Readers' Letters: Public abandoned as Police Scotland ignore crimes

I’m appalled at Police Scotland, like many forces in England, walking away from investigating burglaries, and their inability to attend cases of shoplifting promptly even where the alleged culprit has been apprehended by security staff.

A lack of funding has Police Scotland concentrating resources on 'more serious' crimes (Picture: Mike Boyd - Pool/Getty Images)

This approach may well free up time for officers to attend “more serious” offences, but it completely ignores the impact of these offences on individuals, on companies and society.

Those who commit these offences will quickly realise there are no consequences, so will commit even more offences. Committing minor offences is the start of the path to more serious offences, so what the police sow now, they will reap in spades for years to come – but those who pay the price will be the public.

MSPs and MPs need to get their act together. Properly fund the police (what happened to the short-lived SNP promise of 1,000 more officers?) and ensure prompt justice. The closer the court case to the crime, the gre ater the chance of conviction and the greater the deterrent effect.

And please, please let’s not have letters from the SNP keyboard warriors saying that there are more officers per 10,000 inhabitants in Scotland than in England.

Whether Scottish or English, we don’t care. We all want a police service that protects us and a justice service that delivers justice.

Brian Barbour, Berwick-Upon-Tweed, Northumberland

Failed police

Former SNP Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill did the Scottish police service an injustice when he replaced regional forces with a single entity, supposedly to bring about more efficiency and value for money.

In reality it seemed to have been more geared towards allowing the SNP government to exert more influence over Chief Constables than bringing about a better service for the population.

It's now suggested that Police Scotland is a reactive service, underfunded and understaffed with the welfare of staff under increasing pressure due to intolerable workloads.

It's all very well for current Justice Secretary Angela Constance to say that Police Scotland is in receipt of record funding and that recorded crime is at one of the lowest levels since 1974.

Could it not be that crime victims are failing to report criminal activity because it would be a waste of time and no investigation would take place?

Bob MacDougall, Kippen, Stirlingshire

Called to account

In February this year, MSP Michael Matheson was granted an extension to the time requested to reply to the findings of the inquiry into his iPad expenses claim. I believe that time has now passed yet I don’t recall seeing any news about the findings.

Surely this is a matter of public interest, whatever the outcome was, or are we seeing another example of SNP openness and transparency?

Bruce Proctor, Stonehaven, Aberdeenshire

Nuclear nightmare

Sally Gordon-Walker’s letter of 5 March claims that there is “value” in the UK having a nuclear “deterrent”. Can she please explain why the majority of countries, including many of the richest, do not agree, and have chosen not to pour money into acquiring nuclear weapons?

Could it be that these countries know that nuclear warheads, unlike conventional ones, cannot be tested? Could it be that they have observed the failures of UK Trident missile test firings, the latest on 30 January 2024?

E Campbell, Newton Mearns, East Renfrewshire

Darkly funny

I wondered if I had somehow accidentally opened Viz Comic when looking at The Scotsman this Tuesday (5 March).

So does the SNP really think it's a good time to get rid of Trident submarines from Scotland? Camper vans – mounted with machine guns, of course – could be the new primary defence against Vladimir Putin. SNP members, MSPs or staff could use the vans for holidaying, if there was no sign of Putin on the horizon, or if the crazed dictator failed to ring and warn of his army's impending arrival.

James Hardy, Belfast

Dream on

Angus Robertson claims that an SNP government of an independent Scotland would close Faslane yet still be able to join Nato. That's about 8,000 jobs gone and, of course, the removal of a facility used by the US and France as well as the UK.

To join Nato would require proof of a minimum £4 billion per annum spend on defence and the agreement of all other member states. Dream on, Angus!

A McCormick, Terregles, Dumfries

Good luck

The failure of the SNP to provide an estimate of the cost of the setting-up of military and intelligence capabilities is significant, not least since there would both be capital and revenue requirements, but of equal significance is the fact that the chance of Scotland’s admission to the special intelligence exchanges of the Five Eyes of the USA, Canada, New Zealand, Australia and the UK is, to put it mildly, remote.

These relations are guarded with the utmost jealousy, and for good reason

Rt Hon Lord Campbell of Pittenweem CH CBE PC KC FRSE, House of Lords, London

Now is the time

In reply to correspondents (Letters, 5 March), Holyrood is constrained by Westminster to operate a “pocket money parliament”, subject to the vagaries of the Barnett formula and consequentials (ever shrinking), unable to borrow and obliged to go cap-in-hand to develop green, low-cost renewables and our infrastructure.

This is no way to run a wealthy, resource-rich economy like Scotland’s, with GDP per head on a par with England’s – one of the richest countries in the world, we are told.

The UK Government has entered an era of “ministerial irresponsibility” triggered by the chaos of the Tories, according to analysis by a professor of constitutional law at the University of Liverpool, who examines the challenging and breaking of rules around constitutional conventions which characterised the premierships of Theresa May (Brexit) and Boris Johnson (his personal conduct with scandals such as Partygate).

He warns against a “risk of complacency” in thinking the turmoil is down to individual political circumstances and will return to normal. Recent figures show we are no longer “Better Together” but are now “Poorer Together”.

Research conducted by The Centre for Cities think tank found almost everywhere in Scotland is out of pocket, with the average Scot £23,000 worse off since 2010 due to lagging income growth under Westminster – particularly Aberdeen, where people are £45,000 worse off since 2010. While jobs increased in Scotland, by over 166,000, weak productivity growth means the amount of available disposable income has dropped alarmingly.

We will continue to be at the mercy of this dysfunctional UK Government which does not govern in Scotland’s best interests. England and Scotland can live as good neighbours with Scotland, like Brexit, taking back control. The status quo is no longer in the best interests of the Scottish people. Now is the time!

DW Lowden, Mannofield, Aberdeen

Obscured view

William Loneskie’s letter (6 March) highlights the crisis we have in the UK regarding a credible energy policy by any of the political parties.

Offshore wind generation will probably provide the most expensive electricity to the grid. I say “probably” because there is no transparency regarding energy generation costs and how governments decide on what is needed is decided by politicians who are not in possession of the facts.

Mistakes will be made resulting in consumers paying a very high price, as they do at present, and politicians will not take the blame.

To continue building increased wind farm capacity is madness and this crisis needs to be addressed.

Mr Loneskie makes reference to Professor Wade Allison as a fierce critic of wind farms and those interested in the future of energy in this country should read his 2015 book, Nuclear is for Life: A Cultural Revolution. I recommend it be read by politicians, or at least those who can grasp the implications.

There are many scientists and engineers in Britain who could resolve our energy crisis and reduce the price of electricity to an acceptable level if permitted to do so by whichever government is in power.

Charles Scott, Edinburgh

Costly power

The Scotsman article regarding the planting of wind turbines on Berwick Bank (6 March) claims the facility would be “capable of powering over six million homes”.

Theoretically, in perfect conditions, it might, but reality is very different. In reality, it will offer substantially less, at random, and nothing whatsoever when there is no wind.

A reliable backup source must therefore be available for these six million homes and the cost of that additional provision will be included in consumers' electricity bills. Payments to the operators for switching off production when it's not needed are also included, as is the cost of balancing the National Grid for a supply that varies with the speed of the wind.

Pinning your hopes for providing a vital service on a 100 per cent unreliable and hugely expensive source is beyond ludicrous.

Hamish Hossick, Broughty Ferry, Dundee

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.