Readers' Letters: Blair's comments on net zero should stir us into action

Maybe just maybe, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and Energy Secretary Ed Miliband will heed the warning from former prime minister Tony Blair regarding UK net zero policy and its impact on global reduction of CO2.

We have to hope this because for a long time Scotsman columnists and letter writers have queried the benefits of net zero policy to the UK, with its impact of energy prices on employment, manufacturers, business in general and, not least, families.

Not that I would expect Mr Blair’s intervention to make a difference, coming as it does a very long time since the stable door to green energy was opened by his government back in the day, but we have to hope.

Former Labour prime minister Sir Tony Blair this week said limiting fossil fuels as part of the UK's drive towards net zero was 'doomed to fail' (Picture: Dan Kitwood/Getty Images)

In the meantime we read that China is rushing pell mell to create an energy super power highway using all means – solar, nuclear, coal etc – in the realisation that a country that looks forward can see that new technologies will soak up energy way beyond current levels and only those who have the foresight to activate and implement necessary infrastructure today will stand a chance of competing in the global market.

Back in the UK, instead of looking forward and planning for an energy mix that provides opportunities for the country, we appear to be locked into a doom loop of missed opportunities and government financial mayhem.

Probably the only way out of this is for the people to create and fund support for energy infrastructure totally outwith government interference. Instead of paying the green energy supplement to our energy bills this money could be diverted to a people’s fund set up solely to invest in energy infrastructure that will benefit the country and its people.

A Lewis, Coylton, Ayrshire

Zero success

I am beginning to think Ed Miliband will indeed achieve net zero. Not of CO2… but of everything else, such as crops and life itself.

Malcolm Parkin, Kinnesswood, Perth and Kinross

Fire safety

As a retired architect with an interest in fire safety I read Katherine Metcalfe’s article on the Grenfell Tower Inquiry with some interest (28 April). However, I would query whether the regulation on construction products is entirely a reserved matter, as she writes.

Testing of products is generally done by independent testing houses so the regulation of these would indeed be controlled by Westminster. In addition, the internal market dictates that a product that is legally available for sale in the rest of the UK must be made available in Scotland, even if the Scottish building regulations deem it unsafe to install in or on a building. Therein lies the problem.

In other words a product that is deemed dangerous in Scotland becomes safe when you cross the Border. It follows that the unrestricted sale of products in Scotland that the internal market demands will not reduce any fire risk but will actually increase it.

Robert Menzies, Falkirk

Kind words

“Greens call for a ‘respectful’ campaign” (your report, 30 April) – would that their MSP Maggie Chapman had been capable of showing respect to the Supreme Court rather than accusing them of “bigotry, prejudice and hatred”.

Michael Wood, North Berwick, East Lothian

Costly affairs

Scottish public inquiries are like ferries, taking years to complete after launch and costing big money. But setting strict time and financial controls on them, as suggested by Brian Barbour (Letters,1 May), is easier said than done.

I chaired a public inquiry in Wales about an enormous E.coli outbreak in September 2005, with cases in 44 schools and one fatality, a little boy aged five. We started work at the beginning of 2006. To minimise costs, we chose a barrister who was not a QC. But our barrister became a QC during the inquiry. And we had to delay public hearings until criminal proceedings against the culpable butcher had finished; he was sent to prison on 7 September 2017. The subsequent breadth and depth of investigations, including the commissioning and interpretation of state-of-the-art scientific tests and the following up of unpredicted lines of inquiry, took longer than expected but was essential.

My report was submitted to the First Minister for Wales in March 2009. The Welsh Government paid me £43.75/hour as chair, with £5 extra for overnight stays.

The inquiry as a whole cost just over £2 million. Lawyers cost big money!

Hugh Pennington, Aberdeen

Four thoughts

I always thought the number 7 was widely accepted as having magical properties. It would appear that in Scotland we now have a potentially new one, namely, number 4.

Here is how it works. Take large public projects, ferries, bridges, roads etc. Invite and accept tenders for cost and longevity of each project.

Now multiply those two parameters by the magic number 4, and bingo, you have fairly accurate figures as to the what the eventual bill will be and how long the job will take. Problem solved by magic!

S R Wild, Edinburgh

No debt plan

In the Opinion article of 30 April by Ian Johnston there is a statement that “the task [to achieve net zero] is vast but so is the threat”.

However, like many articles on climate change, there is no reference to the debt incurred in achieving such project goals or its impact on the economy of Scotland. The Scottish net zero debt is around £1 trillion, although, if the scrapping of the £130 billion decarbonisation scheme by John Swinney is a foretaste of future SNP initiatives, perhaps there will be a reduction in the size of the debt!

However, what Holyrood needs to address is the impact on the budgets of the NHS, education and social Welfare if politicians are unwilling to raise £1tn in tax to repay the net zero debt.

Note that even repaying the annual debt interest requires around £40bn of cash which must be found by the Finance Secretary from some source at every budget presentation over the next 50 years! When are the people of Scotland going to be provided with a debt repayment plan from our Cabinet Ministers, who have just received a wage increase of £20,000 from Scottish taxpayers?

Ian Moir, Castle Douglas, Dumfries & Galloway

Help Scot

I am pleased to see nearly 200 MPs and peers have expressed support for Jagtar Singh Johal, a Scot held for years on dubious charges in India. When he was acquitted of a charge at the start of April, I contacted John Swinney, Angus Robertson and my local MSP. A month later and they have only acknowledged receipt.

While the SNP pretend they have some sort of international credibility, Westminster has acted.

George Craig, Glasgow

Costly move

Stan Grodynski(Letters, 1 May) again rehearses his grievances without the slightest appreciation of the extent to which leaving the UK would impoverish the vast majority of Scots, with only those of substantial independent means able to live at a standard anywhere near that which they currently enjoy. The devolution experiment has already demonstrated how costly the duplication of functions is and how economies of scale on a UK-wide basis benefit us. A separate Scotland would have to assume a variety of additional functions without any increase in revenues – without a painful tax hike. We can already see how costly the SNP regime has been, with a deficit last year of 10.4 per cent, compared with the UK’s deficit of 4.5 per cent. Why does Mr Grodynski campaign for Scots to suffer a plummeting standard of living by going it alone? That is what those of us who voted No in 2014 were voting against, something he steadfastly refuses to acknowledge.

Jill Stephenson, Edinburgh

Europe opinion

Henry MacLeish (Perspective, 1 May) makes ten suggestions to improve the quality of Scottish political institutions and how politics is practised in Scotland.

He references a recent comment by Professor Sir John Curtice, “that politics has been changed by Brexit”.

In his eighth point in his prescription for Scotland, Mr McLeish writes, “the Scottish Parliament must be bold, brave and fearless in advancing the ends of Scotland, in Westminster and the EU”. He goes on to propose Scottish Labour should on occasion distance itself from Labour at Westminster.

As the largest all-party Pro-Europe group in Scotland, we regularly engage with MPs, MEPs and party activists, and we attend all the main party conferences. We have yet to meet a senior Labour figure opposed to the UK rejoining the European Single Market and the Customs Union. Most would welcome the UK rejoining the EU as a full member. The Scottish public and now a majority in England see the world in similar terms. Every part of Scotland's economy and public life would benefit from rejoining the single market.

Surprisingly, for someone calling for more transparency from politicians, Mr McLeish failed to mention the low hanging fruit just across the water in mainland Europe.

David Clarke, Chair, The European Movement in Scotland, Edinburgh

Write to The Scotsman

We welcome your thoughts – NO letters submitted elsewhere, please. Write to [email protected] including name, address and phone number – we won't print full details. Keep letters under 300 words, with no attachments, and avoid 'Letters to the Editor/Readers’ Letters' or similar in your subject line – be specific. If referring to an article, include date, page number and heading.