I HAVE to refute the deeply flawed propositions made by several sources that we have to wait till we are sure of winning before we go to another referendum. In politics you can never be sure of winning. The road is littered with evidence of this.
The suggestion that we wait, discussing potholes in the roads and who lifts the bins, until we are at 60 per cent support is nonsensical. We only get to a winning position on any issue by campaigning for it. We only campaign productively when we have a target. The only target that powers a campaign for us is a demand for an independence referendum.
We sit now with a mandate for a referendum achieved in our parliament, our opposition is in the weakest and most incoherent position it has ever been in and, without any campaign for independence, independence-supporting organisations are springing up all across the country.
What is it we are waiting for? The opposition to straighten itself up after Brexit and be able to turn all its guns on us again?
What nonsense.
David McEwan Hill
Sandbank, Argyll
WOULD you believe the good old Liberal Democrats are at it again? LibDem councillor Peter Barrett, who sits on the council umbrella group Cosla, said: “A month ago Derek Mackay (Finance Secretary) promised to help communities remain resilient and councils deal with any immediate and unforeseen costs resulting from the recent heavy snowfalls and ongoing cold weather – he is going back on his word.
“In Perth and Kinross alone we have been hit by more than £2 million of extra winter maintenance costs. We will end up with just a few hundred thousand pounds because of the Scottish Government’s sleight of hand.”
Enter Willie Rennie: “Derek Mackay has ditched the Bellwin formula activated only a month ago in response to the Beast from the East. Instead, he’s offering a measly £10 million when the councils need five times as much.”
The Mail newspaper printed this story with all the juicy headlines about there being no money left for potholes, then in the small print at the bottom of the article, which most readers never get to: “The Scottish Government said: This additional £10 million is being made directly available to local authorities, and distributed via Cosla, immediately so they do not have to submit formal Bellwin claims and await approval”.
In other words, £10 million is OVER and ABOVE the normal contingency measure which was already in place for emergency funding, known as the Bellwin Scheme.
Absolutely nowhere has it been suggested by anyone whatsoever that the £10 million is a replacement for the Bellwin Scheme – so no scandal, no broken promises, no sleight of hand, no going back on his word, no ditching of the Bellwin formula and it is not true that there is no money left to repair our roads.
Just the Liberal Democrats issuing brazen falsehood to the press whilst crying “SNP Bad!” – and they wonder why they are haemorrhaging party members, voters, and seats right across Scotland. By the way Willie, I would not question the First Minister on Thursday over potholes, you will only look like a fool. Oops, too late.
Walter Hamilton
St Andrews
I RARELY feel comfortable with Michael Fry’s opinions, but today he stepped over the line into a dreamland of his own (We need a capitalist plan for indy Scotland, April 10).
He talks of “the UK milch cow”. Until he realises that it is the UK which uses Scotland as its milch cow, he’s in no fit position to pontificate on how we should rebuild our economy.
Michael continues to see our options as capitalist or socialist/ communist. The Scottish Government’s record shows that there is indeed a middle road. We only have to read about the report commissioned to look into options for a state-owned power company (Options set out for new state power firm, April 10) to see that forward planning is ongoing.
Maybe it’s time for Michael to wake up to reality.
Catriona Grigg
Embo
FOLLOWING the debacle in Falkirk Council chambers last week, folks should be aware of a few facts. Firstly the Tories, the smallest group on the council, supported by Provost Billy Buchanan, proposed a take-over of the powerful decision-making executive committee.
Secondly, the Labour group, which is the second largest group, sold out the people of Falkirk by supporting this Tory bid.
This effectively excluded the largest group, the SNP – who were elected by the people of Falkirk as their choice to run the council – from the decision-making process. Convenorship of the executive is now in the hands of Dennis Goldie, who was installed by the Tories and Labour to replace the elected leader of the council, the SNP’s Councillor Cecil Meiklejohn.
These questions need to be answered by Labour:
Why was the committee make-up acceptable when your party was the largest and why is it no longer acceptable now that the SNP is the largest group?
Why was Labour prepared to deal with the Tories and why have they effectively sold out the people of Falkirk?
Will Richard Leonard have the sense and decency to deal with the local Labour group as Kezia Dugdale did in Aberdeen, and suspend them?
The people of Falkirk deserve answers.
Lorraine Alexander
Falkirk
WHY does Labour in Scotland not just go the whole hog and form the SCOTTISH LABATORY PARTY?
From Kier Hardie to John MacLean and Jimmy Maxton then to Leonard, all in a century!
Roy Linton
via thenational.scot
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