THERE has been much coverage of the UK Government’s latest attempts to “solve the migrant crisis”. It seems its ideas now include housing asylum seekers on what the Tories see as remote islands, including possibly some in Scotland.
I am reminded of a visit some years ago to San Francisco and looking towards the deserted prison island of Alcatraz. It housed some of America’s most notorious criminals from 1934 until it closed in 1963. During this time its residents included Al Capone, Robert Franklin Stroud (the Birdman of Alcatraz) and George “Machine Gun” Kelly.
It has featured in a number of movies, and I am forced to wonder if these have provided the inspiration for Priti Patel’s latest ideas.
In its continuing battle to appeal to the worst depths of human nature, the UK Government hopes the public will see little difference between those who have had to flee halfway around the world – often on foot, often with wives and children in tow – and America’s most hardened criminals.
READ MORE: Priti Patel's asylum seeker speech slammed as 'shameless' and 'nonsensical'
The fact that many of these folk had to flee their homes under a hail of bombs and bullets, in many cases provided with the blessing of Western governments, seems to have been forgotten.
The possible location of these virtual prison camps is interesting in itself. It would appear that in the minds of Tory strategists there is little to choose between Ascension Island and a similar-sized island in Scotland.
If the concept of “out of sight out of mind” is important, Ascension is a clear winner, being about 1600km from the coast of Africa and 2250km from the coast of Brazil. Presumably that would be far enough to discourage the use of small inflatable boats as a means of escape.
It does, however, come complete with an airport whose runway was once the longest in the world. It was designed to accommodate the space shuttle, and is therefore a wee bit bigger than, for example, the beach on Barra.
Both Barra and Ascension clearly suffer from a lack of accommodation for what could amount to a large number of new residents.
I do wonder why the Isle of Wight has not featured in the Tories deliberations. It is very close to the point entry of the vast majority of people crossing the English Channel and could offer a wide choice of accommodation.
Perhaps it is a little too close to home (their homes) for the Tory Government.
Brian Lawson
Paisley
I WAS very interested to read Stephen Gethins’s piece in the National (“Scotland could give troubled region a safe space in which to build peace”, October 2) with regard to the present active conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan, a serious and dangerous ramping up of tension in a long standing and always troubling situation.
My wife and I visited Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan last autumn. They are fascinating places but the complexities of their history and geography and the tensions they give rise to are never far below the surface. An independent Scotland will have to find its place in the world and make choices about its foreign policy.
I appreciate that one cannot seek to run before one can walk and that gaining independence is a huge task by itself but I think that Stephen is quite right to bring this situation to our attention and suggest the positive role that an independent and trusted Scotland could play through its foreign policy in seeking to help resolve this situation.
READ MORE: Anger as Priti Patel hits out at 'do-gooders' as she pledges tougher asylum regime
As we make the case for independence and look forward to regaining independence it is only right and proper that we remember that independence is not an end in itself, it is a means to an end. We must consider what we can do with independence not just within Scotland for our own people but also beyond Scotland with and for other people.
Andrew Parrott
Perth and Kinross Council SNP Group
I AM grateful to Charlie Kerr for his attempt to answer the points I raised last week regarding pensions. However as he says, which was my point, we live in different times and different circumstances to 2014. I myself could have written a very similar letter to Charlie but, with all due apologies to him, it would lack any authority.
Why won’t a member of the next Scottish Government say without equivocation, “you will continue to receive your pension when Scotland becomes independent”? I am genuinely puzzled.
Ian Richmond
Dumfries and Galloway
CORRESPONDENTS in the “mainstream” (Unionist) press often blame Scotland’s present ills on 13 years of SNP government. That the Scottish electorate keeps electing the SNP shows that many disagree. If Scotland is in a bad way, that might have something to do with more than 300 years in the United Kingdom.
That our Scandinavian neighbours all do better than us, both economically and in dealing with Covid, suggests they benefit from not having the “broad shoulders of the United Kingdom” weighing them down. That we have a devolved Scottish government, even with limited powers, allows that government to modify many of the ill effects of government from Westminster.
It is natural and right that the SNP and the wider “Yes” movement continue to press for full sovereign independence so that Scotland may rejoin the world as a normal and constructive member of the international community.
David Stevenson
Edinburgh
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