The BBC is failing in its obligations to Scotland. Holyrood take note

The Herald Scotland

2 days ago

After 100 years of existence BBC Scotland lacks the ability to make its own programmes; cannot identify and train local people (two Controllers in a row from outside Scotland) and certainly does not represent or reflect the history, culture and lives of Scots past and present.
BBC Scotland totally fails to meet the criteria of a national broadcaster, and Tim Davie's recent speech ("BBC's Tim Davie to call for 'bold collective choice to take on the trust crisis'", heraldscotland, May 13) had nothing of relevance for Scotland. Holyrood should examine the options for Scottish broadcasting, because giving our money to the BBC has failed us.
GR Weir, Ochiltree.
Don't blame police officers
I would like to congratulate your correspondent G McKenzie on a rather excellent letter (May 30) commenting on Calum Steele's not so excellent article about policing, or rather the lack of it in Scotland ("Shocking: young police officers are being badly let down by their leaders", The Herald, May 30).
I normally agree with Mr Steele's observations on the wide range of topics he discusses in his column in The Herald. He is rather lucky to have such a platform. However, on this occasion he appears to blame serving officers for all the operational ills of the failed concept that is Police Scotland. The blame for this mess is most certainly not serving officers but without any doubt, the responsibility of the politicians who created the national force.
We are told the creation of Police Scotland was to take advantage of 'economies of scale'. What utter nonsense. A before and after cost analysis I think would be very interesting. Political control was the real reason.
Prior to the creation of the national force on April 1, 2013, I concluded in a letter to The Herald: 'As a society we are sleepwalking into a situation that is not in our best interests.' I fear we are now living the nightmare
I am truly heart sorry for those officers burdened with the responsibility of operating a largely failed system.
Dan Edgar, Rothesay.
Read more letters
Parenting then and now
Like Doug Maughan (Letters, May 30) I was brought up on a council estate where many big families produced kids who went on to great careers as engineers, doctors, headmasters, scientists, tradesmen and politicians (Alex Salmond), virtually all of them doing better than their parents.
There were, however, a number of differences in those days: there was good, cheap council housing in good neighbourhoods, work was often within walking, cycling or cheap bus fare distance so a car wasn't an unaffordable necessity, a family could survive with one breadwinner and one parent staying at home, the education system was reputedly the best in the world and further education was genuinely free with means-tested grants. Hardly any families got, needed or expected state benefits. And contraception wasn't as easily available or reliable.
Contrast that with today. Housing costs at least twice as much in real terms so both parents have to work, requiring childcare costs of £75 per day until the age of three and less time being spent with kids in the evening – and that's if there are two parents around. The education system has fallen down the pan, further ruined by by pupil violence, and further education involves the colossal costs of accommodation and loans to be paid back for, in many cases, useless degrees.
The result is most couples either don't have, delay having or only have one or two children because that's all they can afford financially and in quality time spent with them, which is exactly what my two kids and their spouses have done with my four grandchildren.
Child benefit worth £3,455 per year doesn't even touch the sides of the issue, and in terms of declining population I thought one of the objectives of net legal immigration of several thousand was supposed to solve that?
As an aside, in my case, I was adopted as an only child. When I was 43 I found out my single-parent birth mother and my sister had pretty sad lives and I definitely benefited from the policy in the 1950s and 60s of illegitimate babes being adopted as opposed to facing a life of poverty with a single mum as happens today.
Allan Sutherland, Stonehaven.
Heat pumps can be good value
Ian Moir (Letters, May 30) compares the unit prices of electricity and gas and concludes that heat pumps could never be as economical as gas boilers. It's not quite that simple.
A unit of electricity costs about four times that of the gas equivalent. A heat pump, however, can produce between three to four times the heat per kilowatt of electricity depending on the installation and the property itself. An existing gas boiler is never 100% efficient; older models can be as low as 70% efficient. Comparing a super-efficient heat pump with an inefficient gas boiler, therefore, means the running costs are broadly the same.
A heat pump is, of course, more expensive to buy than a new gas boiler. Hence both the Holyrood and Westminster governments are offering generous grants to make the transition easier. Home Energy Scotland offers a £7,500 grant and optional £7,500 interest-free top-up loan for anyone considering such a move. What's not to like?
Jeff Rogers, Banchory.
A heat pump being installed at a domestic property (Image: Getty)
Brighten up our buildings
I heartily concur with Bryan Marley (Letters, May 30), but it's not only Glasgow that's drab; the whole country is. Our buildings could be brightened with a little colour here and there, without the need for planning permission. Councils and private owners could, for example, apply small roundels to bleak façades and gable-ends, to break up the surfaces.
Yet the brutalism persists; the latest instance near me in Dunfermline is the new Fife College, whose architect must have studied in North Korea.
George Morton, Rosyth.