
Just think what we could done with the cash wasted on the CalMac model
In comparison, council-owned monohull ferries operating on Shetland's frequent inter-island services have minimal shore-based, shift-working crews and operate efficiently for significantly longer hours daily than CalMac; likewise, privately owned Western Ferries, with one route, four ships and exemplary reliability and which incidentally also pays tax to support public services.
Mr Turbet finishes by extolling the virtues of 'the public model's ability to divert resources where they are needed', as compared with an operator serving just one route. Well, if CalMac's record of network capacity constraints and chaos is his desired model, I fear for the future of our island communities.
There is, however, a better way – catamarans, minimal shore-based crewing, multi-ship frequent crossings and gradually-introduced debundled route tendering, preferably to community-owned entities.
Roy Pedersen, Inverness.
Read more letters
What's the value of human life?
It is quite remarkable that an amendment to decriminalise self-abortions until birth in England and Wales was considered in the same week as new legislation seeking to decriminalise assisted suicide in the Westminster Parliament. Similar initiatives are also being examined in Scotland, as mentioned by Hannah Brown ("Labour MP calls for Scotland to decriminalise abortion", June 29). It is, therefore, appropriate to ask what is happening in our modern society; why have many members of the general public, and their representatives in Parliament, given up on the concept of the value of human life?
A societal paradox seems obvious. UK and Scottish government funding has been quite rightly provided to support extremely premature infants, while initiatives are considered to enable abortions until birth. Similarly, financial support is rightly being provided to prevent suicides, including amongst young persons, while new assisted suicide legislation is being considered.
In all this confusion, it is worth asking why human life should be valued. Certainly, from a purely scientific perspective, human beings have no value whatsoever since they are just made up of about 70 per cent water and a few other biochemical compounds.
Do human beings then have value because they have autonomy? But this would mean that some lives, such as the unborn and those with very serious mental disorders, are worthless. Moreover, how can the autonomy of persons, logically, give them any worth?
Maybe the value of a human life comes from the amount of pleasure or suffering it experiences. But why should the activation of certain sensory cells in the brains of individuals give them any greater worth? Moreover, if pleasure is all that mattered, it would mean that all persons in society would have lives of unequal value.
So where does the value of human life come from, including that of politicians who adjudicate (after a few hours of discussion) whether some of those around them have lives unworthy of life, which can be ended? But perhaps politicians in Parliament only exist to support the concept of a social contract where everyone should equally respect each other. But why then should the strong and powerful respect such a contract? And why should anyone care if no one has any value?
The only possible answer to the question of why human persons have worth, lies in the belief that every human person has immeasurable value. A belief that everyone should share in a secular society if it is to remain civilised and not descend into a jungle of barbarity.
In this regard, it was distressing to see so many MSPs disparage personal beliefs in the debates on assisted suicide in the Scottish Parliament. They ought to have realised that it is only because they, themselves, share the belief in the value and the equality of all human life, that democracy and the Scottish Parliament actually exist.
Dr Antony Latham (Chair); Dr Anne Williams (Vice-Chair); Prof Dr Robert Minns (Honorary Chair); Dr Calum MacKellar (Director of Research); Dr. Danielle de Zeeuw (Senior Researcher), Scottish Council on Human Bioethics, Edinburgh.
Why the EU is struggling
Ian McConnell's article rehashing tired Brexit regrets ("We're all still paying price for hard Brexit", June 29) does so in defiance of mounting evidence that the EU's internal contradictions are being brutally exposed.
Donald Trump's proposed high tariffs on EU exports are not reckless bluster – they are a response to long-standing covert trade barriers and regulatory protectionism that have helped the EU run persistently high surpluses. The irony? Britain experienced the same treatment, yet was told to accept a £121 billion goods trade deficit with the EU (2023) while paying £10bn net annually into the EU coffers.
And this wasn't a global pattern. The UK's goods trade with the rest of the world was broadly in balance, underscoring how structurally skewed our trade relationship with the EU had become. The bloc's protectionist barriers – and rigid regulatory alignment – consistently undermined British competitiveness.
Unlike Britain's previous passivity, the US has now acted decisively. And with Fortress Europe under pressure, countries like Italy, facing economic malaise and rising populism, may well look to strike their own deals with the US, bypassing Brussels entirely.
Germany, meanwhile, long enjoyed the advantages of an artificially weak euro, supercharging its export dominance. But that model is now unravelling: a struggling car industry, falling Chinese demand, and crippling energy policy are exposing deep vulnerabilities. A weaker Germany means a less cohesive EU.
Outside the bloc, Britain is free to strike deals. Like, for example, trade deals with the US, India and the CPTPP (Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership), which may be modest today, but they align us with the fastest-growing economies of this and the next generation. They represent flexibility and global engagement – exactly what Brexit was meant to enable.
The EU is now discovering how 'difficult to negotiate with' it has become – only this time, it's not Britain acquiescing but America swinging a hammer.
Ian Lakin, Aberdeen.
Debt worry for Scotland
The latest figures on Scotland's debt makes grim reading: average household unsecured debt is running at over £16,000 and more than 475,000 people are on benefits, while 810,000 16-64-year-olds are economically inactive.
There needs to be radical change to stimulate employment and a return to work in order to get us out of the financial rut that the SNP has allowed Scotland to sink into.
Dennis Forbes Grattan, Aberdeen.
Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump (Image: PA)
Please support these rabbis
It is tragic for humanity that two men have appeared on the world stage at the worst possible time and place.
One whom I am referring to is Benjamin Netanyahu. The government of which he is Prime Minister is responsible for murdering and injuring some 50,000 children (Unicef). That would keep most people awake at night. But no: he and his fanatical supporters press on, planning more suffering, more cruelty, more murdering of children, more clearing Palestinians off their land, destroying their infrastructure.
The other is Donald Trump. I do not need to list the ways in which he is singularly unfit to be 'leader of the free world'. I was however going to suggest he is unfit to be President of the United States, but that is a decision for the American electorate to make, once those who voted for him come to their senses.
I mentioned in my letter published on June 29 that one of the positive elements in this unfolding tragedy is the many Jewish Israelis 'who defy courageously their government by working for peace and justice'.
There are many such groups and I suggest that we can respond to their courage by providing them with financial assistance. I give one example only, that being Rabbis for Human Rights, who, driven by 'the profound Jewish values of responsibility for the safety and welfare of the stranger, the different and the weak, the widow and the orphan' provide aid for Palestinian communities facing state-backed settler violence and ethnic cleansing. There is a website for British Friends of Rabbis for Human Rights.
John Milne, Uddingston.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Edinburgh Reporter
30 minutes ago
- Edinburgh Reporter
Is Online Poker Legal in Mongolia? Here's What You Should Know
The popularity of online poker has spread to all the corners of the world. However, it is widely not legally accepted in different countries. This is what has changed drastically in the last several years in Mongolia. A field that was one of the most unregulated areas is now open to direct intervention of the government. But in case you are asking yourself whether or not online poker is legal in Mongolia the following is what you ought to familiarize yourself with in 2025. freepik The Legal Background: A Grey Zone No More For several decades, Mongolia has been in the grey legal area concerning online poker. Although the classical variant of gambling or rather the land-based component was prohibited in a direct manner, online gambling has not been directly discussed in the act. Due to this, Mongolian players had no problems with playing international poker games at sites like PokerStars or GGPoker and avoiding any legal persecution. The completeness of lack of enforcement along with thin online controls provided the impression that online poker was condoned, even when they were not actually legal. This enabled an underground community of successful online poker to emerge. It was common for players to use foreign platforms — a typical poker site Mongolia users would access might be based in Europe or Asia — and to handle payments through digital wallets or foreign bank accounts, all while avoiding domestic regulation. Nevertheless, to the government, this unregulated industry became both a financial and social menace as it grew. Concerns about gambling addiction, fraud, and the outflow of money intensified pressure from stakeholders to control or completely ban online gambling. Mongolia's Legal Pivot in 2025 The amendments to the Mongolian laws that had to do with gambling were far-reaching and were done by the Parliament in May 2025. The changes directly affected the face of online gambling because they criminalized all digital casino game websites, online poker sites, online slot machines, and online lotteries. Online gambling services face criminalization too, under the law. This also involved people who assist other people to open an account, provide payment services, or encourage criminal companies to gamble or advertise their websites in either way. The new law gives the state agencies the authority to block the websites that engage in illegal gambling. Owing to this, thousands of websites that deal with gambling such as poker sites, have already been blockaded or become unreachable domestically in Mongolia. Governments are also increasing surveillance of online payments especially those that can be associated with offshore casinos. Moreover, the new legislations openly forbid online gambling advertisements. Any advertising of online poker or other games that was carried out via websites, mobile apps, affiliate networks, or even social media is now discussed as a violation of Mongolian legislation. The punishment includes an administrative penalty to a criminal trial. The Sports Betting Exception Although the 2025 legislation was mainly limiting, an exception has actually been carved through it, and that is where sports betting is concerned. Both online and offline sports betting have been legalized through a state licensing system. This was done based on economic strategy. Legalizing a popular form of gambling, controlling it, and thus gaining control of tax revenues was one of the things the state intended to do in order to halt the continuous stream of money flowing to unlicensed foreign operators. This legal difference between sports betting and other gambling activities is quite important. The fact is that, although poker and other games resembling casino ones are forbidden online, sports betting operators have an opportunity to receive official licenses and operate their activities under the governmental control of Mongolia. However, this might be under stringent supervision of the government such as identification, accountable gambling measures, and making the financial affairs visible. This legal structure on sports betting will not automatically be applied to other forms of games such as poker according to the government. Until today, online poker is not availed of such an exemption. Legal Consequences for Players and Providers The new gambling laws are mostly directed at muzzling illegal activities and the worst penalties will be on the hands of persons operating, promoting, or facilitating online gambling sites. Now, speaking of individual players they cannot be left alone entirely. The players themselves may not be charged with a criminal offense; however, in case of the repeated occurrence of a prohibited gambling activity, a fine or an administrative measure may be applied on the basis of Article 4 of the law. The government has instructed financial dealings to watch flag and scrutinize any transactions that are assumed to be related to online gambling. In other instances, their user accounts can be frozen or their funds can be confiscated in cases where it is being used to perpetrate criminal activity. There is also surveillance of the applications of virtual private networks (VPNs) and digital wallets which could assist a user in circumventing local blocks. This enforcement situation is a new one that presents signs of being rather serious as the government gets down to crackdown. State-initiated media and public enlightenment have been applied as a means of cautioning the citizens on the effects of engaging in illegal gambling, such as poker. The Skill Game-Debate Another point that has emerged in Mongolia as it did in several other countries is the fact whether poker is a game of chance or skill. Pro-poker parties state that poker is a game of complexity and strategy quite unlike slots lottery or other pure games of chance in which luck alone takes the upper hand. In this regard, they assert that poker should be considered as a sport/competitive activity and not gambling as is the case with other types of gambling. Companies such as the Mongolian Sport Poker United Association have gone out of their way to ensure that poker is taken as a skill rather than a game of chance. This group is certified by the International Federation of Match Poker and it popularizes poker as a sport, rather than a gambling game. Nevertheless, the law of 2025 fails to distinguish between poker and other games of chance notwithstanding the attempts to do it. At the time being, the Mongolian legal system regards poker as similar to Internet casinos and virtual slots. freepik How Mongolia Compares to Other Countries This of Mongolia is more prohibitive as compared to a number of other countries that have either legalized or regulated poker. As an example, there is a detailed system of gambling control in the United Kingdom, where licensed online poker sites are present. In the state of the United States, such as New Jersey or Pennsylvania, online poker is governed by state law in certain parts as well. On the other hand, Mongolia has lumped prohibition that best fits those found in places such as China where most gambling is prohibited on the web and its sites are actively blocked. This rift represents two approaches to online gambling at a world level. Other nations are convinced that the better options to use are regulation, oversight, and taxation rather than prohibition. Others such as Mongolia call tough prohibition the only avenue available to curb the negative social and economic effects of gambling. Like this: Like Related


The Independent
37 minutes ago
- The Independent
Macron presses for recognition of Palestine as ‘only path to peace'
Emmanuel Macron pressed for recognition of Palestinian statehood in an address to the UK's Parliament, saying it was the 'only path to peace'. The French president said a ceasefire was a matter of 'absolute urgency' and that a two-state solution would bring security to the region. He said: 'We are aware that a political way out is crucial, and I believe in the future of the two-state solution as a basis for regional security architecture which will enable Israel to live in peace and security alongside its neighbours. 'But I want to be clear, calling today for a ceasefire in Gaza without any condition, is just telling to the rest of the world that for us as Europeans, there is no double standard, and as we are attached to human lives, as we are attached to territorial integrity, we want the ceasefire, no discussion. 'And today, working together in order to recognise the state of Palestine and to initiate this political momentum is the only path to peace.' David Lammy had earlier refused to set a time frame for when the UK would recognise Palestinian statehood. The Foreign Secretary was asked at the Commons Foreign Affairs Committee when the timing would be right to recognise statehood. He said: 'I'm not going to set it to a set time frame, because I've explained that this is a moving, live situation. 'There are delicate ceasefire negotiations under way. I've explained the issues that sit within that, and whether we will get a… ceasefire. I'm hopeful that we will.' Mr Lammy said he was in talks with French and Saudi colleagues on recognition, but that he wanted to see change on the ground. He said that 'despite the recognition movement, actually what we've seen is further annexation on the West Bank' and 'it has not led to get us getting closer to a process, it's led to further annexation'. Mr Lammy said he 'would prefer it was part of the process' and that he believed 'our French colleagues are also waiting to see if there is, in fact, a ceasefire in the next few days' to kickstart a process and that the UK Government remained 'completely committed' to recognition.


The Sun
an hour ago
- The Sun
Keir Starmer should be ashamed of awkward charade he put Rachel Reeves through – even Matt Hancock didn't stoop THAT low
AS awkward encounters go, it was right up there with one of those 'business as usual' photocalls when a famous man has been caught with his trousers down and wheels his wife out for the cameras. Except that, this time, it was Sir Keir Starmer's right-hand woman Rachel Reeves gurning her way through an 'unscheduled' (aka painfully staged) appearance designed to limit the damage sustained by the sight of her crying in the Commons just the day before. 6 The heat was on the PM, painted as callous for failing to publicly back his Chancellor or notice her distress, so the spin doctors got busy with this blatant damage-limitation exercise which, to my mind, had more to do with saving his reputation than hers. 'Nothing to see here' was the intended message as she sat next to the PM, laughing with all the gusto of someone enjoying a private audience with none other than comic genius Billy Connolly. Nothing's that funny dear — least of all the launch of Labour's 10 Year Health Plan. Rictus grin firmly in place, she gave a blessedly brief speech to assembled health workers, telling them 'it's great to be here today' but fooling no one as to the true intention of her presence there. There followed a hug with the PM that, if you imagine the prospect of Ann Widdecombe and John Sergeant performing a rumba together on a Strictly Christmas special, would give you some idea of how excruciatingly awkward and clumsily choreographed it was. To my mind, it would have been a far greater power move had Reeves refused to take part in this charade and let her political colleagues stew in the hot tears that many believe were caused by her exhaustion and frustration. Those old enough to remember the scandal of former Tory Cabinet minister David Mellor having a tawdry fling with a bit-part actress, still squirm at the memory of his wife and children being paraded at the end of the family driveway for an awkward 'business as usual' press photocall. To this day, a 'five-bar gate moment' is the phrase used by journalists when it comes to jaw-dropping displays of shamelessness in the Westminster bubble. But when former Health Secretary Matt Hancock was caught on his office CCTV snogging an aide, his wife Martha emerged alone from the family home for a dog walk, head held high and looking a million dollars. After all, he was the idiot, not her. So why should she make it easy for him? Rachel Reeves FINALLY addresses Commons tears after she and Keir Starmer put on awkward show of unity And it's not just politicians. After actor Dominic West was spotted getting cosy with former co-star Lily James in Rome, he later posed with wife Catherine Fitzgerald for the assembled paps outside their home alongside a sign that read 'Our marriage is strong and we're very much together'. 6 6 They remain so. Whether the political union of Starmer-Reeves lasts much longer remains to be seen. BOASTING about spending your money on a great experience, rather than buying a vastly expensive watch, is more socially acceptable apparently. And of course, another bonus is that a nice holiday or Michelin-starred dinner can't be snatched off your wrist by some oik on an e-bike. RISKY PATH TO TAKE THE Salt Path – a supposedly 'non-fiction' book about a couple's struggle against adversity – sold two million copies and was made into a movie starring Gillian Anderson and Jason Isaacs. But The Observer has now revealed a few potholes in the story of 'Raynor and Moth Winn' who, it turns out, were once known as Sally and Tim Walker. Instead of losing their money in a business deal that went wrong, it's alleged that Sally stole £64,000 from a previous employer and their UK home was repossessed when a loan to repay it turned sour. On top of that, several neurologists have cast doubt on whether Moth really has the rare and debilitating neurological condition corticobasal degeneration. Consequently, PSPA, the only charity that supports people with CBD and progressive supranuclear palsy, has now cut ties with the couple and says 'too many questions remain unanswered'. One might be why no one at the charity thought it odd someone who claimed to have the condition for 18 years was seemingly so well. But the biggest mystery is that this couple thought they could blithely reinvent history in such a public way without someone from their past calling them out. Heavy on the testosterone 6 6 ON Saturday, Sharon and Ozzy Osbourne invited me to Birmingham's Villa Park to see his and Black Sabbath's last ever live performance. A fan told me: 'It's the greatest line-up in metal history.' And, sure enough, rock stars such as Guns N' Roses, Anthrax, Yungblud, Slayer, Aerosmith's Steven Tyler and Metallica turned up to play tribute to the godfather of heavy metal himself, with all proceeds going to three charities. Ozzy was moved to tears by it all and so was the 40,000-strong crowd which, despite looking like a Hell's Angel convention, was joyous and trouble-free. And as if that wasn't enough testosterone for one day, movie stars Jason Momoa (Aquaman) and Joe Manganiello (Magic Mike) were among the fans flocking to see the Prince of Darkness perform one last time. There wasn't a metrosexual shaved chest in sight. KILLER HADN'T A CLUE 6 AUSSIE Erin Patterson murdered her in-laws by deliberately serving them death cap mushrooms in beef Wellington. During the ten-week trial, it emerged that her mobile phone data showed she had travelled to two locations where the lethal fungi had been spotted, bought a food dehydrator on the way home, made individual servings instead of one joint, put her own portion on a different coloured plate to the others, was later caught on CCTV buying sandwiches despite claiming to be suffering from sickness and diarrhoea, and was spotted dumping the food dehydrator at the local tip. A nasty piece of work she clearly is, but master criminal she clearly ain't. ONE in five Gen Zs say that they regularly jump queues, and 53 per cent of them think that's OK. A spokesperson for American Holidays, which commissioned the research, says: 'The younger generation is reshaping how we wait in line, from the pub to the passport desk.' Hmmm. Among themselves, maybe. But try any of that nonsense when there's a Baby Boomer behind you and, trust me, you'll know that it's very much not ok.