Gracie notes

I can only presume that James Macintyre is asleep whenever BBC correspondent Carrie Gracie appears on BBC News, since he believes she is “unknown on BBC television” (Letters, 10 January).

Ms Gracie is a highly respected correspondent whose regular reports from China are informative, insightful and delivered with precision, and with an assurance which can only come from years of experience.

She speaks fluent Mandarin, as Mr Macintyre would discover if he watched her talking to Chinese citizens during her assignments to their country. I doubt if any other BBC correspondent could match her language skills.

Mr Macintyre makes a value judgement about the relative importance of the Washington correspondent’s post compared to the China post and, in doing so, accords Jon Sopel a higher value rating than Carrie Gracie, despite the fact that Donald Trump aids correspondents by virtually doing the job for them via his relentless tweets.

A correspondent in China has a much tougher job. Even those who can overcome the language barrier have to tread very carefully in a country whose government is highly suspicious of foreign correspondents. As Gracie informed the BBC, “The rise of China is one of the biggest stories of our time and one of the hardest to tell. I cannot do it justice while battling my bosses and a Byzantine complaints process.”

These women are simply asking for equal pay for doing the same jobs as men. The option is certainly open to both sexes to “strive to improve their performance” but, under present BBC pay conditions, women will never be rewarded as generously as men, no matter how talented or efficient they are. CAROLYN TAYLOR

Wellbank Broughty Ferry, Dundee The country’s roads are strewn with litter, particularly plastic bottles, takeaway cartons and “energy” drinks cans. Apart from being unsightly, much of the plastic washes into culverts, and is then conducted via burns and rivers to the sea, contributing to a pressing world problem.

In spite of educational initiatives, people persist in dropping litter. Maybe the threat of a significant financial penalty will cause them to behave?

Technology might provide an answer. Most litter items will have been scanned by sales terminals in shops and supermarkets. It may well be possible to extend the capability of scanning equipment whereby, at the time it senses the bar code on the item, it imprints it with a “microdot” which carries a unique code for the retailer and the exact time of the sale.

The system I propose would require all retailers to upload their daily data, in terms of times of sales, items and card or phone details, to a central hub. This process would be automated, and the data unseen by anyone.

We would then need to develop the technology to scan an item found as litter; this may amount to little more than writing an app that would convert any mobile phone into a scanner. Council staff, or groups such as countryside rangers, school groups, beach cleaners etc, could then go on litter picks with such scanning technology, and upload their results to the central hub.

There, software would unite the item with the seller and the buyer’s card or phone details, if a match is found for it. The buyer’s account could then be automatically debited by a sizeable sum, say £25.

This income might be split, some going to underwrite the costs of maintaining this system, and some to reward the finders. Those guilty of littering would quickly learn to dispose of their rubbish in a proper manner, while litter-picking groups would have access to a good revenue stream at least for as long as the problem persists.

KEN GOW Bridge of Canny, Banchory