Stirling’s war on motorists Get England to withdraw

SOME time ago when Scotland were due to play Ukraine in an important football fixture the Prime Minister suggested that Scotland should forfeit the tie as a show of solidarity with the people of Ukraine at a time of great distress and conflict. It never came to pass and Ukraine overcame Scotland in any case. No mention was made of allowing Ukraine to qualify at the expense of Wales in the final qualifier. Wales then progressed, and good luck to them.

In the interests of national solidarity and a show of character for fairness around the world wouldn’t it be a similar show of solidarity with the downtrodden citizens of Qatar and the many thousands of immigrant workers who lost their lives in appalling conditions for this Prime Minister to withdraw the England team from the World Cup? I’m sure this statement of intent would send a strong message to Qatar and other likeminded nations that their regimes will not be tolerated in this day and age.

Robert Hayes, Cumbernauld.

STIRLING, once proud capital of Scotland, central to the fight for independence at Stirling Bridge and Bannockburn, is now embroiled in a 21st-century conflict.

It is the intention of the “city” faithers to drive (pardon the pun) the motorised vehicles from the highways and byways of the ancient burgh. Streets have been torn up, someone has made a fortune in supplying traffic cones, no need for fairy lights as traffic lights are in vogue, and don’t get me started on the proliferation of signs informing the poor motorists that the authorities offer their apologies for any disturbance to our daily comings and goings.

And for what good reason you may well ask have mayhem, gridlock, frustration and confusion been visited on our four-wheeled friends? In a word – sustainabilty. The car is dead, long live the bike. Now, as a parttime pedaller I have to declare that I do enjoy the wind blowing through the gaps in my teeth. But not at the expense of those