Responding to the online story at http://commentonline.co.uk/general/ShamefulLocalRacialHarassment.htm  the following remarks have been posted in the online poll:

It is a sad but true fact that minority groups in employment locally can be much more polite than local people . This isn’t a good way to feel about our local population but it is certainly true that many of them give poor service in local businesses.

My family moved to this area 20 years ago and in that time I personally have not experienced any form of resentment or abuse because of being a white (probably now grey) settler. however my 2 sons who attended both primary and secondary school here both suffered taunting and discrimination because of their ‘english’ accents and my younger son who is quite a sensitive personality, failed at school and played around, I feel, because of being desperate to ‘fit in’ in with whatever peer group would accept him. My sons are now young men and can look back and rationalise but neither look upon their schooldays as the ‘happiest days of their life’ and the younger is still looking for his ‘place’.

Anyone who feels thay have been unfairly discriminated against should seek advice from the local agencies that may be able to assist. If you feel verbal, mental or physical violence is involved then the police must be contacted immediately and their advice sought.                                                       C’llr Ian Campbell

I abhor racial discrimination and welcome the arrival and integration of people from a wide range of ethnic backgrounds into our lovely area. The small-mindedness of some of our indigenous residents is shocking, especially when many of our own have such a negative approach to contributing much to their own society. Many ‘incomers’, particularly East Europeans, are hard working and polite with a ‘can do’ attitude, something sadly lacking in many of our long-term local residents.

Gary Hodgson | garytheguide@hotmail.com | IP: 95.145.159.22

I see more protest against the ETAPE 2010 on the news today. I’m sure there have been lots of comments on this. I still can’t beleive the narrow mindedness of some people here in Scotland/UK. Probably every other country in the world, definately Europe embress events like this, you see it all the time on TV when the locals and villages make a celebration of it. Shame on all of those narrow minded and selfish people. Don’t they realise that a certain tourist establishment concered (for example) could actually ‘cash in’ on this instead of being negative, if they were for the event going forward and advertised the event they would get MORE people staying there and eating there for longer, I have banned using the establishment so there is one loss at least that they have lost custom for not being welcoming.

Gary (a past resident in Killin)

IN THE LEAD STORY on the front page of Comment in June 2006, the following appeared:  “…Readers are warmly encouraged to make known to Comment the issues that vex them most concerning life in Highland Perthshire, and the most pressing challenges that they see facing its future. Over the forthcoming months we can collectively develop a manifesto for our heartland area against which to measure the performance of the incoming administration and its members.”  As a result, in the March edition 2007, the following appeared: 

“…It has now become clear that a growing number of folk in Highland Perthshire feel strongly on the issue of independent representation for our area at Perth & Kinross Council.  They are beginning to develop a platform of ideas and issues to help to forward this ambition, and some of these are indicated below.

“It is strongly suggested that, in advancing our rural interests (which are entirely different from those of urban Perth and Kinross), Independent candidates for Highland Perthshire should stand for election with, among others, some or all of the following manifesto intentions:

*  To pursue robustly, as part of the above, the decentralisation of Council services and the establishment of part-time functionaries working from home in each community – as an opportunity for better budget management and greater engagement of the community in civic life. Potentially, to work towards creating greater local autonomy and local responsibility for services currently supplied in Highland Perthshire - mostly inadequately - by P&K.

*  To avoid wastage and maladministration by the Council and press for a vigorous review of the staffing levels and duties of Council officials, and the possible reconfiguring of their functions as part-time occupations

*  To bring P&K Council to press the Scottish Executive to fight for a better deal for our hill-farmers. Local authorities should not exist to represent the Scottish Executive to the people, but to represent the people to that Executive

*  To advance the use of former municipal buildings and other Council managed properties in Highland Perthshire as bases for business start-ups at very low rents in order to attract and encourage locally-based enterprise. This to be coupled with a policy for contracting out Council services where possible to existing businesses in the area.

*  To introduce and firmly apply the rule that all letters to the Council are answered within 10 working days and to banish the practice wherein businesses and householders can be kept waiting up to a year for replies.

*  To introduce rational limitations upon the implementation of Health & Safety or other regulations that will maintain a sensible balance between enforcement and common sense, where the former put at risk the survival and continuation of important, established cultural, commercial and social institutions and practices.

*  To support firmly the existing P&K planning refusals for wind-farms in Highland Perthshire on the grounds that they are a pointless but damaging gesture in not preventing a single gram of CO2 emissions because other power stations have to be kept in steam at all times in case the wind stops.

*  To bring P&K Council to require that all military aircraft comply with the Civil Aviation regulations by flying at least 500 feet above any inhabited building or livestock. Failures of the MoD to investigate low-flying incidents properly, particularly where actual harm is caused to people on the ground, should no longer be tolerated. Compensation for aborted lambs and calves should be pursued.

*  To develop measures which ensure the survival of all existing Post Offices and, where demand exists, to reopen closed Post Offices. Likewise, to maintain and extend the vital network of post-buses for those who do not have their own transport.

*  To evaluate the re-opening of the railway line between Perth and Crianlarich, as a primary tourist route between Highland Perthshire and the West Highlands, and as a lifeline for those who do not have their own transport.

*  To improve standards of education in our rural schools by pressing for a root and branch public revue of the Educational and Children’s Services Department’s policies and practices, to be conducted in a wide-reaching and transparent manner, taking account of the views and experience of parents and public as service consumers.

*  To draw up a new Local Plan for Highland Perthshire, in which each community council  territory will have the opportunity to write its own section of the plan. In particular, the Plan must identify rural locations where there were once substantial communities, and permit new building in those locations – subject to the agreement of the local community being properly secured.

*  To devise a Building Control policy for P&K which actively encourages architectural innovation but favours vernacular architecture, in order to preserve and enhance the built heritage of Highland Perthshire

*  To require that adequate infrastructure to support every development of new homes is part of the developers’ planning application, and to reject applications where local infrastructure is inadequate.

*  To make affordable housing available for local young and old people, and for vital teachers, nurses and other service-providers, commencing with a properly conducted inventory of need/demand carried out in partnership with trusted local bodies and organizations.

*  To curb the re-housing of dysfunctional families from sink estates into Highland Perthshire in deference to the interests of both incomers and the host communities.

*  To encourage the full participation of all the local communities in developing a 10 year Roads Plan and which ensures consultation before special event organisation.

*  To campaign for the retention and improvement of the Dalweem Residential Home (Aberfeldy) and cottage hospital facilities and for the resources to be drawn in to achieve these goals

*  To assist directly with establishing Community Shops in Aberfeldy and Pitlochry as outlets for locally derived/made produce and products of good quality.

*  To establish and endow a Community Fund, a registered charity run by independent trustees and serving the whole of Highland Perthshire, to assist projects such as acquiring the premises for various projects of community-wide benefit. The endowment capital to be ring-fenced and professionally managed to provide regular annual income without depleting the capital.

*  To draw up a Highland Perthshire Flooding Plan, as part of the Strategic Threat Assessment, and to invite each community to write its own section of the plan, as local planting and field drainage have a larger part to play in flood prevention than has yet been realized.

*  To establish a taskforce approach in Highland Perthshire that engages the community in addressing social problems particular to the scattered community which result from youth boredom, unemployment, binge-drinking, street violence, drug-trafficking and petty crime, by engaging the direct support and participation of the community.

Anyone wishing to contribute to debate surrounding these manifesto points, their expansion or amendment, or to add other points – is warmly invited to do so through the pages of Comment. Particularly, interest from people willing to stand as candidates in the May P&K elections on such issues will be most welcome.” Only one candidate stood as an Independent in the election that year, with a single-issue agenda strictly localised to just one small part of the whole ward. He did not consider this manifesto.   However, the whole of the above, with the exception of the wind power section, was adopted by the LibDem who.·        agreed to face up to regular performance assessments and time lines for issues to be progressed; ·        committed to doing his own job by diminishing quangos/bureaucrats; ·        acknowledged an ultimate project focus – the achievement of Highland Perthshire Independency. He was beaten into fourth place. But, as a result of his campaigning, he noted:“…at this recent local election, most of the time spent talking about politics was involved with aspects of decentralisation. Why could Highland Perthshire issues not be better dealt with more locally? There was very positive reaction to, for instance, the notion that planning decisions should be devolved within P&K for formal decision locally, rather as they are in Highland (Region). There was a discernible anger about the perceived arrogance of Perth officialdom, exemplified above all in the cycle event fiasco…”

And he adapted his stance to accept that “it is entirely right that the group concerned with building and asserting Highland Perthshire autonomy through a culture of self-reliance does …endorse … a candidate explicitly of their own…” .

This is the sort of thing which raises the image of brown envelopes and local authority corruption in the mind of Joe Public.

It appears that Sainsbury is confident that its planninng applications in Perthshire will be blessed with success.

The timing of these ’search for suppliers’ events is surely premature. Nothing would be lost in waiting until an application is approved before seeking local suppliers. The interval between an approval by the council and store opening should be more than sufficient to identify and contract local suppliers of local produce. 

These events, and P&K’s involvement in them, implies confidence verging on certainty that planning approval will be given; they raise the question as to why this is so; and suggest an all too cosy relationship between the applicant and the local authority.

Such conduct is imprudent, raises suspicions of corruption, and is damaging to the ordinary citizen’s confidence in the integrity of local governance. 

Authoritywatch

I would like to raise is the wider issue of the poor governance of this area by Perth and Kinross Council.
For all the reasons outlined over and over on this blog, our local authority is failing Highland Perthshire. Every few years we vote in people who then have to do battle with a system that is organically flawed, and if they fail it should come as no surprise.
The party political system is failing us and the local government bureaucrats are failing us. This is because their eyes are on Perth and its problems - not on rural Perthshire’s problems.
Many older residents will remember with affection when we were governed by three local councils with town halls in Pitlochry, Dunkeld and Aberfeldy. In the interests of so-called efficiencies these were wiped out in 1975.
I am not arguing for their return but we should recognize that in the last 35 years, Highland Perthshire has developed as a cohesive entity, with closer collaboration between communities with like interests.
Given there is so much local dissatisfaction with P&K (I could add to the list their bulldozing approach to closing roads for the Etape cycle race), I suggest it is time for us to think laterally and draw up plans for independence.

Let’s Go Our Own Way
Let’s not divert our energies at lambasting P&K but on replacing it. Let’s fight to create a council for Highland Perthshire that truly represents local interests and helps the area to prosper.
This is not pie in the sky. It is the sort of local initiative all the major political parties say they want to encourage, but never do anything about.
In other words, let’s form a Highland Perthshire Party to fight for local independence. Let’s demand the right to have our own Highland Perthshire local authority which would be lean on bureaucracy and rich on local community involvement.
This is the right time to do it. If we act now we could be a real force at the next local elections. I can almost hear the established party apparatchiks quaking in their boots.

Peter Hounam

Re-Rab and Jamsie

I just thought I would pop into the Bickering Blog, to say how accurate Rab and Jamsie were on their point of view. And just maybe, if everyone stopped squabbling amongst each other and stuck together as a town and not “Them and Us”, then maybe just maybe, we could look into the future and not the Victorian Drains of Pitlochry.
Taking a quote “If you don’t use it, then lose it”, well maybe you should start practicing what you preach.
If there is such a thing as “U and I” in community then maybe there won’t be any more empty shops, as the money being spent in community will keep the shops open.
The heart and soul is being ripped out of the community and if the squabbling and bickering does not stop, the town of Pitlochry will disappear before your very eyes.
So….lets start putting the “U and I” back into the community and start behaving like one.
If you have any comments to be made, then leave them on this blog or email me at davynelson@ymail.com. Don’t be like the daftie who came in shooting their mouth off to me in my shop this morning.

Yours

Davy Nelson

Is this democracy?

The approval by Perth and Kinross Council’s Development Control Committee, by a vote of eight to four, for the application to build 22 flats on the curling rink site in Pitlochry must be a low point for democracy in the area.  As one of the 146 objectors, I attended and listened to the Committee’s deliberations.  On several preceding applications, discussions had been detailed, thoughtful and often probing – even to the extent of asking one farmer, who was applying to convert a listed steading to housing, for evidence that dairy farming didn’t make money!  Hearing these, and knowing that similar levels of investigation would expose major problems with the shoddy curling rink flats proposal, I was quite hopeful. In the event, we were cut short in our submission, by draconian time-keeping which had not applied to other cases, and most of the Councillors (with the notable exception of local Conservative, Cllr Ian Campbell) seemed completely disinterested in following up on major issues such as lack of provision for any outdoor space for children; the impact on the edge of a conservation area and the contradictions with prominent government and local authority policies.   The agent for the developer, Uplands Developments Ltd., and the planning officer, Nick Brian, treated the few questions from Councillors with contempt.  Why wasn’t there any provision for children?  Because it wasn’t expected that occupants would be children but would be elderly.  This was despite officials and others having constantly said that this development had to go ahead because families badly need affordable housing (which is indisputable).  “Why couldn’t a pavement be provided around the development to improve the road safety?”  Because Pitlochry has a unique character of not having pavements, but of stone walls built right alongside the road.  “Why couldn’t the current, decades-old short-cut through the site be left open to allow a safer path for schoolchildren?”  Because they would be stepping straight out onto a road. (because the development won’t provide a pavement).  I’m sure an ironic chuckle was had when that Catch 22 was first dreamed up.  “Why wasn’t Historic Scotland consulted about the impact on the conservation area”.  Mr Brian didn’t think they’d thank him for consulting them about every development on the edge of a conservation site (despite the very specific wording in the guidance, read out by Cllr Campbell, about the need for consideration of impact from neighbouring sites).  The other Highland Perthshire Councillor present, Ken Lyall, suggested that children could nip down over the main road to the recreation ground to play and then abstained. 

As soon as they could possibly get it over with, a vote was taken which had all the hallmarks of being a pre-arranged vote on Party lines – SNP and Lib Dems voting for it.    I await the result of Freedom of Information requests with interest, to discover the background to this extra-ordinary performance.  Uplands Development have already moved on to their next Applications in Pitlochry - knocking down two buildings in the town centre conservation area - previously the Bank House and the Bakers Oven - and putting up a hotel, flats and retail units. However, perhaps the vote in the Council Committee was totally kosher, and perhaps the next part of Uplands Developments masterplan for Pitlochry will not go through on the nod.

 Highland Perthshire – under threat

Pitlochry’s unique town centre; the Birks of Aberfeldy; Dall, Rannoch; Griffin and Calliachar wind developments; the 400kV Beauly-Denny electricity transmission line passing down east of Schiehallion and on through Glen Quaich.  A roll-call of stunning places under threat.  They may not all mean something to you but, for most residents of Highland Perthshire, almost certainly some of them will.  Those of us who care must act now.  Thousands of people have made representation against these planning proposals.  Those applications already decided suggest that it is unlikely that any of those people will be heard.  For each development, we’re given spurious reasons why those of us raising voices in protest are wrong-headed, selfish, NIMBYs and standing in the way of progress and “sustainable economic growth.”  I don’t mind being called a NIMBY – if I don’t care about my own backyard, the chances of me caring for someone else’s is remote.  Don’t wait until there’s an Application to destroy a part of Highland Perthshire that you love.  If you’ve never paid any attention to planning before, assuming that you’ll get fair warning if something’s coming your way, beware. 

A new planning system is currently being rolled out.  The TAYplan is an over-arching plan for Tayside, Angus, North Fife and Perth and Kinross that will detail what type of development is suitable for each and every area within it.  If your area is zoned for something you think will be detrimental to the area, it will be too late to object when the Application comes forward.  You need to get involved in the consultation process as the plan is written.  If enough of us get involved, who knows – we might just be listened to.

Helen McDade

It is ironic that in a week where Highland Perthshire has a young woman, Eve Muirhead, leading a serious Olympic challenge in the Ladies Curling, Perth and Kinross Council are considering a planning application to knock down the curling rink in Pitlochry where Eve was able to train.  Instead, Pitlochry is being offered the dubious privilege of yet another block of 22 flats, with no gardens or communal “greenspace”. 

A key question which Councillors should consider is what sporting provision does the Council intend to provide in the Pitlochry area to replace this facility and address the total inadequacy which currently exists?  Young people in Pitlochry seem to be expected to travel between 15 (Aberfeldy) and 25 (Perth) miles to get to sports facilities, e.g. curling and swimming.

The flats planned are of a totally inappropriate design for a small town setting and unsuitable for families - which is the type of accommodation badly needed in the area.

If the Council Development Control Committee give consideration to their Policies on sustainable development and amenity provision, they should turn down this change of use from sports facility to housing.  Then, perhaps, the Council could give consideration to what provision it is going to make in this area – joining with the residents to keep Pitlochry as a place which people want to live in,

Helen McDade

Seeing the exhibition/open day for the Birks Hydro scheme confirmed my doubts about the proposal. When the photos for 1m3/sec and 0.24m3/sec (very close to ‘before’ and ‘after’ at maximum abstraction) were put side by side, it was an overwhelming demonstration of the negative effect the scheme will have on the visual impact (and no doubt the ecology) of the Birks.

While the top falls may still be impressive ‘after’, it is beyond doubt that less visitors will come to the town to see the Birks over a period of time with a serious negative impact on our already very fragile economy. Those who see a diminished Birks will be less likely to come back and less likely to tell others how impressive it was.I understand that the photographs we saw have only recently been taken - I cannot understand how the scheme was approved by Planning without the committee demanding/seeing similar evidence. Was any independent professional report prepared before the planning approval?Another factor came to my attention on Friday. Until now all the photographs and a lot of the discussion has centred on the top falls. On Friday I visited the Birks with family members and one of them said to me that what made the Birks special wasn’t just the (impressive) top falls but the whole experience of an hour long walk up alongside a series of smaller falls and caterracts leading to the top falls. I think that if water levels are cut in the manner allowed for in the CAR licence, the visual impact will be even more damaging in the lower sections.

I have recently seen the SEPA methodology and I believe the approach of this to be flawed - to say in effect that there are other ‘similar’ sights around and then use a comparison of visitor numbers between the Birks and The Hermitage or Falls of Bruar to say the Birks is of ‘low’ importance is totally spurious. 1) The Birks is not on the A9 - it doesn’t even have a ‘brown sign’ 2) The other sights are simply not in AberfeldyWe all want to see more renewable energy but that should not mean ‘carte blanche’ to devastate every natural jewel in our countryside. Especially when the scheme is such a small one in the scheme of things. I understand the total of approved renewables in Perthshire is some 700mw, whereas the Birks is around 1mw - just over 0.1%.The proposed ‘rent’ money - £10,000, £20,000 or £50,000 or whatever is offered to the community - should not be the issue. The Birks was gifted to the community and should not be treated as an asset to be negotiated with a developer, and certainly not one offering sums that are tiny (‘glass beads for the natives’) compared with the huge profits to be made.As the owner of a local business who has invested heavily in the local economy and now employs 15 full-time staff in a business that draws heavily on visitors, both tourists and more local ‘visitors’ I strongly urge the  Common Good Fund councillors to act for the ‘Common Good’ of the people of Aberfeldy on and reject the scheme by whatever means is appropriate at this stage - ie refusing to grant a lease.  Kevin RamageEast Cottage, Tullicrow, Aberfeldy 

I read the article “Pitlochry Community Council:  A Failure of Duty” on page 8 of your November edition, which contains such inaccuracies and defamatory comments that I feel compelled to reply on behalf of the Pitlochry and Moulin Community Council and set the record straight.

 

The person referred to as having a personal interest in the Curling Rink has never ever been asked to step aside, and has always declared an interest where appropriate, until at the August 19th meeting it was declared that the directorship and shareholding had been relinquished. Much to the dismay of the members of RAID who came to the meeting, and yes they did walk out after the official stance of the Community Council was read out, a fact that was best left out of the minutes so their unreasonable behaviour went unrecorded.

 

The development has always been placed in the Planning report, which is nearly always around the middle of the agenda. I put the development at the end of my report so that any pertinent matter could be raised and discussed properly. What is meant by interruption to Mr Bean’s visit I am at a loss to fathom, the Community Council visited Perth to put forward the case for him to visit, he considered our request and accepted. We shall be ever grateful to him for doing so, and the minute of his discussions took up a whole page in the August edition of News Round North!

 

To make comparison with other work the Community Council carries out, and say that “serious concerns that affect so many” are not as important, is cheap. What is important to one person may be far less important to another, and the Community Council has to represent 100% of the community of Pitlochry not just the 7% or so members of a local pressure group.

 

Affordable housing is important for the town. There is government policy laid down, fully supported by P&K Council as to the quantity, design and build quality of this type of housing, the Community Council can do nothing to change that, what it can do, and has been doing is to see that what is proposed for the town is fair and equitable and that local people get priority to what is available.

 This squabbling however must stop, as we have a far, far bigger battle to face, which will take a united Pitlochry to win.    J R PearsonPitlochry & Moulin Community Council