WHO would have thought that in 2018 we would have a Prime Minister whose strings are being pulled by the right-wing extremists in her party, most of whom stand to gain financially from the worst type of Brexit?
Weak and struggling to hold on to her leaking lifebelt, she changes her mind every day on her direction – possibly following the lead of her friend, Donald, who met with her only last week, no doubt offering her more “advice”.
We have a Tory party where a variety of elected officials at every level seem to be mired in sexist, racist or financial scandals, both current and historical. We have a Brexit campaign that lied about what was going to happen and was substantially financed by Arron Banks – a man who has links to Russian finance and holds himself above any enquiry into his dealings. We now have Vote Leave being fined and referred to the police. And what is the Westminster answer to all this? Lets close parliament a week early and go away on holidays for the next seven weeks!
Really? Is this the way ahead for democracy in the UK ? If so, surely it’s better to break away from the UK before we are pulled under and drown with those whom the establishment use only as fodder for their own futures. Our future choice is clear now. More than ever. Be part of what rapidly could become a semi-fascist country led by those who supported much of the policies of 1930s Germany and wish to revert to the Victorian life of 150 years ago, OR become independent, embrace the rest of the world and choose our own path, perhaps in conjunction with other like-minded countries. The choice is ours – at least for now.
James Davidson
Renfrew
SINCE our last General Election in particular the weaknesses and flaws in the Westminster system, often suspected, have emerged in their highest ever relief, and now – when globally the importance of democratic government is recognised – this is especially true.
We are cautioned to believe that our system will achieve for every part of Britain that which will be in the best interest of the whole. The essential question is to determine what the latter in our case actually is. While Scotland in the 19th century was regarded as an industrial European powerhouse, and Scottish Home Rule was then being discussed, the fact is that acute industrial decline was experienced here, in and post 1945. That did not characterise in the main the situation elsewhere in Britain.
The growth of the independence movement – born out of the consequent discontent coupled with the confidence that we could by our own efforts improve our condition – should not therefore be surprising, nor should it be dismissed.
The Scottish Parliament at Holyrood was reborn in 1999, when the Scottish National Party began to gain support. Since 2007 the SNP have formed our government either with an outright majority or as a minority. Holyrood has at no time housed a Conservative party in numbers able to form either a coalition or a minority administration. In 2007 Westminster saw a Labour majority, in 2010 a Conservative/LibDem coalition, in 2015 a Conservative majority and in 2017 a Conservative minority. It is clear that since 2007, Scotland in the Union meant political domination by London-based parties who have been rejected consistently by us.
Going forward that position is likely to obtain. The purchase of DUP support by Conservatives to secure a working majority in 2017 indicates their determination to hold on despite election results.
It is nakedly evident that even in the unlikely event of every single Scottish seat in the house being held by a Scottish “opposition” member, we will not be allowed to influence the UK Government regarding any matter, advantageous to us or not, if there is a modicum of risk to English interests. Mr Cameron’s introduction of English Votes for English Laws saw to that!
It is therefore equally nakedly evident that decisions concerning our best interest will not be made by us on any matter reserved to London by the devolution “agreements”, which as we know can be ignored at the whim of Westminster. We are not governed democratically, a position which daily becomes more intolerable. We must have our independence and it is time to recognise that such is not, repeat not the gift of Westminster but the right of Scotland.
J Hamilton
Bearsden
HAVING now accepted the four amendments put forward by the Tory lobby group “European Research Group”, Mrs May is still arguing that her convoluted customs-sharing plan remains essentially intact. It is obvious that the Hard Brexit no-deal Tories have got her measure and have forced the issue, sensing her overriding ambition is to cling to power, and with their amendments have driven a coach and horses through her Chequers agreement as it was described.
She is at best simply acting as an arbiter between the competing interests within the Tory party while they plot to pull the rug from under her feet. This way with a lame duck PM there is no need to risk a vote of no confidence. So much for Mrs May’s talk of facing down her detractors, vowing to stay on even if she only won by a single vote. No deal is now becoming ever more likely, whether it’s in the country’s interests or not.
Peter Gorrie
Edinburgh
I WAS in Kilmarnock on Monday in the Burns Shopping Centre. Bargain Buys, a large shop that is part of the Poundworld empire, is closing down, with all staff losing their jobs. When I wished one staff member luck, she said it’s the third time she has lost her job. Just as bad they are just accepting it.
So are the public. Where is the fight, the demonstrations for jobs we used to have in the 80s? The public, as was proved last week, will turn out. So why not for jobs?
David Ritchie
North Ayrshire
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 here