JOHN McLellan makes the fair point that Scots do have some input into decisions taken at Westminster ("Tooth-fairy promises put aside by the SNP", The Herald, September 22). However unless member states of the EU agree to it taking over military and defence decisions (including placement of weapons of mass destruction), non-EU immigration, foreign policy, taxation, macro-economic policy, and the power to block or agree to referendums that will be legally respected, I'm not sure the comparison with a putatively independent Scotland's position within the EU really holds for long.
Just as the greater degree of honesty over the challenges of independence is the right way to go, it surely behoves those opposed to the idea not to conflate the powers of the UK Government in Scotland with the position of Scotland with separate membership of the EU.
Michael Rossi,
66 Canalside Gardens, Southall, Middlesex.
THE contrast between the attitude of the UK Government to Northern Ireland and to Scotland when it comes to Brexit could hardly be more different.
In a recent speech in Belfast the Brexit Secretary, David Davis, stressed: “We had a common travel area between the UK and the Republic of Ireland many years before either country was a member of the EU. We are clear we do not want a hard border – no return to the past – and no unnecessary barriers to trade.”
In Dublin the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, James Brokenshire, stressed the “strong commitment” to work with the Irish Government to find a solution to the border problems which the EU vote had generated.
Across the Irish Sea a very different song is being sung. The Secretary of State for Scotland, David Mundell, states that an independent Scotland within the EU would necessitate a hard border with England. No “strong commitment” to finding a solution here, no room for negotiation, the only way to retain no border controls is through membership of the United Kingdom.
It is indeed highly peculiar that the UK Government has pledged no hard border between a Northern Ireland outside the EU and a Republic of Ireland within, but has stated there would have to be a hard border between an England outside the EU and an independent Scotland within.
Alex Orr,
Flat 2, 77 Leamington Terrace, Edinburgh.
SELF-GOVERNMENT is better than good government". A quote from British Prime Minister Henry Campbell-Bannerman tweaked down the ages by pro-independence leaders from Mahatma Gandhi to Nicola Sturgeon. A quote deliberately misinterpreted by Unionists everywhere to suggest that those seeking self-government would rather spend money on flags than hospitals.
The case for self-government does transcend current issues such as Brexit, oil, and passing trends because it pre-empts them.
The economy falls and rises, controlled by the UK Government of the day. Westminster governments come and go. They are subjectively seen as bad or good. However, they are elected by the majority of UK citizens using an out-of-date system which is unlikely to change soon.
For a long time (from the start of the 20th century with the exception of the post-war 1950s) Scotland has voted left of centre while England has most often voted right of centre. This difference has widened since the establishment of the Scottish Parliament. As long as decisions for our country are taken from outside our country by politicians whose philosophy is increasingly alien to our own, there will be discontent. This applies even when some individual decisions are seen as good.
Being grown-up means earning your own money, keeping your own budget, choosing your own friends and making your own mistakes. It doesn't mean you stop loving your parents who used to give you pocket money and control your life in accordance with their own views.
As far as independence goes, "panacea" is a word used only by Unionists. Nationalists use the term "prerequisite". With independence we make our decisions to suit our own changing circumstances and priorities. Without it somebody elsewhere is making decisions for us to suit their own.
Mary McCabe,
25 Circus Drive, Glasgow.
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel