I WAS very interested and a wee bit surprised to read the article “Joanna Cherry-backed group seek SNP NEC control and start of new Yes campaign” (November 22).
It seems that this plea is being made by a group within the SNP which has launched a so-called “manifesto for democracy” and has unveiled a list of 18 candidates it supports for positions on the party’s National Executive Committee (NEC).
All 18 candidates are being supported by the SNP’s Common Weal Group (CWG) after they signed its manifesto setting out a set of objectives including seeking a commitment by the party leadership to launch an independence campaign in 2021 and a series of internal reforms.
READ MORE: Joanna Cherry-backed group seek SNP NEC control and start of new Yes campaign
Apparently a key objective in the CWG manifesto is advancing the independence cause by giving the grassroots a greater say in policy and decision-making. The manifesto includes steps to “improve accountability and transparency in areas such as financial matters and the complaints process”.
CWG convener Craig Berry said “We must revive internal party democracy and policy debate, ensuring the SNP is ready to deliver Scottish independence. We can’t keep ordinary party members shut out of the conversation anymore.”
READ MORE: Catriona MacDonald: Scotland must push devolution to its limits as we move to independence
As an SNP member for more than 45 years and a councillor for 25 years who is standing in these NEC elections, I rather wondered why, given this call for improved democracy, I had not been invited to even consider being a part of this group. I may or may not have signed up for what is being proposed, but surely if they don’t want to “keep ordinary party members shut out of the conversation any more” then at least an email to ALL candidates standing in the NEC election would have been the first item on their agenda.
It took me a fair bit of internet searching to actually find this list of 18 folk blessed by the Common Weal Group just to confirm I was not on it, let alone the actual so-called manifesto for democracy.
So much for improved accountability and transparency.
Brian Lawson
Candidate for the SNP NEC West of Scotland region seat
IT is concerning that there is any doubt about the SNP’s commitment to unilateral nuclear disarmament. This is something that has been part of their political DNA for decades and is something that is supported by the majority of Scots.
Particularly with less than two months until the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons is set to enter into force, a slide in the position would be very counterproductive and send totally the wrong message.
READ MORE: Weak words are an insult to anti-nuclear activists within the SNP
The debate on Scottish independence should focus on what positive changes can be made, with the total removal of Trident, the end of arms sales to repressive regimes and the UK’s aggressive foreign policy all being open to discussion.
Hopefully the SNP will use their conference this weekend to send the strongest possible message and reaffirm their unequivocal opposition to Trident and nuclear weapons everywhere.
Emma Cockburn
Campaign Against Arms Trade
IN his column in Monday’s National on Chancellor Sunak’s spending review, George Kerevan accepts that because the Scottish Government is adopting the Growth Commission’s terms for an independent Scotland, the government will have to borrow from the private banking industry for some years (What is Sunak up to ahead of this week’s Commons Spending Review?, November 23). This would impose a great restriction on all aspects of government.
READ MORE: George Kerevan: Rishi Sunak is under pressure ahead of Spending review
There is a very simple answer to this ludicrous proposal. Disregard Andrew Wilson’s neoliberal banker’s charter and adopt a constitutional currency, issued by the state, from day one of independence. With the power to issue our own Scottish currency, there will be no need to borrow money; the central bank will issue it, just as the UK does now.
Tony Perridge
Inverness
IS Malcolm Rifkind not aware that, come January 1, Scotland (along with the rest of the UK) will no longer be in the EU, even though we voted overwhelmingly to remain (Tories in ‘deep panic mode’ over future of the Union, November 23)? His proposal for a federal system for the UK not only has no chance of ever being agreed by Westminster, but neither does it give Scotland the opportunity to re-apply for EU membership, because in a federal system Scotland would still be in the UK and not an independent country.
Keith Scammell
Inverness
SINCE Covid-19 spreads through contact and one tries to avoid multiple contacts to limit and then reduce rates of infection, one has to question the UK Government decision to allow at a stroke a massive rise in numbers attending sporting fixtures, albeit in the lower tiers. Up to 4000 can attend!
While distancing may take place within the stadium or cricket ground, surely the crowding en route to public transport at departure and arrival and en route to the venue will cause a surge! How long will the queuing be outside a stadium before entry? Is this not another carelessly thought out move at this juncture?
John Edgar
Kilmaurs
READ MORE: Covid in Scotland: Three households allowed to mix at Christmas for five days in UK wide plan
LEAKED email from viral HQ:
Hi Vi,
Great news that our hosts intend to relax their rules over the festive season. Like me, I bet you’re really looking forward to Christmas. Just think, excited family get togethers, a few drinks and a few hugs –bound to be our best Christmas gift ever! Squeeze the disease? They must be joking!
Regards, Rus
Bill Drew
Kirriemuir
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