Letters: How would new 20mph speed limits be policed?

20mph speed limit sign. Pic: Comp
20mph speed limit sign. Pic: Comp
2
Have your say

I READ with interest your story “20mph speed restriction to be imposed across city” (News, January 13). The big question regarding the proposed 20mph zones is, who is going to police these streets?

Also, where is the money coming from? Is there a money tree at the bottom of the highways garden?

Edinburgh trams.'' Pic: Comp

Edinburgh trams.'' Pic: Comp

Answer – there will be no police watching these zones, the police have far more important things to do than watch over the council’s pie-in-the-sky schemes

The money will have to be taken from other areas, such as health and education.

There is no money tree at the bottom of the garden, so along with the trams it will be another millstone round the council tax payers’ necks.

J Wight, Baberton Mains Lea, Edinburgh

Portobello Park. 'Pic: Ian Georgeson

Portobello Park. 'Pic: Ian Georgeson

No danger of tram staff doing too much

I HAD to read the letter on January 13 a few times to understand that your correspondent George Ritchie compared the building of the Empire State Building and Golden Gate Bridge to the Edinburgh trams.

Surely this letter was a wind-up? In my opinion the job was over-manned and many a time sitting on a bus looking out half of the workers were on their mobile phones or standing watching a few with spades, not forgetting the snoozing in the cabs. Where was the danger?

I was one of the many who thought from the outset and still believe the trams were an unnecessary expense with our excellent bus service.

Next we will be hearing of certain people appearing on the New Year’s honour list in relation to the trams. Nothing surprises me nowadays.

Failure seems to be rewarded all the time.

F Rutherford Edinburgh

Party that created the NHS wants to sell it

How can a Labour Party that used to say “a vote for any party other than Labour was a vote for the Tories” now tell its supporters that they are “better together” with the Tories?

Let’s be honest, a “No” vote in the independence referendum is a vote for the status quo, i.e., right wing Conservatism while a “Yes” vote is a vote for left of centre social 
democracy.

Many Labour supporters are somehow so compelled to support falsehoods spread by Alistair Darling et al, that they have abandoned their party’s founding principles.

New Labour may talk left of centre social democracy, but in effect, it is so much in tune with right wing Conservatism it is indistinguishable from the Tory party.

No wonder Mrs Thatcher cited New Labour as one of her greatest 
achievements.

The case made by the “Yes” campaign that Scotland should be governed by political parties the people of Scotland elect, not a Con/Dem coalition they rejected at the ballot box, is irrefutable, in my opinion.

It’s a pity that a Labour Party that gave us the NHS and the Welfare State now supports selling off these fine institutions to a private sector that must put profit before people.

Jack Fraser, Clayknowes Drive, Musselburgh

Don’t leave tribute until the last minute

Well done Evening News with your campaign regarding a Lawrie Reilly street name. Last Minute Reilly, as he was known, deserves such a fitting tribute.

He always did it the Reilly way, so perhaps the choice of street name appropriately would be “Lawrie Reilly Way” or simply “Reilly Way”.

Here’s hoping the council don’t leave it till the Last Minute!

David Campbell, Saughton Grove, Edinburgh

Park bill is a serious threat to open spaces

Your article “Backing for new school sparks fears for common good land” (News, January 10) highlights the danger the Portobello Park Bill poses to common good land across Scotland.

It has been ruled illegal by the Court of Session to build on this land and yet the Edinburgh City Council persists in its plans to build on the park, despite the fact that it has identified alternative brownfield sites where the school could be built.

The real tragedy of this bill, if passed, will be that it opens the door to other local authorities to get around common good protection by using a private bill to circumvent the law.

Common good parkland elsewhere is under threat of development and this bill will make it all the easier for it to be developed.

The private bill committee convenor Siobhan McMahon has denied that a precedent will be set but has acknowledged that other councils may seek to follow the same route should the bill be passed and that each case would be considered on its merits.

How will the Scottish Parliament be able to refuse such requests once they have granted this bill for Portobello Park and how can this not be seen as setting a precedent? This bill will have the unintended consequence of allowing common good protection to be chipped away.

Diana Cairns, West Brighton Crescent, Edinburgh