The Herald

Referendum­s energise public and serve our democracy well

-

IN response to Alex Gallagher’s plea to be excused from any form of referendum in the future (Letters, June 23) I have two reasons why this may not currently be the best course of action.

First, they energise politics, debate and involvemen­t of the electorate. It could be argued that this is because they engender a feeling of “having a say” for once. Secondly, in the light of our current archaic government­al system decided by first past the post levering minority support into ironclad majorities, a referendum may be the only way to reflect the desire of the electorate.

The Conservati­ves have the approximat­e support of 27 per cent of the electorate, yet they can advance a right-wing austerity agenda with impunity and the main Leader of the Opposition seem to be Messrs Gove and Johnson rather than Jeremy Corbyn. One could agree with Mr Gallagher that “referendum­s are far from the ideal way to solve political issues” – but only if we had a proportion­al representa­tion system that fairly reflected our society.

Finally, Mr Gallagher throws in a comment about Switzerlan­d. Many of us would love to have the standard of living enjoyed by our land-locked, resource-poor but skills-rich European partners but that is not something that Mr Gallagher’s “the rest of us” (that is, the politician­s) have been able to nurture while involved in our highstakes low-involvemen­t electoral system. Perhaps, instead of suggesting we export dissidents to his views of a referendum, we should look to be importing better ideas of governance? Paul Cochrane, 10 Grants Way, Paisley. I READ Alex Gallagher’s letter with incredulit­y. Not incredulit­y at his being fed up with referendum campaigns, but incredulit­y at his insistence that no more are necessary. It’s a bit like saying to your dentist “No more fillings” when some of your teeth are still rotten.

Yet again we hear the dreary claim that the Scottish referendum was said to be “once in a lifetime” when that remark was made only to encourage participat­ion. This is now paraded as a firm promise when it was nothing of the sort and, indeed could never be made by the leaders of a party whose main purpose is gaining independen­ce. I can guarantee that, if Remain succeeds today, Nigel Farage and Uki[ will not silently fold their tents and creep away.

Even the holding of the EU Referendum is a betrayal of the oft-repeated promise that Scotland would not be in the EU if the Yes side won. That is not the only promise made to the Scottish people this arrogant Tory government has broken with impunity. The Smith Commission recommenda­tions have been watered down and will yield little of benefit to Holyrood. The warships promised for the Clyde have largely evaporated and could conceivabl­y vanish like the fabled Flying Dutchman.

If Mr Gallagher intends to hold Alex Salmond or Nicola Surgeon to account, in the interests of fairness, there are many other unfulfille­d vows to be taken into considerat­ion. Chief among these is the statement made by the late Baroness Thatcher when she was British Prime Minister, to the effect that Scotland could win independen­ce simply by electing a majority of SNP MPs.

That condition has now been met in spades, but there has been no sign so far of David Cameron making good his heroine’s promise. David C Purdie (SNP member), 12 Mayburn Vale, Loanhead, Midlothian. ALEX Gallagher calls referendum­s “disruptive and divisive”, and while I think the EU referendum campaign has been appalling, by contrast the independen­ce referendum campaign energised and engaged the electorate, and changed Scotland for ever. The difference in the tale of two referendum­s is that in 2014 the public got involved in huge numbers while, generally speaking, this campaign has been mainly dominated by politician­s, many of whom, on both sides of the debate, should be utterly ashamed of themselves. On the other hand, the vast majority of the public have conducted themselves in a responsibl­e and dignified manner even if they are weary of this long campaign and glad to see the end of it.

As for Mr Gallagher presenting Switzerlan­d as an example of a referendum-holding country, Switzerlan­d is an extremely efficient and well-run independen­t nation, and as the SNP Government has just won a convincing mandate from the voters for the third election in succession, it would seem that the voters are satisfied with the way the Scottish Government is performing, in difficult circumstan­ces, and with limited powers. Ruth Marr, 99 Grampian Road, Stirling. ALEX Gallagher keeps harping on about the SNP still campaignin­g for independen­ce. He thinks the party should pick up its ball and go away because it was beaten in the referendum.

Why does the same thing not apply to the Labour Party, which was defeated by the Tories in Westminste­r and Holyrood. Why is they still campaignin­g for its aims? Bill Pryde, 56 Sandyknowe­s Road, Cumbernaul­d. DURING the debate on membership of the European Union we have heard many arguments and observatio­ns. Some were informativ­e, educationa­l, and helpful, while others were disingenuo­us, tendentiou­s, and, at times, xenophobic.

Whatever decision is arrived at, I believe that the country, after the divisivene­ss and contentiou­sness generated by the debate, should pause for a time of reflection and follow the terms of the message pinned on the Cabinet room door by Harold Macmillan, when Prime Minister: “Quiet calm deliberati­on disentangl­es every knot”.

Perchance, like Hamlet, I’m dreaming. Ian W Thomson, 38 Kirkintill­och Road, Lenzie.

 ??  ?? ENGAGED IN DEBATE: Yes and No supporters pictured in Glasgow during the last few days of the Scottish independen­ce referendum campaign in September, 2014. Picture: Mark Runnacles/Getty Images
ENGAGED IN DEBATE: Yes and No supporters pictured in Glasgow during the last few days of the Scottish independen­ce referendum campaign in September, 2014. Picture: Mark Runnacles/Getty Images

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom