Don’t let smug Tories force a Scotland Bill on us we don’t want

It is entirely proper that Holyrood takes a view on whether that legislation is decent and honest.

The National makes some well-reasoned arguments about whether our MSPs should accept or veto the Scotland Bill on the basis of the fiscal framework elements.

But what really set me thinking is that affront to Scotland’s democracy as I watched Westminster debates when the Conservatives rejected every single one of the amendments sought by 56 of the 59 Scottish MPs to the Scotland Bill.

Think about that. With smug complacency Westminster told Scotland what it could get. The crumbs off of that proverbial table fell short on every and all aspects promised in that infamous Vow.

I also recall watching 56 Scottish MPs turn up and impressively occupy a quarter of the House of Commons chamber, whilst a miserable token four or five Conservatives could be spotted on the green benches opposite like some rare species of lesser-spotted, disinterested Tory wildlife.

Every day and night of those debates I had a feeling of revulsion when dozens of extra Tories appeared like lobby fodder, from the 14 bars and pubs in that place at 10pm to vote against what Scotland’s overwhelming democratic phalanx of MPs had sought.

We ended up with a Westminster Tory version of the Scotland Bill so watered down that it was positively incontinent as well as impotent.

Here is what I would like to know. What happens if our MSPs veto the Scotland Bill at Holyrood? Not just because the fiscal framework on offer is gerrymandered to force John Swinney into carrying out Tory cuts.

The main reason Holyrood should now veto the Scotland Bill is that 56 of Scotland’s MPs were voted down by Westminster on every division at the London Parliament.

Now is the time to send a clear message back to the Tory Raj. If you can’t do this properly, please don’t insult the intelligence of Scottish voters with the limp and soggy effort you now want us to digest.

Thanks to IndyRef1 our country is very well educated on political issues. No more will we accept dodgy London legislation.

Will the world come to an end if Holyrood votes no? Will the sky fall in because Scotland rejects this badly framed legislation? No.

So it is time for Holyrood to put down a marker. Our MPs did their best to ensure Scotland’s voice was heard in the drawing-up of the Scotland Bill. At every turn Westminster voted the democratic wishes of Scotland into oblivion.

Newsflash, Scotland has the democratic right to reject what are substandard and undemocratic laws. David Mundell, please take your Scotland Bill back and make it fit for purpose. Once you have done that Holyrood will reconsider it. Until then the Scotland Bill really should be rejected by our MSPs.

That is the only way that our democratically elected MPs and MSPs will be listened to in the future. Anything else of rejection is a tacit consent to allow the Tories to continue ignoring 56 out of 59 MPs that Scotland sent to Westminster in May 2015.

Alastair Stewart
Hamilton

THOSE who see a democratic deficit in Tories voting down the will of Scottish MPs at Westminster on the Scotland Bill are wrong . If you’re outvoted, then that’s democracy, however you despise the opposition.The problem is we’re in a democracy we don’t want to be in...

John Macanenay
Glasgow

Oil price fall is a red herring in economic debate

WE know that no matter what the price or the forecast revenue for oil is, oil is, and has been, a bonus to the UK economy and would be an even bigger bonus to an independent Scottish economy.

The oil industry is cyclical, based on supply and demand and sometimes global politics. There have been North Sea oil job losses and gains in the past and will be in the future.

HMRC and the HM Treasury have benefited and still benefit from North Sea oil revenues and the very high fuel tax on petrol and diesel. It is highly unlikely Scotland has reaped its fair share of these revenues from our membership of this “one nation” UK Government. The Barnett formula does not take these revenues into account.

The tiresome repetitive comments by Unionists about black holes in Scotland’s economy created by a low oil price or a poor oil revenue forecast are red herrings. It is a fact that an independent Scotland would be an economic success and they know it.

Gordon Robertson
Address supplied

MAY I attempt to balance the fawning tributes to Cecil Parkinson?

Having lived through the Scottish “Thatcher Years” and, fortunately, still possessing my own experiential memories, I say good riddance as he joins his partner in crime, Maggie (wherever she is).

Peter Barjonas
Latheronwheel, Caithness

ERROR of judgment by Julie McDowell in her comments about Robert Burns; surely the TV Pick should highlight a programme that stands out or may be of interest to the readers of The National, not be a platform for the personal prejudice of the writer?

I found Julie’s remarks about Burns offensive and patronising, and I imagine many of the readers of this newspaper would feel the same. Please send Julie to see Kirsteen McCue and Gerry Carruthers in their workplaces at GU; then to the Burns Room at The Mitchell Library, maybe also to visit the Burns Museum at Alloway.

In fact, why not sign up for the Futurelearn course on Robert Burns – it is free, designed by Gerry Carruthers and his colleagues at Glasgow University. Perhaps Julie would open her mind and learn why Burns means so much to people all round the world.

Alison Duncan
Address supplied

I CAN understand why (Letters, The National January 24) “SNP supporter” chooses to ignore Donald Trump’s racism, misogyny, attacks on the disabled and his bombastic ego. After all “he is providing badly needed employment”. However, as an SNP supporter, it is not clear why she/he is attacking Rise for the protest at Balmedie, and not Alex Salmond. In response to Salmond’s own media vendetta, Trump has threatened to withdraw £700 million investment from Scotland.

As a Rise member, I welcome Salmond’s political U-turn over Trump. It was not so long ago that Salmond and his SNP Government were trying to court Trump.

However, I think a large proportion of the SNP’s post-referendum members understand the problems associated with Scotland’s history of economic “development”, based on pandering to the needs of the rich and privileged. Deer forests and grouse moors led to very few jobs, environmental degradation and the cultivation of forelock-tugging subservience. Trump’s schemes are part of this woeful history.

However, it appears despite her/his championing of Trump, “SNP supporter” does believe in “demonstrating at estates owned by wealthy princes from Saudi Arabia”. I’m sure Rise would support such an initiative. Rise could also invite her/him to a protest at one of the UK’s arms factories which supply “Saudi Arabia, a county where executions are common place”.

Allan Armstrong
Address supplied

ASYLUM seekers newly arrived in the UK are forced to wear wristbands or denied food. If a picture is worth 1,000 words, why not show a picture of an asylum seeker wearing a wristband alongside a Jew forced to wear a yellow David cross on his sleeve. Or two doors into the public toilet, one for blacks, the other for whites.

Walter Hamilton
Elie