Letters: It’s sad to wave goodbye to Waterworld now fight’s over

In doing so the Edinburgh Greens allowed the group campaigning to save Leith Waterworld to make their case in front of our elected representatives.

I am not a Green voter, but someone who sincerely believes that allowing Waterworld to close with nary a whimper and without proper procedure being followed would be seriously remiss of councillors.

The establishment of the Splashback group to save Waterworld was certainly eleventh- hour, but since its inception has conducted an honest, focused and positive campaign. Splashback collected 5000 signatures in the first six days of petitioning outside Waterworld – equal to one a minute.

For councillors to refuse even to discuss what we hold to be a travesty for the city would have reflected very badly on all those we have chosen to represent us.

Chris Askham, Dalmeny Street, Leith

Less needy areas wouldn’t lose out

IT’S disappointing that Prospect Community Housing has pulled out of plans to build 150 homes in Wester Hailes due to £1 million of “exceptional costs” (News, December 27) .

These costs included contributions towards infrastructure and “public realm” improvements. To me that sounds worryingly like the council asking a developer to pay for stuff so it doesn’t have to.

And so, the developer has decided the project is not worth going ahead with, and as a consequence an area which badly needs regeneration goes without.

If it had been a development in a more sought-after and more profitable part of the city, I’m sure the money would have been found.

Ken Welsh, Easter Road, Edinburgh

Lack of buses info drives users away

WE are all encouraged to use public transport so we are generally forced to rely on government-sponsored information sites such as Traveline.

Why then had First Bus failed to advise about its Christmas 43 Queensferry bus services? There was no place that this information could easily be obtained. No wonder folk use their cars.

Colin C Maclean, Hillpark Avenue, Edinburgh

Integrity doesn’t always win votes

ANDREW HN Gray raises an interesting democratic issue in his letter (Councillors will pay price for unwanted parking scheme, News, December 27) with his implied threat that residents will be “notified of those who vote in favour”.

Whilst having no local knowledge of the South Morningside scheme and not being on the transport committee I am aware that councillors will have to consider a more comprehensive picture than just the pure local interest, important as these will be.

There will be a host of broader issues to be considered – I am not just talking about the Morningside scheme – many of which will have been laid down in successive council policy documents over a period of time and debated at full council level.

Why would a councillor vote against the apparent wishes of a vocal section of any local community particularly in the run-up to an election?

Might I suggest that having acquainted themselves of all the facts, this informs them that even though it may not be a vote winner, their conscience and sense of integrity tells him or her that the correct way to vote is that which is based on sound knowledge of all the issues involved both local, city- wide and on occasion national.

Daily now I get e-mails – as I am sure do all councillors throughout the country – making various demands followed by the reminder, as if we didn’t know, that there is an election coming!

Who will you vote for? The career-serving politician who will always take the easy option, or the one who occasionally sticks their neck out and displays integrity and real considered values? It is your democratic choice.

Stuart Roy McIvor, SNP councillor, Inverleith