Salmond’s crowdfunding throws down the gauntlet to Sturgeon

ALEX Salmond has, emulating the example of nationalist bloggers, solicited donations from loyal followers, in order to fund his case against the Scottish Government (“Salmond quits SNP amid sexual misconduct claims”, The Herald, August 30). I believe that, within 24 hours, he has received more than £50,000, which was his original target. It has presumably not occurred to the donors that, instead of contributing to the costs incurred by a relatively wealthy man, they might have made a donation to their local food bank. That would have been appropriate, given how many nationalists complain about the need for food banks.

The crowdfunded monies are, however, less to bail out a politician incurring legal costs than to demonstrate to the rest of us, and particularly to Nicola Sturgeon, how much loyalty Mr Salmond continues to command within the nationalist camp. This may not be a declaration of war, but it is certainly intended as a show of strength.

Jill Stephenson,

Glenlockhart Valley,

Edinburgh.

IT defies belief and gives the word shameless a new meaning that a man with the wealth of Alex Salmond, awash in government-supplied pensions and independently wealthy by any standards, would attempt to raise money from his upcoming court case against the Scottish Government by crowdfunding. I had to read the report twice for it to sink in.

In due course, his innocence or guilt with regard to the complaints of sexual harassment will be determined by our justice system. However, there is a judgment of morality also to be made. It revolves round using very gullible supporters, of whom there are demonstrably many, to finance the ego-driven action of a wealthy man. Alexander Mckay,

8/7 New Cut Rigg,

Edinburgh.

IS there not something obscene about the former First Minister asking for crowdfunding to pay for his own private legal escapades, when he already receives pensions of £100,000 per annum as well as a £65,000 contribution to help him to adjust to “normal life” after politics? How many, I wonder, of the crowdfunders enjoy a similar income?

JL Brown,

9 Lubnaig Road,

Newlands.

ALEX Salmond is greeting about the legal costs he is facing. However as First Minister he failed to make justice affordable to those who needed to use the law. He’s quite happy to ignore the issue then complain when he is affected. Further, he wasted millions on unnecessary expenditure – including fees for EU students, probably £500 million and rising.

His successor Nicola Sturgeon, a lawyer to trade, also doesn’t bother to address access to law.

Donald Mackintosh,

96 Glasgow Road,

Paisley.

ALEX Salmond must be congratulated on tendering his resignation from the Scottish National Party. A feature of Mr Salmond’s leadership in the past has always been his willingness to concede on points which are of little or no relevance. In the independence referendum he readily conceded on points which he anticipated a majority of the electorate might be in favour of, so that he could concentrate on his main goal of independence for Scotland. At present it really is immaterial as to whether or not Mr Salmond is a member of the SNP for the next few months and resignation from the party has no detrimental consequences.

On the assumption that the investigation into the claims of sexual misconduct has not come to any firm conclusion it is regrettable that Mr Salmond’s name has been disclosed in public at this time. Presumably the first part of the investigation has established that one or both claims have some sub-stance and are not malicious complaints. In that case the investigators should now be attempting to seek reconciliation or some form of resolution between the complainers and Mr Salmond without naming either Mr Salmond or the complainers.

With the unfortunate revelation of Mr Salmond’s name it is now imperative that the investigators of these complaints now consult with Mr Salmond and issue a statement regarding the nature of the complaints and the progress made to date in the investigation. Otherwise we, the public, have no idea as to whether the complaints are of a serious nature or are a result of a misunderstanding between the various parties and at what point the investigators have reached in the investigation.

As a separate matter the source of the leak should be investigated, as should be Mr Salmond’s con-duct in potentially breaching confidentiality by disclosing details to Nicola Sturgeon and then taking legal action which itself resulted in the complaint being made public.

Sandy Gemmill,

40 Warriston Gardens, Edinburgh. IN Reply to Dr Gerald Edwards (Letters, August 30) I would contend that Nicola Sturgeon has led her party honourably and with dignity throughout a very difficult and distressing situation, and I think Dr Edwards is being more than a tad optimistic if he thinks that “Theresa May and the Conservatives are looking in far better shape, especially once the Brexit issue is successfully concluded”. With Scotland and the rest of the UK bracing itself for a no-deal Brexit, it is difficult to see how there can be a successful conclusion, and it should not be forgotten that it is the Conservative Party which led us into this mess.

In his letter Sean Piggott writes that he “fails to see how Jeremy Corbyn can be blamed for the fact that most of the Parliamentary Labour Party would rather have a Tory Government”, and that is a very serious problem for the Labour Party. Naturally, it is entirely a matter for Labour as to who leads it, however, as someone who is not a member of the Labour Party, but who agrees with Jeremy Corbyn on his stance on nuclear weapons and the Iraq war, I am extremely disappointed that he has not been able to persuade his parliamentary colleagues to back his position on Trident, and that since becoming leader he has taken no action to expel Tony Blair from the Labour Party for taking the UK into an illegal war.

Regarding Mr Piggott’s point about the current Parliament being a one-party state, I would remind him that the party in power at Westminster was not elected by Scottish voters (and hasn’t been since 1955), and that the party in power at Holyrood is now in its third historic term, and going by the opinion polls, will be re-elected for a fourth term, because “people like me”, the voters of Scotland, have chosen to elect them.

Ruth Marr,

99 Grampian Road,

Stirling.