Salmond and Sturgeon have ripped the nation apart
I AM of the same generation as Willie Maclean (Letters, January 1) but my “strong feeling of Britishness” is not based on his analogy of having experienced life after recent world wars. My “strong feeling of Britishness” is based on the fact that Britain works, it has worked for hundreds of years, socially, economically, financially and militarily. Britain has been the envy of the world and Scotland has played a major part in its success.
What has happened is that emotionally-driven separatists, led by Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon, through their angry, persecuted, complaining, blame-driven, negative culture have ripped Scotland apart, driven family against family, friend against friend and created antibritishness. If “young working-age Scots” are unable to identify as British, it is down to the culture of the 45 per cent who want to destroy Britain and will stop at nothing to achieve their illogical goal.
As far as being part of a
“European nation”, unless Ms Sturgeon and her hapless Derek Mackay get a very serious grip on Scotland’s finances, there will never be any chance of an independent Scotland becoming a member of the European Union. So, our “young working-age Scots” will find themselves outside the UK and outside the EU, in a lonely, disadvantaged financially-challenged country – check with Andrew Wilson. In the absence of any financial and economic facts and figures to support an independent Scotland, Ms Sturgeon continues to hoodwink supporters who blindly follow based on nothing more than emotion and xenophobia. What an immorally reckless way to establish grounds for an independent Scotland. We are stronger together. Douglas Cowe, Newmachar.
WILLIE Mclean reckons that keeping a British identity is doing a disservice to the young. On the contrary it is the creation and promotion of a politics of identity that betrays future generations. Anyone who doubts it should learn the lessons of the 20th century, where the politics of identity led to untold division, destruction, misery, war and genocide. Or just look at the foolishness that is Brexit.
As for the idea that we need independence to improve the life of the impoverished: the exact opposite is true. A quick read of the SNP’S own Sustainable Growth Commission Report will reveal that it says so in so many words.
Alex Gallagher, Labour Councillor, Largs.
DO Alexander Mckay (Letters, January 1) and I actually live on the same planet? He goes on and on – and on a bit more – about the failures of the SNP Government in Holyrood to deal with issues concerning, particularly, the NHS and education. Does he seriously think that things would be better if it was left up to Westminster to decide these things?
Give us proper powers and then see where that leaves us. If it gets worse (which I seriously doubt) I’ll concede to him.
Ian Baillie, Alexandria.
ALEXANDER Mckay starts the year with a condemnation of the SNP, willy-nilly; he seems to have missed the point that the people of Scotland voted overwhelmingly for the SNP – 48 seats out of 59
From one of his previous letters he claimed that as a life-long Labour voter he voted tactically for a Tory to stop the SNP’S Deidre Brock being elected; I am sure that he noted Ms Brock’s vote increased, the Labour and Tory votes decreased, and Ms Brock’s majority increased by 12,000.
Christian charity forbids me to make any further comment.
Jim Lynch, Edinburgh EH12.
JUDGING by the tone and bluster of Alasdair Galloway’s reaction (Letters, January 2), my factual contradiction (Letters, December 31) of his attempt to dismiss the commitment to a once in a generation referendum as a throwaway remark seems to have touched a raw nerve.
As to his other remarks, I did not studiously ignore the rest of his letter as I was concerned only with correcting his erroneous remark. However, to set his mind at rest , I do not fear any Indyref2 as I remain confident that rational consideration by the electorate of the economic realities of independence – which this time would be demanded and addressed comprehensively in the lead-up to it – would be persuasive in repeating the result of the 2014 referendum.
Whilst current evenly split opinion polls from such an eminent source as Professor Curtice are of passing general interest, do Mr Galloway and others agree with me that, as is necessary for any change to the SNP constitution, hugely significant change as envisaged by Indyref2 should require equally a two-thirds majority?
Alan Fitzpatrick, Dunlop.
WITH the dawning of the New Year and a new decade hopes are now high for Scotland to benefit from what’s in store. At long last in 2020 we are to finally leave Europe and enjoy a new-found freedom to trade worldwide and prosper.
Our new strong UK Government will swiftly recover international status and reputation, leading to massive trade agreements with America, China and India and giving full employment and a boost to the Scottish economy.
Dennis Forbes Grattan, Aberdeen AB21.
Letters to the Editor, which should not exceed 500 words, must include a full address (not for publication) and contact number for verification. Email letters@theherald.co.uk, or post to Letters, The Herald, 200 Renfield Street, Glasgow G2 3QB. We may edit submissions.
CLEARLY it is important, as more people start to contemplate the possibility of Scotland becoming an independent country, that the views of as many as possible are sought and hopefully accommodated within that overall vision of the country we would all wish to live in.
However, we all have to recognise and accept that it is impossible for everyone to get everything they want – there just has to be some flexibility within the demands and expectations.
Since the Second World War, Scotland has adopted a clear left of centre position and the needs of that “broad church” require to be both addressed and incorporated within that overall vision. Given that historical record, it is almost inevitable that such a stance would be classified as a left of centre position.
I see such a position as being most accommodating and would certainly prefer that as opposed to the wishes of the hard left or what could be inflicted upon Scotland by the current right-wing government in London – under Boris Johnson or whoever replaces him.
Scotland is indeed at a crossroads and Kenny Macaskill’s call for all political leaders to get together and address the needs of Scotland is indeed timeous and a positive proposal (“Kenny Macaskill urges parties to exploit anti-tory ‘anger’ in Scotland”, The Herald, January 2).
But I fear there are some, for example Jim Sillars, who are fighting old battles and doing exactly what he claims is being done by the First Minister – namely playing to the gallery, but surely this is what all politicians do?
Alan Mckinney, Edinburgh EH16.
KENNY Macaskill is right to suggest there will be no indyref2 in 2020. Unfortunately, he did not go far enough. There is no reason to have a second independence referendum anytime in the foreseeable future. “Building on anger” against the Tories, as Mr Macaskill suggests instead, is unbecoming of any politician. The challenge for the Scottish National Party is that this stoking up of anger is really the only weapon in its arsenal as even a cursory examination dictates the SNP do not have the appropriate answers to the problems facing independence for Scotland.
The sensible way forward is to give Boris Johnson some time and space to see how he handles Brexit and domestic issues too, but this requires diplomacy on the part of the SNP. The SNP has launched its attack on Mr Johnson from day one, suggesting that it wants to turn him into a “bogeyman” no matter what he does. This is the politics of desperation on the part of the SNP that simply does not know how to proceed having boxed itself into a quest for independence it simply cannot achieve but whose core supporters will not forgive if it doesn’t. The SNP is facing implosion.
Dr Gerald Edwards,
Glasgow G77.
YOU would be hard pressed to get a cigarette paper between Kevin Mckenna’s views on what socialism should entail (the nationalisation of every means of production, expropriation of property, show trials etc) and the proposals set out in the Communist Manifesto (“I salute Rees-mogg for his heartfelt Christian message of goodwill to all”, The Herald, December 28). I wonder if in a future article he could indicate where his unicorn programme has been introduced and successfully implemented? Alan Ramage,
Edinburgh EH10.
AS a Brexit supporter I had to vote for Boris Johnson to be our Prime Minister, although being an ex-miner it was very hard. Having said that, he is head and shoulders above all our other politicians with his strong personality.
The SNP has had no real opposition for many years now, and I am now looking forward to Mr Johnson facing up to Ian Blackford SNP in the House of Commons, who will soon realise he is not facing Theresa May and that every time he brings up the subject of independence, it will give the Prime Minister the opportunity to highlight the SNP’S poor record on health, education and the like.
John Connor, Dunfermline.
BORIS Johnson’s continuing analogy of the “oven ready” Brexit deal now informs us that “the plastic covering is pierced and it is placed in the microwave” (“Johnson: 2020 can be start of ‘remarkable decade’ for UK”, The Herald, January 1). Sounds as if we are in for a TV dinner, rather than a gastronomic experience, post-brexit.
David G Will, Milngavie.