DIDN’T Alan Adair really spit his dummy out of the pram in response to my letter of Friday (Letters, Aug 9)?
Criticised for swallowing all the capitalist free-market guff, doesn’t it seem that like frustrated keyboard warrior Mr Adair launched off into another textbook irrelevant tirade full of diversionary meaningless guff that didn’t begin to address the issues I raised?
For example, the tripe about the diesel differential is facile, nothing to do with market forces, rather our broken energy market being manipulated for excess profits, as the profit returns reported by the companies themselves prove, and which they’ve been allowed to get away with by this corrupt Tory government.
READ MORE: 'Create by-laws to protect Scottish loch from development', locals say
As for standing charges, why should it be consumers who pay excessively for energy supply company failures, why not the shareholders who invested on the government promise of getting rich quick?
Standing charges were supposed to be to fund the infrastructure, not create extra profits – the charge is different depending on tariff – and not either to fund the transition to green energy, which should be funded by shareholders investing in their company’s estate as is supposed to be the case in the “free” energy market foisted on us by the Tories and acquiesced to by red-Tory Labour.
I could write a book about the economic and political stupidity of Alan’s tirade, but suffice to say that after all his personal attack on me we at least agree that the price of electricity should have no relation to the price of gas. It should stand alone in the market, with green electricity competing directly with other forms of it and gas, oil etc, as should happen in a truly free market to reduce prices through that competition rather than its price being artificially hiked to fuel the profits of greed allowed by our broken energy market and Tory government in whose party interest it is to do nothing about it.
READ MORE: Scottish airport climate protest set for shooting season start
I suggest Alan and his ilk calm down, cut the personal attacks, place the blame for our energy price crisis on greedy producers and our UK Tory government where it belongs, and concentrate on unity for independence, which holds the only prospect for fair energy provision – hopefully in the public sector as a social provision where production is for need and not profit.
And let’s forget all the irrelevant and illusionary capitalist propaganda guff designed to excuse excessive, greedy profit-taking at our expense.
Jim Taylor
Edinburgh
IN response to Drew Macleod (Aug 9), the Heat and Buildings Bill places the financial burden on us individuals who are already struggling. Just how far will a grant of £7500 go towards changing people’s heating systems and insulation? A serious and impossible ask for many of us in rural and island Scotland in particular, and one will impose massive costs on householders. People having to take out loans! Why does he even think that is a option to people?
It’s reported there are around 170,000 off-gas-grid properties across Scotland that currently use oil, LPG, and other mineral fuels, the majority of those being in rural and island areas. The practical challenges of retrofitting older harder-to-heat homes must be taken into account. It has been estimated that the cost of installing a heat pump and associated energy efficiency measures is£15,000-£30,000 for an off-grid property. In a recent poll, four out of five people just can’t afford such a exorbitant cost and it would be unaffordable, forcing people to take out loans! Its crazy that the government, any government, would even consider proposals to decarbonise properties by 2025!
READ MORE: Scottish independence more important to voters than the environment
Rural and island properties must surely have a choice about what type of heating is used; the Scottish Government cannot just order us all how to live our lives. Our rural and island communities need to be listened to.
The whole bill needs ditched, and the sooner the better for all of us. Anything else would severely penalise us individuals. At present it’s up to us if we want to pay to better insulate our homes, and that’s fine for those who can afford it. Scotland is not seen as a problem, so why change things so drastically now?
Michael Maclennan
Brora
I WAS glad to see Ross Hunter’s coverage of the people harassing Aida H Dee for performing Drag Queen Story Hour in Edinburgh (Campaigners stage protest against Drag Queen Story Hour in Edinburgh, Aug 3). But as important as it is to call out this awful behaviour, let’s also remember that after making all kinds of grand threats online, the most they could muster was a whopping total of eight people. Eight! They may be full of sound and fury, but you didn’t need to take off your shoes to count them.
I saw more protestors outside the Jerry Springer opera back in the day, but they were less obnoxious. At least these were easily blocked from view by a few strategic flags, so the kids could ignore the hate and do what they came to do – enjoy a good show.
Erica Brooks
Edinburgh
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here