ROSEMARY Goring's article on measuring how successful a country is or claims to be determined ("Judge society by how happy we are, not how wealthy", The Herald, July 31) is entirely apposite as the UK undergoes an existential Brexit-fuelled crisis. Ms Goring's piece originates in the recent talk the First Minister gave to the TED (technology, entertainment and design) conference in which Ms Sturgeon revealed the refreshing philosophy that the success of a nation need not be simply judged on economic factors alone.
Her belief that the happiness and health of a population must be a major consideration when deciding government policy and practice flies in the face of the ideology of traditional Conservative administrations at Westminster. In this century David Cameron and Theresa May have fronted UK governments that have, unashamedly, put the interests of their party first and protected those with vested interests at the expense of wealth distribution and fairness. With Boris Johnson at the helm there are signs that the doctrine of conscience-free libertarianism will be further emboldened following a No Deal Brexit which will cripple the country and the vast majority of its people but buttress the wealthy both economically and politically.
Dominic Cummings, senior adviser to Mr Johnson, very recently said that, in the view of the public, Tories do not care about poor people or the NHS. Whilst this statement could well be another part of his grand election strategy to stimulate debate, it is nonetheless true that societal divisions have been accentuated under the Conservatives.
Ms Sturgeon has introduced a Benthamite dimension to the national discourse at a time when clarity is most required regarding the nature of our values and what sort of country we wish to live in. She will, almost certainly, come in for criticism from political opponents for hypocrisy or idealism or both.
A genuinely Utilitarian society may be a Nirvana in many ways, but it is greatly encouraging that we have a First Minister who possesses the ability to convey her vision, display her humanity and provide sound leadership at this juncture of unprecedented national crisis.
The well-being and happiness of Scotland may well rest on her guidance in the weeks and months to come.
Owen Kelly, Stirling.
THE letter from James Martin (July 31) is one of the best examples I have encountered of the use of the word hyperbole. We have “cringeworthy, whinging, victim persona, suffer, hate-filled, nationalist faces, screaming, foul mouthed, abuse, misappropriated Saltire, intolerant, ignorance, wanton display of boorishness, nationalist, nasty creed”. My goodness, what side of bed did Mr Martin arise from that day?
The cause of this unmerited fury is the performance of Ian Blackford at Westminster and the crowd outside Bute House for the visit of Boris Johnson. I would commend to Mr Martin several viewings on the BBC Parliament channel of Scottish Questions at Westminster, where he will see behaviour from the non-SNP benches to which most of the above words could be applied, so in addition to hyperbole I see hypocrisy.
The visit to Bute House by the PM has been well reported and televised by the media and is still available. After several viewings myself, I see an orderly crowd protesting with the booing being louder than the cheering and all in very close proximity to the PM and FM. What were the police thinking about in letting “hate-filled nationalists” from both sides so close?
I take particular issue on Mr Martin’s comment on the waving of the “misappropriated Saltire”. The Saltire cannot be misappropriated by anyone, it is the flag of Scotland and may be used by those who wish to use it. That the SNP and independence supporters use it is perfectly natural. The fact that Scottish Unionists and especially the “Proud Scot” variety choose not to, is their decision. We hear about Scottish Unionists rooting for Scotland too and so they should, but the Unionist peg is so shoogly they cannot bring themselves to wave the flag of their home country in “our precious Union” – shame on them.
Alan M Morris, Blanefield.
I WOULD point out to James Martin that the demonstration in Edinburgh was a peaceful one which left Boris Johnson in no doubt of the strength of feeling regarding Scotland's desire to remain within the EU, and the ultimate horror of a no-deal Brexit. Mr Martin reminds us that the new Prime Minister wasn't "duly elected other than by a coterie of like-minded individuals" but that "in the UK system the party given the majority chooses who will be PM, not the electorate". Indeed, but Scotland hasn't chosen a Conservative government since the 1950s, and as Scotland has but 59 MPs, Wales 40, Northern Ireland 18 and England 533, it is clear that under the UK system everyone gets the governments England elects, and Scotland is facing the unpalatable prospect of leaving the EU because England voted to leave. An affront to democracy which deserves to be protested against.
Ruth Marr, Stirling.
THE SNP and their apologists tell us on an almost-daily basis that Scotland did not vote for a Conservative government. Figures for the 2016 Holyrood elections and 2017 general elections show that SNP votes were 46.5 per cent and 36.9 per cent respectively indicating that the majority of Scots voters didn’t vote for an SNP Government. They complain that Scots didn’t vote for Boris Johnson, conveniently forgetting that Nicola Sturgeon was not voted in by the Scottish voters but simply took over from Alex Salmond when he stepped down after losing the 2014 Independence referendum. The same people tell us that Scotland is being dragged out of the EU against its will. The EU referendum was a UK-wide vote with the result being binding on all parts of the UK. The SNP doesn’t accept this.
In the 2014 independence referendum 28 out of 32 Scottish council areas voted no to independence, so by applying SNP logic it would be reasonable for those council areas voting no in any future referendum to be allowed to remain within the UK. Then again the SNP does not do logic: but it does hypocrisy and cant extremely well.
Donald Lewis, Gifford, East Lothian.
I WONDER if it has occurred to Nicola Sturgeon and her party that the reason why they no longer have a majority in the Scottish Parliament, and lost so many seats at Westminster is because the Scottish electorate do not agree with their policies, especially that of seeking to break up the UK.
Most people are now weary of reading in the newspapers, and hearing on radio and television of the latest rants and moans from Nicola Sturgeon et al.
It would not surprise me if Boris Johnson found his recent visit to the RN nuclear submarine base at Faslane less grim than that to Bute House.
Robert I G Scott, Fife.
Read more: Judge society by how happy we are, not how wealthy
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