I AM an Englishman by birth. As an Englishman I am in favour of independence – the ability to run our affairs for ourselves. The Brexit project was sold to the English as getting independence for themselves. In the real world, it ignored the realities of living with our neighbours in a structured society for the good of all.
I moved to Scotland in 1977 and here I shall stay until my dying day. Already most of my life has been spent here, and I am somewhat puzzled as to whether I am still an Englishman or if I have become a Scot. Though I was not convinced by the Brexit argument, I am at heart still an Englishman who seeks independence. The independence I should most like to see is an independent Scotland, a country which can co-operate with its neighbours in Europe but not be dominated by the government of England.
At this time of crisis, I would have no problem in supporting the closure of the Border. Aside from making this a political issue with an SNP flag, I support those trying to close the Border. They are not being racist, just attempting to keep Covid-19 out of Scotland.
We in Scotland are basically unaware of the lack of knowledge about Scotland in England, particularly the south. The English do not get Scottish “political” programmes or even information programmes about Scotland. All they get is Nicola Sturgeon as portrayed in UK news programmes and in English newspapers, which have no intention of spreading Scottish independence. As pointed out in these columns regularly, the BBC is a mouthpiece for the Westminster government and Unionism.
Now in my seventies, I should like to see Scottish independence in my lifetime, and while I still have the opportunity to enjoy it.
Robert Mitchell
Dunblane
PRITI Patel has stopped the Scottish Government from seeing the data it needed to monitor people coming from abroad to quarantine; suspected Covid-19 carriers. Yet the British Unionists are of course yet again trying to blame Holyrood. Even though immigration isn’t devolved and Westminster has no intention of handing it over. They see Holyrood as the equivalent of an English region.
The Home Secretary is currently fighting to have an 11-year-old child deported to Sudan. That child faces the real threat of having female genital mutilation performed on her. Priti Patel is more immoral than all the other current Tory Cabinet. Like everything else, Scottish Unionists are silent on this.
The Tories have been humiliated by the way Sturgeon has handled Covid-19 compared to Boris Johnson. This why the “Scottish” Tories want the daily Covid-19 briefing pulled. In the middle of the worst pandemic for 100 years, the “Scottish” Tories are more concerned with spin and managing Boris Johnson’s image than they are with public health.
Johnson is now bungling around trying to find a scapegoat for his Covid-19 incompetence. He is saying it’s the fault of care home owners.
Johnson’s approval rating is now minus 39 whereas Nicola Sturgeon’s is plus 61. The Tories are planning an assault on Holyrood. They want to have “market alignment” for the UK. This would mean things like free tuition, prescriptions and personal care would disappear. All at the stroke of a Tory pen.
When someone tells you they are a Unionist; what that person is saying is that they will believe anything, no matter how absurd or foul without a shred of evidence, as long as it affirms the “superiority” or divine providence of the Union.
The case for independence is based on hard facts and what’s best for Scotland. The case for the Union is based on lies told by Boris Johnson and a nostalgia for an Empire whose days are long gone.
Alan Hinnrichs
Dundee
I WAS fascinated by your article “Party led by former FM would win list votes” (July 7). The poll by Wings Over Scotland does indeed make for interesting reading. However there is clearly no certainty that Alex Salmond will be involved in the May 2021 elections.
A more interesting and perhaps more likely scenario, which really should be the subject of a poll, is one where Alex is not the leader of an indy list party. If Alex could hope to achieve only 45% of those who voted Yes in 2014, what level of support may the virtually unknown leader of, for example, the newly formed Independence for Scotland Party (ISP) achieve?
With only just over a quarter (26%) of all voters supporting an Alex Salmond list party, a fundamental question is what kind of reception any new party, especially one minus Alex Salmond, led by political novices, will receive from the Scottish electorate. The formation of the ISP, we are told, is to defeat/make the best of (delete where applicable) the Additional Member System conceived at the birth of the Scottish Parliament (some say to prevent an SNP majority, others to actually make the system fairer). Will SNP/Yes voters be persuaded by this cunning plan? Maybe more importantly, how will “floating” voters view it? Will at least some see it as a cynical attempt to defeat their perceived fairness of the system?
Given the current opinion polls point to an SNP majority in May 2021, a rather obvious question would seem to be – who needs the ISP?
As the May 2021 elections approach on the political horizon (and that horizon is not really that far away – less than 200 days to Christmas) the SNP will have to decide very soon what its response to the challenge from the Independence for Scotland Party or any similar organisations will be.
Will the SNP stand down its candidates from the list ? I suspect not. There are many more questions than answers. Time will tell, but time is short and getting shorter.
Brian Lawson
Paisley
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