'The issues that matter'

Although you are nodoubt aware of the national issues, jobs, education and the ilk, you may of heard of some of the local issues. So here is a quick guide to local Ayr issues.

The Carrick Street Halls
This is a day center for the elderly. It is located in the town center. But now the Kyle center wants to expand and build on the site. As such South Ayrshire wanted to relocate the halls, but now with budget cuts it looks like it will get the chop. Opponents of Labour are maxamising on this, and Rita Miller, a counciler at South Ayrshire.

Budget Cuts and tax rises.
It's not offten a party go into an election with a tax rise, but Labour are. South Ayrshire Council (SAC) are increasing the council tax by 5% as well as cutting services bu £5million due to complex budget cuts from the Scottish Executive. It also could mean the end of the Ayr Flower Show as well as cuts in education and social work - which is focused on by the candidates

Air Traffic Control
Labour want to part privatise the service, which has a base at Prestwick. There are local conserns over job cuts as well as the wider issue of safety.

A77
The A77 is the main road from Ayr/kilmarnock to Glasgow, but at times is a four lane road (no central reservation - just a white line). It is one of the most dangours roads in Scotland. Labour have promised and upgrade, but others want immigiate action and to motorway status. This is both to increase trade, but more importatly safety.

Troon Harbour
The development of tbis has split the parties, some want to increase the freight at Troon as they claim it helps the economy and gives jobs. Others see it as intrusive and anoying to the residents who have to live with the increased traffic. Some oppose the scheme, others want an inquiry to look at new road links to the site.

Ayr Seaside and the Low Green
SAC want to allow car acces to the long since declined sea frount, as well as moving the bike lanes to the low green. This ot to try and  encourage some sort of tourist industry. There are local opponents in the Community Council (though NOONE lives directly on the promanard). Not likely to be a big issue as most people want ANYTHING to be done! The seaside residents may vote Tory as a protest, but they always do anyway...

'It's fast becoming a referendum on Section 28..." Fiona Ross, STV

Section 28 has been a major issue in this campaign. All the parties have a stance, some advocating it very much. Although they all want to 'focus on local issues', and the campaign is doing so, this issue still dominates.
So on this issue (as requested) here is where the paries stand on the issue - and as KeepTheClause says, use your vote wisely, look at the list and whichever side you support, you can.

FOR repeal:- (Repeal Section 28)
Labour (who introduced the move, also now support guidlines in some form)
Lib Dems (the most pre-repeal, they oppose statutory guidelines saying they are the same as S28)
SNP (although Mather is sitting on the fence in this issue, wants to show he will 'protect' as well)
Green Party (support abolition)
SSP (also support compleate abolition as a matter of principle
OPPOSE repeal:- (Keep section 28)
Conservative (the main opposition, oppose guidelines - say only S28 protects
Pro-life (the most pro-S28. They also want to see it extende to include health authorities)
UKIP (not sure why, but oppose abolition. States to protect from Homophobic Maphia propaganda)
INDP - Radio Vet (this is one of his key areas of his campaign, 'sending a message to governemnt'
INDP - Anti-clone (also oppose, a belife in 'rights' focuses his view)

You can get more information on this subject from the BBC News web-site in Scotland (it should be there somewhere). Also Keep the Clause web-site has detiled arguments, and they claim a balanced picture with arguments on both sides (I've looked at it, there is no question that it is bias - indeed a bit misleading at times, but worth a look neverthless). They do fail to answer many questions, and reley on the idea of 'protect our children' rather much. they don't answer what S28 rellay protects from. It dosen't answer why they feel homosexuality should not be tought, why it should not be seen as acceptable, why they see gay people as different.
So after reading KTC, here is the counter argument (just to be fair)...
The opposing arguemnt is clearly that homosexuality is not wrong, neither legally or morally. It is what people are. You can't encouage people to become gay, just as you can't teach them to become left-handed. You can't protect with S28, as talking about an issue does not harm anyone. Parents have worrys over how their children may be vunrable to the inapproprate information - compltely faulse.Just as you would't show abortion scenes, you wouln't get homosexual propaganda. And how do we 'protect' children by keeping them in a vacume. If there are dangours that parents claim, is it ot better children know them, and what to do if they encouner it. KTC are also nieve, they feel children don't know about gay sex and life - any visit to a school playgroud dispells that. But it is not accurate what children know, they think it's something to make fun of, and ridicule, it dosen't make a tolorant society - and whatever they feel, it is not dangour from it, not when they snigger behind teacher back and point fingers.
We must help our children be citizens of the world, by telling them the facts in a mature way, so there is tolorance and equality. There is not a dangour in removing S28, it dosen't protect from anything at the moment - it mearly singles out one group in society and lets our children draw heir own misguided conclusions.
GavinB*

* All through this site, I intend to be imparsial - despite any views I myself hold. If you wish to take issue with the comments, then visit the message board or e-mail me.