I AGREE with Tony Blair on one point: “The question of ... another independence referendum has to be decided completely separately from questions of who forms the government of the UK” (“Blair: Labour must not use the Union to bargain with the SNP”, The Herald, October 9).
Scotland, we are told, is not a colony, and therefore must not be dependent for its future on the condescension of other political jurisdictions.
Scotland must have the same constitutional freedoms as other peoples, based on democratic choice. It is time those who wish to exercise a veto over Scots (not the SNP) on those rights, to justify their claimed authority, especially those of all parties who have considered a second EU referendum a legitimate constitutional outlet for themselves.
Scots have elected a majority of pro-independence members to our parliament, and that majority have passed a Referendum Bill, but Holyrood has been defenestrated by the leadership of the Westminster’s British nationalist parties.
If there is no legitimate constitutional road-map for Scots to follow, and the results of the ballot box are ignored, then shouldn’t Johnson, Corbyn and Swinson be forced by the media to explain what other options Scots can pursue? There comes a time where Westminster hypocrisy goes beyond tiresome.
GR Weir,
Ochiltree.
WILL the Church of Scotland articulate a clear position on Scottish independence?
At this critical time in our history will its echelons continue to side with the Union, as they have been doing while pretending to neutrality?
It is surely contradictory for a national Church to oppose the independence aspirations of its nation. The Church of Scotland prefers the continuation of the Union and should say so clearly and give their reasons.
This is an honourable stance but fraught with trouble for the future. The current British establishment model is crumbling and the Church of Scotland has too close a relationship with its past history and with its contemporary decomposition.
The SNP has agreed to continue the monarchy in the short term but its socialist and collectivist political philosophy logically requires abolition along with aristocracy and the class system.
Christianity began as an egalitarian base community and the teaching and example of Jesus allow for a return to such simplicity for any people or nation at any time.
Would it not be better for the Church of Scotland to show leadership and move ahead of possible events? Christianity would then be more relevant to the new order, a help towards social coherence, a restraining counterbalance to despotism and the source of vision, wisdom and inspiration from Jesus Christ for coming generations.
Rev Dr Robert Anderson,
Dundonald.
If Nicola Sturgeon didn’t have such a large and highly effective team of taxpayer-funded spin-doctors, one could almost be persuaded to feel sorry for her ahead of the forthcoming SNP conference.
First, she is eclipsed by Joanna Cherry’s Supreme Court outcome. Now a 50-strong group of luvvies plus a handful of academics, many not living in Scotland, have signed a ‘Declaration of Independence’, more or less telling her she’s failing their separatist cause and to get a move on with Scexit.
Of course, they don’t face the reality with which the nationalist leader must contend - she is impotent, since Downing Street will not grant her a Section 30 order enabling her to pursue her policy of Neverendum.
Martin Redfern, Edinburgh.
AS a Yes voter five years ago I was rendered disconsolate by the outcome of the referendum, but the Declaration of Independence, signed by so many notable Scots, allows me to think that the dream will one day come true.
S. Murray, Glasgow
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