LISTENING to various Labour politicians trying to explain their party position on Brexit in relation to expected reforms to “self-employed” workers' rights, I wondered if they have lost the final few of their collective marbles. I am a sceptic about many features of membership of the European Union. But throughout the many years in which I was an active trade unionist, I was favourably impressed by the directives from that body that compelled UK governments to make laws protecting the rights of workers. Off the top of my head, some of the benefits that British workers enjoy thanks to membership of the EU include employment protection in the event of an employer being taken over or ceasing in business, protection of rights to form or join a union, guarantee of sick pay and extension of guarantee of holiday pay to part time and temporary workers.
So it is surprising to me why anyone in the Labour movement is opposed to EU membership. I do get it that some workers are so short-sighted that they cannot appreciate the benefits already described that they enjoy, or do not know why they exist. Or maybe nobody has explained the situation to them. I can think of no other reason why so many seem to have voted to leave. But now Labour wants the Tory leader to give it a guarantee that, if we leave with a deal, that deal will include acceptance of EU directives favouring workers' rights. So tell me please, would it not be simpler just to oppose leaving in the first place?
Ken Johnson,
Alves, West Gates Avenue,
Lochwinnoch.
THE bribes paid to various areas in the UK ("May accused of cynical 'bung'", The Herald, March 5), as well as the money paid to the DUP to buy support for Theresa May's plans, are reminiscent of Margaret Thatcher buying Tory support by selling off social housing stock. Which, incidentally, has never been replaced. It just reinforces my feeling when I wake up every day that I am in the middle of Groundhog Day where the same thing happens over and over again. No wonder we are all going doolally.
Has anybody ever heard the pearl of wisdom which says that if you do what you have always done, then you will get what you always got? Or to put it another way, if you refuse to learn the lessons of history, you are condemned to keep repeating the same mistakes until the end of time.
Margaret Forbes,
Corlic Way, Kilmacolm.
TODAY in Westminster, during Prime Minister's Questions, Theresa May stated that the SNP Scottish Government has no mandate for a second independence referendum ("SNP accuses May of scurrying from Commons in 'no mandate' row", The Herald, March 7).
This is false on three counts:
First, the SNP has won two elections – the Scottish Parliament election in 2016 and the 2017 UK General Election – with an explicit commitment in its manifesto on holding a referendum, specifically if Scotland is faced with the threat of being dragged out of the EU against its will.
Secondly, the Scottish Parliament has also endorsed that position.
Thirdly, the Scottish Claim of Right, which stated the "sovereign right of the Scottish people determine the form of government best suited to their needs" was passed in Holyrood, and was endorsed by the UK Parliament on July 4, 2018.
Interestingly, despite the above facts being indisputably true, London Labour's man in Scotland, Richard Leonard, stated last weekend that a future Labour government would not consent to an independence referendum. I thought Labour in Scotland had become an irrelevance years ago, but the three statements of fact above are proof that British nationalists are spreading fake news.
Charlie Bent,
33 John Street, Hamilton.
Read more: May would block indyref2
STEVEN Camley's cartoon (March 7) and Alison Rowat's article ("The state of Scottish Labour? We need to talk about Richard", The Herald, March 7) neatly sum up the dire straits into which London Labour's branch office has sunk. In past years Labour Party leaders who were having a hard time at Westminster could always depend on their Scottish contingent to cushion the blows, but it's grim up north for Jeremy Corbyn, with Richard Leonard the latest in a long line of office managers to preside over dwindling membership numbers, stagnation in the opinion polls and third-party place at Holyrood. And on the eve of its spring conference, the last thing Scottish Labour needs is for Mr Leonard to be under attack left, right, and centre regarding his lack of leadership, including criticism from his own trade union leader, and the beating of jungle drums from former leader, Kezia Dugdale.
I would point out to Ms Rowat when she writes that "the People's Party is letting down those most in need of its help", that Labour, as "the people's party" has been letting people down for a very long time; decades of lazily taking Scotland for granted resulted in staunch Labour voters deserting the party in droves and former Labour red heartlands turning to the SNP. It seems highly unlikely that Scottish voters will return their support to a branch office which is not even a registered political party; Scottish Labour is registered with the UK Electoral Commission as an Accounting Unit of the UK Labour Party. The state of Scottish Labour? They need to talk about a lot more than Richard.
Ruth Marr,
99 Grampian Road, Stirling.
WHAT a wonderful reply by the Prime Minister to her SNP questioner at PMQ. Mrs May was accused of having no mandate to take Scotland out of the EU and she replied in razor-sharp fashion that the SNP had no mandate to take Scotland out the UK but continues to try to do so. The House erupted.
At last we have someone standing up and saying what so many of us in Scotland think. Scottish politicians working in Scotland should get off their knees and follow suit and get on the front foot. For too long we have had to listen to the SNP making their unchallenged assertions.
Alexander McKay,
8/7 New Cut Rigg, Edinburgh.
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