Bird flu is a wake-up call for industry

Unfortunately, the reality of modern farming bears little resemblance to the pleasant traditional scene that many like to imagine. Over the past 50 years farming has been transformed into modern "agribusiness", controlled by large companies with a single motive of making as much profit as possible.

Animals are no longer viewed and treated as individual beings but more like units of production - egg, milk or meat-producing machines. The products have become cheaper and cheaper, with the animals paying a price for increased efficiency.

The vast majority of today's farm animals never see the light of day during their unnaturally short lives. Millions of animals spend their entire lives in cages, stalls or huge, windowless sheds where they can barely move. Forcing stressed animals to try to survive cramped and unhygienic conditions creates the perfect breeding ground for diseases.

This latest scare, of course, comes on the back of previous scares such as BSE, swine fever and foot-and-mouth disease - all linked to modern intensive animal farming practices. When all the costs are added up, factory farming is not as cheap as it may initially appear.

All consumers can help by refusing to buy factory-farmed animal products and by reducing or cutting animal products out of their diet. In addition, governments need to reassess modern intensive animal production practices and help farmers move away from factory farming and towards more sustainable methods for the good of animal welfare and human health.

Ross Minett, director, Advocates for Animals, Queensferry Street, Edinburgh,

Roundabout way of punishing us

EACH evening as I sit in huge queues of traffic waiting to get through roadworks at Milton Link roundabout, the phrase, "If it ain't broke don't fix it" comes to mind. I have driven through this roundabout almost every day for 20 years and, even during morning and evening rush hours, rarely have I seen queues of more than 300 metres on any approach. Everybody knows that roundabouts are the quickest and safest way to deploy traffic in various directions, so why have the council decided to spend 1.7 million of our money removing the roundabout entirely and replacing it with traffic lights?

Don't tell me - it's a "bus priority scheme", which in other words means a "delay cars scheme" - another punishment for the 74 per cent of people who voted against congestion charging back in February 2005.

To everyone currently experiencing long delays at this roundabout, and to the residents of Portobello and surrounding areas who are experiencing a huge increase in traffic and pollution due to these roadworks, please get used to it as this is what it will be like from now on (even after these roadworks finish in June 2007).

And just when you thought things couldn't get any worse, the council will then do the same to Duddingston Park roundabout.

Let's get rid of this car-hating council in the forthcoming elections and get our Milton Link roundabout back to normal.

A. Macfarlane, Brunstane, Edinburgh

Is Hearts' ground a political football?

I FIND myself having to ask the same question as Calum Stewart (Letters, February 6) with regard to the Lib Dems' view of HoMFC's attempts to build a new stand at Tynecastle. However, I would like to take it a stage further and ask all political parties for their view on this situation, as it appears HoMFC may have been given permission to buy relevant land on the cheap.

Mr Stewart seems to think that because Murrayfield has been deemed "not fit for purpose" by the Hearts support, which translates to "Hearts fans don't fancy playing there", then the rest of the taxpaying people of Edinburgh should turn a blind eye and accept a below-market value price for prime real estate, just to help this club.

Hearts' owner, Vladimir Romanov, has been reported as saying he is happy that their current debt of 28.4m is manageable and that the board is happy with the debt. With the proposed rebuilding of Tynecastle going to cost around 25m, and with Mr Romanov being reported as having a personal fortune of around 240m, surely paying Edinburgh City Council the proper market value of the land involved in the deal should not be a problem.

Therefore, I applaud Tom Ponton for calling for an investigation into the sale of the relevant land as Edinburgh councillors have a duty first and foremost to all the taxpayers of Edinburgh.

Michael Burns, Ferry Road, Edinburgh

BNP is not abusing electoral system

REACTION to the BNP receiving public funding and TV exposure is just as intolerant as opponents claim the party is.

They are accused of "exploiting" the rules, while Labour's Christine May declares: "This is a clear misuse of the electoral system." This is patent nonsense. Like the other parties, they are merely complying with the rules.

The BNP will appeal to people despairing of the relentless erosion of the traditional British way of life by incompetent politicians crazed by political correctness. Meanwhile, failure to control immigration wastes millions of pounds which could be better spent.

I'm not a BNP supporter but I hope they win some Scottish seats, if only to shake up the bungling lot we're presently stuck with.

Robert Dow, Ormiston Road, Tranent

Lib Dem tax would deter businesses

I FIND it incredible that the Liberal Democrat Enterprise Minister, Nicol Stephen, wants to bring in a tax that would make Scottish business less competitive than anywhere else in the UK - a local income tax that would mean the basic rate of tax rising from 22p to 28.5p in the pound, and the upper rate of tax rising from 40p in the pound to 46.5p.

I cannot believe for a minute that this would help attract companies to set up in Scotland - indeed, it would probably have the opposite effect.

Furthermore, it would be a disincentive for staff to do overtime just to increase what they pay to the local council. The Scottish economy does not need this barrier to growth.

Michelle Smythe, Dalry Road, Edinburgh

Tories more guilty of heritage 'crime'

WHEN I read the letter from Cecilia Cavaye concerning Labour and architecture in Edinburgh (News, February 5), I didn't know whether to laugh or cry.

This city was in the firm grip of the Tories for decades, during which various offences were visited upon her beauty.

I am just old enough to remember the extremely beautiful St James Square, before its demolition was passed to allow the building of that affront to aesthetic sensibilities known as the St James Centre.

It was also the Tories who authorised the building of the former Lothian Regional Council HQ on the corner of George IV Bridge and Lawnmarket, which would not look out of place in some eastern European Stalinist nightmare. Similarly, the rot which set in at Princes Street was first allowed to happen under Conservative administrations.

Had the Tories stayed in power, things could have been much worse.

One of their proposals was for a "relief" road from the Pleasance across to Picardy Place.

Forget Caltongate; this move would have seen, not just a sizeable swathe of the Old Town disappear, but also Regent's Arch on Waterloo Place. Frankly, I would much rather have the new unobtrusive and enigmatic new council HQ, Waverley Court.

What is now a cycleway/footpath (and soon to be a tramway) from Haymarket to Granton would have become the "Western Relief Road". In other words, the Tories were more than willing to rip up Edinburgh for private car owners and to hell with everyone else.

I do not vote Labour so, under Ms Cavaye's views, I suppose I do deserve to live here. What I do say, however, is credit where credit is due.

As much as I may dislike the current administration in the Capital, even I have to admit that they have done more to preserve the beauty of my city than the despicable Tories ever did.

Leslie John Thomson, Moredunvale Green, Gilmerton, Edinburgh