ALEX Salmond, not 72 hours after decisively losing the referendum vote, is casting out accusations of Westminster backing out of guarantees towards Scotland plus offering independence by the back door ("Salmond:
Independence can happen without referendum", The Herald, September 22).
The favoured expression"the sovereign will of the people of Scotland" seems to have been a flag of convenience for a Yes vote and now, with a clear No vote, older people are being blamed and accusations made of voters being duped in the manner of sore losers.
The referendum had a huge turnout and Mr Salmond would do well to remember that his majority at Holyrood was as the beneficiary of a poor turnout and the SNP securing the support of less than 23 per cent of the electorate.
I am shocked that Mr Salmond can suggest that, if the failed Yes campaign can muster the support of 23 per cent or more of the electorate at the next Holyrood election, then the SNP can ride roughshod over the sovereign will of the people of Scotland, decided in a democratic referendum, in a way that Westminster never has.
John Leonard,
6 Drossie Road, Falkirk.
ERM, do we still live in a democracy? Just checking.
Dr Bruce Halliday,
Stormont,
Dalbeattie Road,
Dumfries.
ALEX Salmond has well and truly let the independence genie out of its bottle; although the referendum vote was No, the margin is not sufficient to persuade our thrawn Celtic genie to climb back in, and, if promises are not kept, then in 10, or even five, years we will be voting once again.
I am as proud of my Britishness as of my Scottishness and I voted No in the belief that, at the moment, this is what is best for Scotland. However, it would take only a properly credible Scottish currency plan and some southern treachery to make me and many like me seriously consider voting Yes next time.
I can only pray that Westminster backbench MPs of all parties will place the promises made last week to Scotland before any narrow short-term personal and political advantage. If they don't then sooner, rather than later, Scotland will be independent.
John Gould,
5 Fulton Place,
Dalrymple,
Ayrshire.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article