The National (Scotland)

Ignoring the Labour threat is a politicall­y suicidal strategy

-

really is time that organised religion grew up and ditched the Bible black medievalis­m that bedevils all they do and that they have a want to force on everyone else.

Peter C via thenationa­l.scot

THE letter by Rhodri Griffiths on Tuesday was one of the most offensive I’ve seen printed in The National. Comparing the right to die – the desperate, last-resort pleading of people in agonising pain or suffering the humiliatin­g loss of dignity and purpose as their body and mind collapse irretrieva­bly – to cosmetic dentistry, hair transplant­s and botox injections says more about the writer’s pious selfrighte­ousness than the moral case it purports to support.

There is no compassion or understand­ing in claiming that assisted dying is “trendy” or “materialis­tic” or an example of “instant gratificat­ion”. If you pause to think about the stupidity of

Hospice staff don’t just watch people suffer

that claim, you can only come to the conclusion that the writer is driven by ideologica­l dogmatism masqueradi­ng as the spirituali­ty which he says is an essential component of society.

Dr David White Galashiels

RHODRI Griffiths claims that euthanasia is “immoral, unnatural and unnecessar­y” and attempts to thwart nature. What’s considered “moral” is something on which opinions vary, but opposing euthanasia because it’s “unnatural” while promoting hospices is strange. Pain is a natural response to injury or illness, but hospice staff don’t just watch people suffer. Unnatural interventi­on and thwarting nature is sometimes considered a good thing. As for euthanasia being “unnecessar­y”, that’s something that only the person concerned can decide.

Mairead Mackechnie

Isle of Islay

IT would appear that I’m not the only one perplexed by Humza Yousaf’s strategy for the next General Election (Pete Wishart being another). His stated aim is to win all the Tory-held seats and make Scotland a “Tory-free” zone. I have no complaint about such a plan, but to make this his sole aim, while ignoring the very real threat from Labour, strikes me as totally inexplicab­le and politicall­y suicidal.

Over the past year, most opinion polls have shown support for the SNP falling while support for Labour has been rising. As it stands, the SNP is liable to lose a lot of Westminste­r seats at the next General Election unless it wakes up and realises the very real threat posed by Labour in many SNP-held constituen­cies throughout the country.

One problem is that, due to the party’s recent performanc­e, many previous SNP voters have lost confidence and faith in the party to deliver good governance without the selfindulg­ence and gaffes of recent years. On the other hand, there does not appear to be any great confidence or faith in the Labour Party, either.

It strikes me that many Scottish voters are thinking about switching to Labour mainly to ensure that the Tories are removed from office at Westminste­r – and voting Labour appears to be the most sure and direct way of achieving that. Meanwhile, Yousaf seems to think that Labour will win an overall majority without needing any Scottish seats but that, for me, is anything but a sure thing. That, therefore, leaves those Scottish voters desperate to see the Tories removed being forced to vote Labour in case Yousaf is wrong.

How can the SNP counteract this? I would suggest that there is one very simple step the SNP could take to stop, and then reverse, any increase in support for Labour. That is to make it crystal clear that the SNP MPs will vote along with Labour MPs to ensure that Labour forms the next UK Government. This might not be needed should Labour win an outright majority on its own, but such an offer would cover for such an overall majority not being achieved.

I would further make it clear that no immediate conditions should be applied to this. The only caveat would be that the SNP would expect that negotiatio­ns to strengthen and improve devolution, without specifics being stated, were started within, say, two years if that support was to continue.

What would this proposal achieve? Firstly, it removes the need to vote Labour to get the Tories out of office (as the SNP MPs would be voting the same way as any Scottish Labour MPs). Secondly, this could lead to a strengthen­ing of devolution, especially if there are a substantia­l number of SNP MPs backed by a large SNP vote. Thirdly, without any immediate conditions, or specific demands for improving devolution, it would be very difficult for Labour to reject this as there would be nothing specific to reject.

There are many other issues which I believe the SNP need to change direction on to raise their level of support back to what it was just a few years ago – but I believe the above would go a long way to improving the SNP’s chances of retaining many more of their Westminste­r seats than would otherwise be the case. Dave McCartney Benderloch

WHILE I did not vote for Humza Yousaf, I wish I had. He has shown great integrity and statesmans­hip for his first year and you really can’t ask more than that. Compare him with the Unionist so-called leaders – they can’t do anything without permission from their London bosses and it shows. Imagine how a totally independen­t Scotland would work.

Keep it going, Humza.

David Sutton via thenationa­l.scot

 ?? ?? Tory-focused: Humza Yousaf
Tory-focused: Humza Yousaf

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom