There is much talk about the General Election that is due this year, with all the parties jockeying for position as speculation mounts.
What, though, about the situation in Scotland? Yesterday a correspondent criticised the performance of the SNP/Green administration and called for a Scottish election at the earliest opportunity.
Today, however, one of our readers leaps to the defence of the SNP, comparing its performance with that of Labour.
Mary Thomas of Edinburgh writes:
"Robert Scott (Letters, March 18) should be careful about calling for a Holyrood election as despite the constant barrage from opponents claiming everything in Scotland is useless, the latest Redfield & Wilton poll, whose methodology is the least favourable towards the SNP, puts the SNP four percentage points ahead of Labour for the next Holyrood elections.
"Labour remained silent when Alister Jack sabotaged the Deposit Return Scheme which was successfully introduced in Ireland in February and last weekend saw one million drinks containers returned rather than littering the streets. But then Ireland’s economy has thrived as part of the EU while Labour even remains opposed to freedom of movement that has damaged recruitment in the NHS and in the agriculture and hospitality sectors in Scotland, and will prevent the UK growth Labour hopes for.
"Following Sir Keir Starmer’s pressure on the Speaker to save his skin and sabotage the SNP’s motion on Gaza, last week Labour MPs were whipped to abstain on the Tory Budget, that they basically agreed with, while it was left to the SNP and others to oppose it.
"The more Scottish voters learn about Keir Starmer and his numerous U-turns, the less likely they will vote for him, while the SNP’s Westminster leader Stephen Flynn has been very impressive and cuts straight to the chase without notes at PMQs. After the Speaker refused to let Diane Abbot speak on Tory racism, Stephen Flynn immediately went to speak to her while the spineless Keir Starmer watched on, then decided he better do likewise but, by all accounts, this didn’t go well when she asked to be given back the Labour Whip."
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