I am a bit older than Ian Gray and sorry that he believes there is no chance of another referendum (Letters, May 28).
I take the opposite view, and look towards the 2029 Westminster election as the point when the independence movement can break the logjam.
That will require a different approach to the argument than hitherto: ignore the unionists on the Scottish economy’s ability to prosper, and concentrate on the neighbour to which we are at present handcuffed.
England is in the final stages of imperial decline. Its institutions are crumbling, it is in a deep trench of debt, out of which it cannot escape (borrowing from 2024-29 will reach £538 billion) and is effectively controlled by the bond market.
And, as anyone can see, it is facing a societal crisis which it cannot solve. Union with a state in decay can deliver nothing to Scotland except joining in the misery. For the Scots the choice is simple: England is going down the tubes, we with our abundance of energy don’t need to go down with it.
Jim Sillars, Edinburgh.
More letters...
Tonal delights of a talented young trumpeter
Blackbird that sang the Beatles
Roadmaps out of lockdown ignore the very real problems millions will face in months to come
Scotland isn’t basket case
Your correspondent Ian Gray asks those opposed to Scottish independence the question: "If Scotland is such a basket case, and needs the Barnett formula adjustments, why do Westminster governments want to hold onto this little part of Britain, if it costs so much to subsidise?"
I cannot speak for others, but for my own part I can answer him as follows.
For several centuries Scotland and England have been part of the same economic and social unit, and have been governed accordingly.
This means that their industrial and social developments have been very similar - but with regional variations according to the natural distribution of resources, topography and climate. In addition, over the past century or so, the government has instituted common public services which seek both to mitigate those regional differences and to provide a roughly equitable social context for its citizens.
So (for example) pensioners in Scotland receive the same state pension as those in Cornwall and Kent. And NHS services for patients in Aberdeen can be expected to be comparable with those in Hampshire or Worcestershire.
This involves redistribution of UK-wide tax revenues to less well-off areas, based on population needs, and regardless of the postcode or any obsolete border.
My advice to Mr Gray is to cease to see things through the Us-And-Them prism of mean-minded nationalism.
And in its place to see redistribution as a Damned Good Thing, which means that taxes levied on those that can afford it across the UK are used to provide much-needed services wherever they are required.
If the outcome of these mechanisms is that Scotland receives more than other parts, that does not mean that it is a basket case. Just that its population has different and (in some cases) greater needs.
Peter A. Russell, Jordanhill.
Indyref2: democracy will win the day
Neil MacKay hits the nail on the head (“Unionism is done in Scotland. It no longer has a story to tell the people”, The Herald, May 26). Only nineteen days after the election, First Minister John Swinney brought a motion to Parliament calling for the powers to hold a second indyref be devolved to Scotland.
He was clearly demonstrating that things are going to change. No more sitting back and hoping that Westminster will recognise that our Holyrood Parliament, by democratic means, has a majority of Indy supporting MSPs.
In Holyrood we need to put pressure on Westminster by bringing forward such motions on a frequent basis.
And, when we get the opportunity, introducing opposition debate in the House of Commons. Wales and Northern Ireland must do the same.
After all, like Scotland, they have nationalist majorities. Neil MacKay highlighted how opposition parties in Scotland have gone stale.
Nothing to offer, no story to tell, party leaders whose message went down like a lead balloon with voters at the election. Not even tactical voting by the unionists succeeded. SNP and Indy supporting parties are in the majority. Westminster and Sir Keir Starmer may well deny Indyref2.
But, going forward, democracy will win the day.
Catriona C Clark, Falkirk.
Murrell’s thieving: we need answers
I appreciate that I had a letter published recently calling into question who in the SNP knew what, and when, regarding Peter Murrell’s criminal activity.
But I could not hold back from writing again, when I heard that the First Minister had refused permission for the holding of a Parliament Inquiry into the matter (“Swinney under pressure as leaders back Holyrood probe into Murrell”, The Herald, May 28).
Surely, as the head of the party whose members have been defrauded, he would want, for their sakes, to know why Mr Murrell was able to steal almost two thirds of the party’s funds without anyone noticing?
He says that the proper financial checks were in place and that Mr Murrell, and he alone, was responsible for the monies disappearing.
The first of these statements is patently untrue as the proper financial processes would have picked up the financial discrepancies very quickly.
This blocking behaviour by the First Minister is bad enough. But to then compound matters by denying a Parliamentary Inquiry surely places this man, who takes pride in being considered ’honest John’, in an invidious position. It will have many shouting cover-up from the rooftops.
First Minister, for the sake of Scottish politics and your own legacy, please reconsider.
W. MacIntyre, East Kilbride.
Poetic justice
Isn't it ironic. 'Sic a parcel o' rogues in a nation' is the bitter protest poem written by Robert Burns about the Scottish politicians bribed to sign the 1707 Act of Union, effectively ending Scotland's independence.
Those words accurately describe some of the 'parcel 'o rogues' now sitting in Holyrood, and over the last twenty years.
Hopefully the same outcome will come to pass.
Isobel Hunter, Lenzie.
Murrell brought to book
For me, the most bizarre purchase by Peter Murrell wasn’t a hairdryer, but a copy of his own wife’s book, Women Hold Up Half the Sky: Selected Speeches of Nicola Sturgeon (£22).
Stuart Neville, Clydebank.
Blair’s right about Miliband
Despite Sir Tony Blair's past failings as UK Prime Minister, his analysis of our current mess is spot on (Letters, May 29).
In particular, his comments regarding Ed Miliband’s obsession with destroying our ability to ensure our energy future is protected. This resonates, revealing the shortcomings of the current Labour Party's Net Zero mantra.
It really is wake up time for this (and the next) government to act before it's too late. There is still time.
However, there may come a point when the population speaks and acts with one voice, and, en masse, cancels direct debits to energy suppliers…
N. J. Hunter, Ardrossan.
UK must aid Ukraine
The recent decision by the UK and France to block NATO's proposal for increased military aid to Ukraine is a concerning indication of our national strategy regarding defence and international responsibilities.
By rejecting the call for member states to contribute 0.25% of their GDP to bolster Ukraine’s military capabilities, Britain risks undermining both its own national security and the credibility of the alliance.
Firstly, military readiness is crucial in our current geopolitical climate. The ongoing conflict in Ukraine highlights the necessity for robust support to our allies.
By not aligning with collective commitments, we jeopardise the unity needed to deter aggression and foster peace. This absence of commitment could have repercussions not only for Ukraine but also for our own security, as it allows hostile actors to test the resolve of NATO states.
Secondly, clarity in strategy is essential for maintaining leadership on the world stage. When Britain dithers on critical commitments, it sends mixed signals to both allies and adversaries. We must ensure that our actions align with our stated intentions, demonstrating solid leadership that reassures our partners and dissuades potential threats.
Finally, this presents an opportunity for reform in how we approach defence funding. Rather than prioritising political expedience, we must encourage a culture of accountability and effective resource allocation.
This approach will allow us to build a military capable of rapid deployment and operational readiness, thereby safeguarding our interests.
While it is understandable to be cautious about commitments that could escalate tensions, we must remember that a strong defence posture is the bedrock of deterrence. Without it, we risk becoming vulnerable.
In conclusion, Britain must recommit to a proactive defence strategy that prioritises not just our own security, but that of our allies.
By stepping forward to aid Ukraine and reinforcing our NATO commitments, we can strengthen both our national and global security.
Alastair Majury, Dunblane.
Driving in the right direction
I am delighted to learn that the Edinburgh taxi drivers day out for vulnerable children is to go ahead ("Police Scotland announce plans for Edinburgh Taxi Outing", The Herald, May 27).
Police chiefs have now sensibly agreed to provide escorts for this event, which can have life changing benefits for those youngsters.
As a severe critic of the concept that is Police Scotland, it is only right to acknowledge when, albeit under pressure, senior officers have the courage to correct a monumental mistake.
Dan Edgar, Rothesay.
Curing congestion
It's amazing and very hopeful news that Glasgow City Council are recommending to Transport Scotland that the crumbling Woodside Viaduct be demolished (Letters, May 27).
This will make some reparation toward the scar of the M8 motorway cutting through the east of the city centre.
A new people-friendly neighbourhood can be created to help heal the wound. The £200million-plus it would cost to repair the viaduct can be much better used in regenerating an active travel city.
Current trough traffic and congestion on this section are an example of the much documented ‘build it and they will come’ effect; roads and motor traffic, in this case.
There are now numerous examples of the opposite, resulting from bold decisions to turn things around. For example, taking away a major road by the Seine in Paris proved successful.
Likewise a multi-lane motorway on stilts, which loomed over packed local roads in Seoul. Traffic disperses, or disappears, and grand new popular areas are created for people to enjoy.
Peter Hayman, Glasgow.
Beavering about
I read with interest about Forestry and Land Scotland (FLS) investing in planting 20,000 trees next to Scotland’s riversides (“20,000 trees to be planted to save rivers in scenic glens”, The Herald, May 28).
Very admirable, appreciated, and beneficial in giving shade for our protected salmon. Additionally, NatureScot has invested in the re-introduction of the protected species, Eurasian Beavers (extinct here for over 400 years) to Scottish rivers. Very cute, if a bit incongruous.
Both FLS and NatureScot are government quangos, paid for by taxpayers.
Do they never talk to each other? Does the right hand communicate with the left hand?
If so, it begs the question: why are we paying for riverside trees to be planted, then for beavers to destroy them?
Linda FitzGerald, Killin, Perthshire.
Share