Readers' Letters: We need a fire service in keeping with James Braidwood's vision

The St Giles’ service is part of a series of educational and commemorative events that will take place to honour the memory of the founder of the service, James Braidwood and his comrades.

​Braidwood was born and educated in Edinburgh and following school joined his father’s building company as an apprentice. Here he developed his knowledge of building construction methods and used his skills to understand how fires spread through homes and commercial premises. This came at a time when existing systems of dealing with the outbreak of fire (via insurance company provision) was seen as ineffective.

In 1824 Braidwood worked with the city authorities and the insurance companies to create the world's first municipal fire service known as ‘The Edinburgh Fire Establishment’. Braidwood took a scientific approach to his work and studied fire spread to try to understand the best method of tackling them. Later he was appointed the first head of the new London Fire Engine Establishment, which became the London Fire Service.

Braidwood was a visionary. He realised that to keep people safe and have a rapid response to emergency situations it required investment, planning, cooperation, trained personnel, modern equipment and facilities.

These lessons from history should not be ignored as we plan the fire and rescue service of the 21st century.

Braidwood’s vision stands in stark contrast to the austerity-driven cuts of the last decade where budgets cuts, job losses and pay erosion were the priority of a Tory government that knew the price of everything and value of nothing, an approach largely replicated in the devolved nations.

With a new government in London developing better relations with the devolved governments there is an opportunity for a fresh approach to our essential public services, including the Fire and Rescue Service. This must see an end to year-on-year real terms budget cuts, the protection of jobs, negotiated fair pay settlements, investment in the best equipment, breathing apparatus, radios and kit, and a fire service estate able to meet the needs of the communities we serve and the times in which we live.

Matt Wrack General Secretary, Fire Brigades Union, London

Balancing books

I read today that our First Minister believes that revenue needs to be increased by raising taxes (Scotsman, 22 October). That is dead easy to implement but where is the other side of the equation addressing spending wisely?

I do not mean just cutting budgets. I would suggest reducing the number of MSPs and their entourage and spend that saving on employing seasoned managers from industry and commerce to show them how it should be done.

Derek Sharp, Edinburgh

Too little, too late

The Scottish Government has opened a consultation on the proposed introduction of a 25p levy on single-use beverage cups (Scotsman, 21 October).

It appears that politicians, especially those in Scotland, never learn from their numerous mistakes or have extremely short memories. Do they not remember the Scottish Government bottle return scheme which failed spectacularly? Surely they must know that they are being sued by Biffa for more than £200 million for the losses Biffa incurred with the scheme being cancelled.

People who pay £3 for a cup of coffee are unlikely to worry about 25p so littering will continue. For more than ten years single-use vapes have been carelessly thrown away but politicians did nothing. In Scotland last year 26 million were discarded with ten per cent thrown away and more than half disposed of incorrectly. Now at last, and long overdue, disposable vapes will be banned in Scotland from 1 April 2025 after Scotland follows Westminster’s lead.

Clark Cross, Linlithgow, West Lothian

Defining issues

I cannot understand why Labour MPs and government ministers have so much difficulty explaining the definition of words. First it was “a woman” and now it is “working people”. Never mind about free tickets and clothes, can someone donate them some free dictionaries?

Paul Lewis, Edinburgh

Regional pricing

Listening to UK energy minister Michael Shanks on Laura Maciver’s BBC Scotland Sunday Show was painful. It’s clear the former secondary school teacher is in way over his head.

He absurdly claimed that GB Energy would generate electricity early next year and that it will bring down energy bills. False. GB Energy is a shell company for foreign investors to exploit Scotland’s renewables. It won’t produce a milliwatt of energy and it won’t reduce bills.

To illustrate how dysfunctional the UK energy system is, since Labour came to power, more than £100m has been added to UK energy bills to pay Scottish wind farms to halt production.

The reason? It’s expensive to move electricity from where it’s produced to where it’s needed and under the existing centralised market structure, if an offshore Scottish wind farm produces more than the network can handle, it’s paid to shut off while a gas-fired plant down in England gets paid to switch on. That’s crazy.

The solution? Regional energy pricing. Instead of one price for the whole UK, each region would have a different price based on its level of supply and demand. Consumers would pay less for electricity if the power is generated near them and more if the power is generated further away. Because Scotland has renewables coming out of its ears, regional pricing would be a huge benefit and Scots would pay the lowest electricity prices in Europe.

Regional pricing would also boost the Scottish economy. When Sweden introduced regional pricing, it attracted more than 70bn euros of industrial investment. Because energy-intensive industries want to find the cheapest energy sources, they’d flock to Scotland.

Leah Gunn Barrett, Edinburgh

Games gamble

A reduced Commonwealth Games (Scotsman, 22 October) will still cost Scotland dear, irrespective of the amount raised by sports tourism. Australia wisely chose not to be lumbered with the next Games – it can’t be seen as a privilege these days.

The Scottish Government assures us it will not cost the tax-payer anything, but that’s only directly: we’ll pay indirectly with cuts elsewhere which are not directly linked to the Games. As the Bay City Rollers once opined, “It’s a game… that we’re playing”. "Paying” might be more accurate.

Steve Hayes, Leven, Fife

Food for thought

Philip Lymbery mispresents data and underplays the significant contribution UK food and farming is making towards safeguarding the future efficacy of antibiotics in his article “How supermarkets help the spread of deadly antibiotic-resistant diseases” (Scotsman, 18 October).

While a significant proportion of all groceries sold in the UK are imported, the vast majority of fresh meat, dairy and fish sold through supermarkets is ‘own brand’. This means it is covered by policies on responsible use of antibiotics that minimise risk of resistance while safeguarding the welfare of animals requiring veterinary treatment – policies that were in place long before recent regulatory updates.

Such policies are working. The UK has achieved among the lowest sales of antibiotics for treating farm animals in Europe, if not the world, irrespective of the system in which the animals are raised. This is thanks to the voluntary collaboration between farmers and vets, the supply chain, retailers and governments across the four nations over the past decade – unique globally, and held up as a ‘best practice’ by the United Nations. The end goal is to reduce resistance, and government surveillance confirms this, too, continues to fall in our farm livestock and their products in line with sales.

Philip is, however, correct in one area. Global trends in antibiotic-resistant infections are alarming and show the crucial importance of dialling up efforts to reduce, refine and replace antibiotic use across human and veterinary medicine. In this, UK retailers will continue to play their part. But the huge achievements of an extremely successful industry collaboration, which retailers are part of, must also be recognised.

Dr Amy Jackson, Secretary, Food Industry Initiative on Antimicrobials

No respect

Just when you think things could not get worse for the party running devolved Scotland, the SNP appoint a new chief executive officer with an online comments history that comes close to defying belief (Scotsman, 21 October).

Republicanism is a choice, of course, some might say a fine one, but nastiness is not required. In particular, when two of the Royals in her targets of abuse are suffering from and being treated for well-publicised and serious illnesses; it can all be done without the nastiness.

Is it really too much to expect that the person occupying an exalted position in the SNP should have a background that excluded such extreme and violent expressions of views? Or has an inevitable thumping in the polls in 2026 been accepted and they simply don’t care any more?

Alexander McKay, 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.