WHILE I wholeheartedly agree with Councillor Kenny MacLaren (Letters, March 23) that Boris Johnson is utterly unfit, unworthy and incapable of representing the UK as Foreign Secretary, I disagree that May will be embarrassed by his actions. I would suggest she and her “strategists” ordered them.
Yes, it was a disgusting and deliberately insulting comment made by an outright buffoon who does not speak for any of us or our country and was yet another reason, as though any were needed, for us all to redouble our efforts and ensure Scotland is free of this foul Union once and for all.
However, in their desperate search for a distraction this government have decided to poke a rabid dog to deflect from their abstract incompetence.
The “strategy” of this unelected, foreign government is now no longer even damage limitation. It is now to cover up their mistakes and crimes.
Is Putin a good guy? Absolutely not. Is that an excuse to insult a people as fine as our Russian friends who suffered in the 20th century more than we can imagine? No. Yet this clown talks for us. He represents us on the world stage.
Who done it? Was it Russia? Yes, it probably was. But I have reached this conclusion because the EU has claimed it is likely, not because of my government or news sources. The UK state media reports with utter certainty this poison attack’s source. No ambiguity. I am not one for conspiracy nonsense, but when the BBC reports something these days I automatically look for the angle. These proven liars have distorted fact so shamelessly they appear as propagandists, and we are now approaching the state of poor Winston Smith.
There are several possible sources for this chemical in the world, and the most likely is Russia, but we are being lied to on a daily basis by the BBC (who incidentally reported the betrayal of the arch Unionist fishing industry as “an 18-month delay” and nothing more).
Our government is intentionally escalating tensions with a nuclear power purely to cover their own embarrassment.
Time to pull the rip cord and get rid of the WMDs on the Clyde. Moreover, I would invite international bodies and demonstrate to them the base has been made unsuitable to house, hold or refuel these submarines.
Not because I believe Russia is an innocent victim in all this but because I find the actions of Westminster to be far, far more sinister and dangerous.
RJ Bulloch
Glasgow
ANDREW Tickell completely misses the point of the Scottish Government’s determination to regain the management over all devolved matters (The problem with the ‘power grab’ ... and why it might backfire on the SNP, The National, March 23).
The more levers of the economy controlled by it, the more flexibility it has to manage in the best interests of the Scottish people. It also presents an opportunity to demonstrate the competence of the government in directing policy which improves living standards for all.
Also, why should Scotland give Westminster the upper hand in negotiations to take place after Brexit? The current Westminster government has not shown any semblance of integrity and as we have all observed over the past couple of years, anything Prime Minister May promises is overturned by the right wing of her party within hours.
For Andrew to trivialise the current negotiations as a political point-scoring gambit is way off the mark.
Mike Underwood
Linlithgow
I WAS pleased to read Martin Hannan’s article, “Judges register to become law” (The National, March 23) as it will ensure that in future our judges will have be more transparent, a condition that is required in a modern democracy.
I was a tad surprised that it had taken almost six years and that it had been opposed by the current and previous Lord Presidents, Lord Carloway and Lord Gill, on the grounds it would make it difficult to recruit judges. I wonder why?
I thoroughly agree with Hannan’s conclusion: “This is a good day for the Scottish Parliament and for transparency”.
Thomas L Inglis
Fintry
AS a Scottish Episcopalian I was appalled to learn that the Anglican Archbishop of York intends not only to vote to support Westminster grabbing powers affecting Scotland on their return from Brussels under Clause 11, but also offers the Upper House advice on how to deal with devolved administrations (Russell in powers plea to leading churchman, The National, March 23).
As a “lord clerical” he sits unelected in the House of Lords and has led a professional life of Christian faith rather than as a politician. So with Scottish bishops, both Episcopalian/Anglican and Roman Catholic, having no place in the Westminster House of Lords, Scotland in this matter is being dealt a triple-blow in democratic deficit.
J D Moir
Address supplied
AS a high-ranking cleric in the Church of England, John Sentamu has little need to understand anything about devolution.Yet in spite of being a member of the House of Lords for over a decade, he appears to be unaware that these powers that the UK Government want to assume when they are returned from the EU were unconditionally transferred from Westminster to the Holyrood parliament with clear legislation in The Scotland Act 1998 and subsequent amendments.
John Jamieson
South Queensferry
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel