A WEEK is a long time in politics – and what a week we are having.

The first casualty was Home Secretary Suella Braverman - and the appointments that followed were demonstration of arrogance and contempt towards the country. Arrogance was evident in the appointment of David Cameron, who does not even sit in the House of Commons ("Former PM Cameron’s pledge in stunning comeback to Westminster", The Herald, November 15). This is the man who inflicted so much damage on the country as the architect of 10 years of austerity. And it was David Cameron who persuaded the LibDems to agree to increasing tuition fees in England.

Rishi Sunak didn’t stop there, however. His appointment of Esther McVey as Minister without Portfolio is breathtaking when we consider the damage she inflicted on millions in her previous role as Work and Pensions Secretary.

Let’s remind ourselves of her quote in 2018: "Some people will be worse off under Universal Credit, but they can take on more work to increase their income."

In those two appointments alone, the PM and his Government sent a clear message to the country: we are not listening, we believe in austerity. The appalling figures recently revealed by the Trussel Trust regarding the issuing of 1.5 million emergency food parcels (April-September 2023) obviously sits comfortably with the Conservatives in Government.

Catriona C Clark, Falkirk.

Slippery stance by the Tories

THE ruling of the Supreme Court that the Government's Rwanda policy is unlawful ("Blow for Sunak as Supreme Court rules Rwanda policy 'unlawful'", heraldscotland, November 15) has blown a hole in the Tories' flagship project.

The new Home Secretary not-so-cleverly waffled on about this judgement being no more than a temporary obstacle. The Government would find a way round it, was his opinion.

So much hot air with so little substance.

Could it be that the PM will adopt a variation on the strategy of the Queen of Hearts that words mean what she wants them to mean? That approach would have to amount to the Westminster Government's overruling the Supreme Court verdict by placing its legislature above and beyond the solemn pronouncements of international courts.

We have already seen a somewhat slippery strategy in relation to the immigrants who arrived by boat across the Channel who until 18 months ago were not illegal but became so through an Act of Parliament. Where they had been innocent migrants determined to seek a better life, they were then deemed criminalised and unwelcome visitors to the UK.

Has it come to this that we will legislate out of existence trouble spots when there are available other more compassionate approaches?

It is passing strange that this Government has not adopted the legal route to close the tax loopholes which enable those who should be contributing to the public purse to keep our public services on an even keel to avoid paying their fair share.

Which end of the telescope does this Government view the world from when it comes to maintaining our public services, which are there for the benefit of all?

Denis Bruce, Bishopbriggs.

Why can't we protect people?

THE Supreme Court rightly rules against the UK Government over the preposterous plan to send asylum seekers arriving in Britain to Rwanda. But what happens now?

How will the Government explain the waste of hundreds of millions of pounds of taxpayer's money: the initial deal with Rwanda, legal fees and now possibly a claim on a failed contract?

Easy. This arrogant, ignorant and privileged Government will try to find another "safe third country" to send people fleeing war, violence and persecution to for "processing"?

I am a simple man. I have a simple question. Why can't the UK do that itself? Is it because we don't have the intelligence, good ideas, the workforce, the facilities?

We certainly have a government with none of these.

My concern is opposition leader Sir Keir Starmer appears to be cut from the same cloth.

Andy Stenton, Glasgow.

• WHAT I found most reprehensible about the rejected Rwanda scheme was that even people whose application was accepted were not to be allowed to come to the UK but were to be left in Rwanda. It was almost worthy of Kafka.

Jane Ann Liston, St Andrews.

Read more: At last there is now hope of a reset with the EU

Braverman helped the PM

SUELLA Braverman's recent tantrums may actually have helped the Prime Minister. By slating the police and failing to ban the Gaza demonstration she inadvertently highlighted UK commitment to free speech, exposed the disturbing rise in anti-Semitism, and enabled the Met to demonstrate British policing at its best.

Her letter to Rishi Sunak, especially about immigration ("Braverman’s broadside at ‘weak’ PM in furious letter after sacking", The Herald, November 15), reminded us that she failed to deliver the Rwanda scheme under two Prime Ministers and delivering it will be a long haul, as it will be for Germany, Italy, Austria and Denmark, four democracies also pondering how to get a treaty ensuring the safety of deportees and compliance with international law.

In reality she’s become the PM’s "useful idiot", an upmarket Nadine Dorries on the back benches.

Allan Sutherland, Stonehaven.

The plot thickens

SUELLA Braverman, whose given name was lifted from a character in Dallas, has been written out of the Conservative Party soap opera. How fitting that her place in the cast has been taken by David Cameron who, just like Bobby Ewing in Dallas, has come back from the dead.

Willie Maclean, Milngavie.

Cameron took the correct step

RUTH Marr (Letters, November 15) again writes that Scotland voted to stay in the EU at the 2016 referendum; of course Scotland as a country voted with an approximate 62% wishing to remain, but as most people know, the referendum was a UK one, hence the UK leaving the European Union with a just-over 3% majority. And hence the reason that David Cameron, who had allowed the referendum to happen and who wished the UK to remain, resigned as PM more or less immediately, doing what some people would term the correct action.

We are reminded of the integrity in 2014 of Alex Salmond who likewise resigned as First Minister of Scotland when the independence referendum produced a majority in favour of remaining part of the UK. In my opinion, both politicians quickly and correctly resigned from their positions because of losing an election.

Would that some other politicians today would take the same honourable action - and of course I refer to politicians in the SNP, in the Tories, in the Labour Party, in the Greens - many of whom we would be delighted to see the back of.

Walter Paul, Glasgow.

Letters: Matheson did the right thing. Now, how about the Tories?

Concentrate on the home front

WHAT workplace allows people to diverge from their role? MSPs are there to examine the work of the Scottish Government and represent us in the Scottish Parliament. Next Tuesday though, Holyrood will hold a debate and vote on the Middle East conflict.

While there may be people in Scotland who are affected by this, this is not what MSPs should be discussing. They have no power over foreign affairs or defence. The debate will be a soap box for the SNP and the Greens to imply that they are on the world stage.

If only they would show any interest in the matters they can influence: NHS waiting lists, education, social care, poverty, drug deaths, the £1billion black hole to name but a few.

That is after all what the Scottish people elected them to do.

Jane Lax, Aberlour.

I won't toast BAE success

NEWS of BAE hailing progress on a major expansion of its Scottish base at Govan is clearly good for current and future employees ("BAE Systems hails £10bn worth of orders in just four months", The Herald, November 14). However it prompts a depressing reflection on UK industrial policy and priorities.

Four new ferries essential to alleviate Calmac’s woes are being built in Turkey. The equipment for major wind farm projects such as Whitelee on land and Seagreen offshore has been manufactured almost entirely abroad. Britain retains its role as one of the top four or five arms-exporting nations. I doubt whether that could be said of any other area of industry - with the exception of course of whisky.

The increased confidence of BAE and the general UK weapons industry in the context of current conflicts is hardly something to be celebrated.

Duncan MacIntyre, Eaglesham.