We are all poorer for the move towards presidential politics

One of my main disappointments was that some 20,000 SNP members failed to vote in the leadership contest. It may well be that they didn't rate any of the candidates highly enough or perhaps they were scunnered with the whole political process. While it was their choice, one could argue they had a moral duty to vote so that the result might be more emphatic and more acceptable to the electorate in general who didn't get a chance to vote for their next leader.

It now seems that the posts of Prime Minister and First Minister are becoming increasingly presidential and in moving away from collective cabinet government the public are getting less of a say in who will be calling the shots and affecting their daily lives.

Bob MacDougall, Kippen.

Parliament must work together

THE SNP has voted for its own extinction. The knife-edge alliance with imperious single-issue fanatics will bleed even more public support. Even if Humza Yousaf is already in office, he is not in power.

The people have suffered enough from Mr Continuity already. Labour, Liberal Democrat and Conservative MSPs should align with those SNP MSPs who preferred a better candidate.

Scotland shall never have good government except by parliament working together for the public.

Parliament exists for devolved government, not primarily as a platform for constitutional initiatives.

If the SNP wants to grow mighty again, it must first grow up. It owed its earlier success to teamwork with others in local government.

The other parties need even more to grow up. I do not believe committee work need always be adversarial and sulphurous. Why cannot the chamber legislate constructively like colleagues? It happens in grown-up countries, though not of course in the UK. Some countries have never had a majority and have four parties in the Cabinet.

Tim Cox, Bern, Switzerland.

📝 Sign up for our Letter of the Day newsletter and receive our Letters Editor's choice every day at 8pm.

Get insight from fellow readers and join in on what has Scotland talking. Exclusive responses to our writers and spirited debate on a whole host of issues will be sent directly to your inbox.

👉 Click here to sign up

Yousaf will never win indy

WITH Humza Yousaf now elected as our new First Minister Scotland is in safe hands. With Mr Yousaf's established record of failure he won't make any progress in the matter of independence. He will instead be preoccupied with Kate Forbes, who I predict will constantly undermine his position.

He only just scraped home against Ms Forbes. That will serve to haunt him.

Dennis Forbes Grattan, Aberdeen.

A series of pyrrhic victories

NICOLA Sturgeon has departed, and, naturally, talked up what she sees as her achievements – one of which is having won many elections. On the face of it, fair comment, yet does this stand up to scrutiny?

Politically, Scotland is divided over the constitution, split between nationalism and unionism, with unionism usually being the larger group. However, nationalists usually only vote for one party, whilst the unionist vote is split three ways, making the SNP the biggest party, hence winning many elections. Independence is seldom the view of the majority.

William Ballantine, Bo'ness.
Read more: Forbes was wrong to rebuff Yousaf on job offer

The rewarding of failure

SO Shona Robison has been appointed Deputy First Minister and Finance Secretary by new First Minister Humza Yousaf. Despite, like Mr Yousaf, being Nicola Sturgeon's pal, many regarded Ms Robison's tenure as Health Secretary as so lacklustre that Ms Sturgeon seemingly had little choice but to "allow her more time with her family" in 2018.

And Kate Forbes, when savaging Mr Yousaf's skill set in a TV debate, in particular flagged up current record-high NHS waiting times on his health watch. Is a questionable stint as Health Secretary a prerequisite of high office in this new SNP administration?

Martin Redfern, Melrose.

Read more: High time unionists came up with more than just echo chamber politics

Let's celebrate Scotland's heroes

IT is heartening to see Humza Yousaf take pride in his heritage and identity, whether wearing a traditional Punjabi jacket or praying with his family in Bute House.

How curious it is that the party he leads takes so little pride in Scottish identity, history and achievements.

When was the last time one of our politicians mentioned the great and compassionate Adam Smith, the father of economics, or his fundamental insights?

Do any of our representatives remember Thomas Cochrane, one of history’s greatest naval officers both in the Napoleonic wars and then fighting for the independence of Spain’s South American colonies?

Have they even heard of Major General Napier’s response as governor of Sindh to Hindu priests complaining about the suppression of suttee (the burning of widows on their husbands’ funeral pyres) that they should follow their custom of burning widows, and he would follow his custom of hanging the men who do this by the neck until they were dead?

Do Scottish nationalist politicians take pride in the achievements of David Hume, James Hutton, James Clark Maxwell, Alexander Bell, John Logie Baird, Alexander Fleming or any of the almost endless list of Scottish geniuses? They never speak of them.

Wouldn’t it be much better to have a Scottish nationalism that took pride in the great Scots of the past and inspired our youngsters to overachieve, rather than the ignorant, grievance-heavy and England-hating one we’ve got?

Otto Inglis, Crossgates, Fife.

Kirk closures are deeply shocking

REGARDING Sandra Dick’s article (“In need of a Saviour: Final bell tolls for churches”) on the Church of Scotland’s Radical Action Plan which is resulting in churches closing “with startling haste”, she points, rightly, to the deep discontent and resentment being felt within a significant number of Scottish communities.

Here in the former Presbytery of Dumfries and Kirkcudbright – we are now one of six ex-presbyteries which amalgamated to form the “super” Presbytery of South West Scotland – implementation of the Mission Plan will result in 30 out of the 62 buildings under the authority of our former presbytery being retained, 18 buildings will close, with a further 14 buildings’ futures being reviewed during the next 12 months. Potentially then, 32 of our church buildings could be closed within the next year, a total of 52 per cent of the buildings under our former presbytery’s control.

Reading the comments of the Convener of the Assembly Trustees of the Church of Scotland, the Rev David Cameron, concerning the grief that ministers, elders, congregations and members of staff all bear, I was reminded of the words of the Rev Dr Doug Gay, a Church of Scotland theologian writing in his blog on the website of Trinity College Glasgow recently, who labelled the proposed plans for ministry and mission “too severe”: “We are now in danger of imposing on ourselves a cycle of cuts and restructuring which is too severe and too far-reaching and which will have irreversible consequences.”

The current and future round of closures is deeply shocking and disheartening. Admittedly the day of reckoning with falling minister numbers, a decline in membership and a reduction in income both nationally and locally, has been deferred for far too long, but the consequences of the Kirk’s plan to fix these problems are giving rise to much concern for the future. I am in agreement with Rev Gay when he states that these cuts and redeployments via mission planning may be just too drastic, with the result that there will not be the ways and means left for the rebuilding of our church.

In Sandra Dick’s well-researched article, fellow Session Clerk at Dalry’s St Margaret’s Parish Church says that the Church of Scotland has no clear idea of how this whole process of Mission Planning will work. My experience of the implementation plan thus far in the Presbytery of Dumfries and Kirkcudbright would lead me to say “Amen” to that.

David Johnson, Joint Session Clerk, Maxwelltown West Church of Scotland, Dumfries.

The folly of the CfD scheme

THE UK Government has repeatedly assured us all that electricity bills would fall as a result of much lower prices for offshore wind power agreed at Contracts for Difference (CfD) auctions. However a Freedom of Information request by Net Zero Watch revealed that the wind companies are under no legal obligation to take up their CfD options and the Government has no power to enforce them to do so or impose penalties on those who do not.

The companies involved are selling electricity on the open market at much higher prices and the flaws in drawing up the CfD scheme have so far cost electricity users £5.7 billion more than it should have. Net Zero Watch is calling on the Government to impose a 100 per cent windfall tax on those companies. The Government officials who drew up this flawed CfD scheme should be sacked.

Clark Cross, Linlithgow.