We need Kate Forbes to rescue Scottish politics from stalemate

The result will be no radical, imaginative solutions for all the well-known ills in our society, economy and polity. The only thing that I can see that would kick-start the long journey to Scotland's rescue and transformation would be Humza Yousaf's resignation the morning after the General Election and Kate Forbes winning the leadership.

She seems to have more traditional Scottish views on hard work, common sense and willingness to speak her mind and if she is as genuinely and grudgingly popular as I expect, she may just do enough before the Holyrood elections to start a turnaround and a debate that may force the other parties to release their "inner Kate" and come up with their own policies - or even, God forbid, work together to develop agreed, workable solutions.

I think I'm right about Ms Forbes, I'm not so sure about the opponents' abilities to smell the coffee, but I sincerely hope they do.

Perhaps one way to achieve cross-party support would be to put independence on the back-burner for 10 years or until an agreed set of benchmarks on how well the country was being run were met.

Allan Sutherland, Stonehaven.

Read more: SNP is now known by the public as the party of incompetence

SNP doing better than rivals

IF the SNP is the party of incompetence as Keith Howell (Letters, January 4) alleges, what does it say about the main alternative, as the current SNP record in government is better than the previous Labour/LibDem Scottish Executive by any measure?

We all want things to improve but it should be recognised that, with limited economic and taxation powers, plus Tory austerity and inflation caused by failed UK economic and energy policies, Scotland has a much better-performing NHS than in Tory England or in Labour-run Wales. Our school pupils are achieving better exam results, with 94 per cent of all school leavers going on to positive destinations. Under the SNP poverty levels are now lower than in England and Wales and the unique £25 a week Child Payment is acknowledged as a game-changer by the relevant charities.

The current UK Government is cutting Scotland’s capital budget by 20 per cent, after inflation, by 2028/29, which is brutal for Scotland’s infrastructure, including roads and the building of houses, schools and hospitals.

As Labour is opposed to rejoining the EU and freedom of movement, UK economic stagnation will continue for years to come. Under the Union, Scotland's GDP is roughly half of Denmark, Finland or Ireland while Norway, which has extracted only as much oil and gas as from Scotland's territorial waters, has a much higher standard of living.

Mary Thomas, Edinburgh.

In defence of our voting system

BOB Hamilton (Letters, January 4) claims Gareth Morgan “misleads the public about the level of support for independence” since it is a minority of the electorate which supports independence. Strictly of course this is true, but the most recent poll, by Redfield and Wilson (November 26/27), offers an interesting perspective. This poll found a minority, 46%, support independence, but 48% would vote No. Another minority. So, neither side has a majority, which undermines Mr Hamilton’s conclusion that Scottish Government work on independence should be funded by party members.

Moreover, he would do well to remember two things. First, can anyone voting SNP really be surprised that if it gets into government it is going to look to further its core cause of independence? Secondly, that few governments are elected by a majority of those who vote (never mind the electorate), particularly with first past the post (FPTP) at Westminster.

As for his contention that the Greens, having won relatively few votes, still ended up in government, their votes, in combination with the SNP vote, offered very close to 50% (49% in the constituency vote and 48.4% on the regional lists).

Mr Hamilton, I am sure, would object that this is still not a majority, but we need to consider two things. First, that the influence exercised by the Green Party is a feature of electoral systems which seek to achieve some degree of proportionality in their outcome.

Secondly, why is this important? The 2019 UK General Election offers a fine example since in this case, the Conservatives won a majority of 80 with 43% of the vote – an outcome where winning one more vote than anyone else leads to out of proportion success.

Is this more or less fair or unfair than the Greens winning influence beyond what their vote may be felt to justify? Certainly, in Scotland the situation with the Greens (and to some extent the Liberal Democrats in coalition with Labour in the early years of the Scottish Parliament) is the known, if unwanted, consequence of a voting system which better reflects the distribution of support of the electorate, unlike FPTP which is determined by who wins most votes with no thought to how these have been allocated.

Alasdair Galloway, Dumbarton.

The Additional Member System has seen the Greens in government (Image: PA)

• BOB Hamilton suggests that elections to the Scottish Parliament are no more fair and no more representative than they would be if we elected our MSPs by the first past the post (FPTP) voting system we use to elect MPs to the UK Parliament at Westminster.

At the last UK General Election the Conservative Party won 43.6% of the votes, for which the FPTP voting system gave it 56.2% of the seats - an 80-seat majority over all other parties. The FPTP constituency results from the 2021 election to the Scottish Parliament show just how fair and representative our parliament might have been if we had elected it that way. The SNP won 47.7% of the constituency votes, for which the FPTP voting system gave it 84.9% of the seats - a crushing majority over all other parties.

Fortunately, the Additional Member System we use to elect the Scottish Parliament provided a corrective rebalance. With 47.7% of the constituency vote and 40.3% of the regional vote, the AMS voting system gave the SNP 49.6% of the seats, one seat short of an overall majority. Later, the SNP decided to form a majority coalition with the Greens; together the two parties had 49% of the constituency votes and 48.4% of the regional votes.

The Additional Member System is not the best voting system, but it certainly delivers fairer and more representative results than first past the post alone.

James Gilmour, Edinburgh.

NHS blame lies at Holyrood

I NOTE an interesting letter from David J Crawford (January 4) regarding the demise of the NHS. Whilst I agree with him regarding the understaffing, surely he knows health is a devolved power. Our universities training nurses and doctors are also under Scottish control. The blame clearly lies on our own parliament’s doorstep.

Sheila Watson, Giffnock.

Read more: Scottish independence: 64p per person for preparations is a bargain

Sad lack of solidarity

JUNIOR doctors in England are starting another strike as part of their campaign to improve their working conditions and save the NHS. Unfortunately it will be the working class who suffer from this action, since it is they who predominantly suffer from industrial disease and accident and do not have the resources for private medicine.

In a just society, unions would take industrial action on behalf of our nurses and doctors.

Margaret Thatcher legislated to make secondary picketing illegal and allow the sequestration of trade union funds for non-compliance. The supposed Labour governments of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown failed to reverse such anti-union legislation.

Andy McAdam, Maybole.

Something has gone wrong

ALAN Fitzpatrick (Letters, January 4) highlights the £60 million profit on PPE contracts of about £200m. The Barrowmans have stated repeatedly that they have done nothing wrong. If that proves to be true then there is indeed something wrong somewhere. And whatever has gone wrong needs to be sorted.

Eric Macdonald, Paisley.