I NOTE your report on the SNP and Cambridge Analytica ("SNP facing pressure to reveal all contact with data-row firm", The Herald, April 19). I would bet that there are dozens of companies that either approached the SNP or were approached by the SNP seeking a business deal that never materialised that Ian Blackford doesn't know about.
Would Theresa May, Jeremy Corbyn, Vince Cable and others know about all the contacts made for deals that were never made by their respective parties?
The SNP and its agent should be congratulated on smelling a rat when he met with this particular company, in spite of its success and impeccable record at that time and all the influential and highly respected individuals associated with the parent group of companies.
The former director of the company said: "I do know that we have been in pitches and negotiations with UK parties in the past, such as the SNP ..."
Is anyone interested in what other parties were involved and when and where meetings took place?
The ex-director didn't provide details of the meetings or contacts with "political parties, such as the SNP" so let's wait and see if and when any verifiable information is brought forward.
I feel that the situation is now approaching hysteria with demands for the SNP to provide information on contacts and details of meetings that didn't take place with a company with which it has had no dealings.
John Jamieson,
37 Echline Place, South Queensferry, West Lothian.
KEEPING the electorate in the dark is becoming more and more a way of life for the Scottish National Party. Recently we have witnessed many SNP attempts to keep the lid on questionable decisions apart from that on Cambridge Analytica. The Police Scotland Chief Constable row, the NHS Tayside row, Ms Sturgeon's Chinese visit row, the reason that the Lord Advocate's reading of the Continuity Bill overrides the Holyrood Presiding Officer's view and the reason why the Growth Commission report has yet to be seen. These issues do not paint a picture of an open and transparent Scottish government as the SNP frequently claims itself to be. It suggests entirely the reverse.
Dr Gerald Edwards,
Broom Road, Glasgow.
IS the lead headline on today's Letters Pages a metaphor perhaps ("All roads are now leading to a second independence ballot", The Herald, April 19)?
Are these roads that are referred to perchance the pothole-infested Scottish thoroughfares that we have to negotiate on a daily basis?
Methinks there will be few pilgrims on the road.
Archie Burleigh,
Meigle Cottage, Skelmorlie.
MAY I add to the excellent quotation from David Stubley (Letters, April 19) some more relevant words from the American Declaration of Independence, exemplifying the inalienable right of Scots to decide their own future? “Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed ….it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government.”
Let us remember how many Scots had input to this declaration, reflecting the spirit of the Declaration of Arbroath, and ask ourselves whether Westminster in general and Theresa May in particular are exercising “just powers” with the “consent of the governed” here in Scotland – for example, on bombing in Syria, the devolution power grab, Brexit itself, and so on. When Scottish votes altered the result in only a single-figure number of cases, over a period when 3,000-plus bills were passed, there has never been much sign of either “just powers” or” consent”.
Even the 1707 treaty, I believe, includes the right of either party to dissolve it if they so decide. Time to have the courage to stand up for our rights.
P Davidson,
Gartcows Road, Falkirk.
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