IS the Union now so weak that it can only be sustained by the dissemination of misleading propaganda and fake news?
The coronavirus pandemic has revealed fundamental inequalities across the four “nations” of the UK but it appears there are also major inconsistencies in the manner in which British democracy operates.
At Westminster the Prime Minister and his government persistently avoid scrutiny but on the whole have, in spite of a catalogue of mistakes throughout this health and economic crisis, been backed by the opposition Labour party.
READ MORE: Tories seem to care more about vaccination statistics than lives saved
At Holyrood the First Minister has consistently acted ahead of the Westminster government and positively responded to calls for even more transparency, as evidenced with even a cursory visit to the Scottish Government website, yet is politically pilloried at every opportunity by the opposition Conservative party.
Of course the media have a significant role to play in the reporting of important health information, but if the Union has a strong moral and democratic foundation then stating that “virtually all elderly care home residents had received their first vaccine or been given an appointment for it” should not be construed as comparable to the vaccination of more than 98% of care home residents.
On the BBC’s Coronavirus Briefing – Reaction on Monday afternoon the clarification was provided that this comparison actually put England about two weeks behind Scotland, but regrettably this assessment was not carried in any of the subsequent evening news bulletins while the “clarification” that Scotland was still a week behind England in vaccinating the over-80s was repeatedly highlighted.
Stan Grodynski
Longniddry, East Lothian
“THERE is a way to deliver a majority for independence which also holds the Government to account. That is by sending a strong group of Green MSPs to Holyrood in May”. This statement by Patrick Harvie in his article of Friday is what independence voters on May 6 need to give serious consideration to (Voting for a strong group of Greens is another way to reach indy, January 29).
Surely it is not beyond the bounds of possibility for both the SNP and the Greens to have an almost identical pledge in their respective manifestos as to the case for a referendum, which would strengthen future negotiations.
READ MORE: Patrick Harvie: Voting for a strong group of Greens is another way to reach independence
Many people see a Green/SNP coalition as a blueprint for a successful combination when the shackles of Westminster are finally discarded. No doubt Kate Forbes will be looking for Green support in passing her Budget, as she and predecessors have often had to do.
Why not consider candidates “standing down” in certain constituencies to ensure a Green or SNP candidate’s success? Maybe in the case of Andy Wightman we should consider this, sadly, for an independent.
David Pratt’s excellent article of January 28 (We must demand more) sums up my feelings exactly.
“At the next opportunity let’s elect the politicians we really deserve. Those with the concerns, wellbeing and future of all Scotland’s citizens close to their heart”.
Sandy Coghill
Sligachan, Isle of Skye
ALASTAIR Forbes is correct (Letters, January 26). If the SNP and Greens agree an arrangement such that the SNP stood only for the constituency votes, and the Greens only for the list votes, and every other independence party stayed out of both – independence would win handsomely!
There is, however, no guarantee that the third condition would happen. In politics as in chess, it is fatal to underestimate one’s opponent. Unionists would flood the list vote with fake pro-independence parties to split the vote and deny the Greens any success.
So, on this occasion (and perhaps on this one only) vote SNP one and two. That is the only relatively safe option to maximise the SNP vote.
Hugh Noble
Appin
IT beggars belief that the Prime Minister of the UK has to enquire “what happens to the Queen?” when Scotland becomes an independent country (PM ignores clear support for indy, January 29). The answer of course is “nothing”, unless at a later stage we, the people of Scotland, opt for a republic!
READ MORE: Boris Johnson ignores support for independence in polls on visit to Scotland
Whit a glaikit gowk he is, richt enough. Dis he really no ken we were an independent country fae 1603 til 1707? See English private schooling, a’ these fees richt doon the stank! Why did the wee fickle Tory MPs no gie him a briefing to save himself from such an acute embarrassment? Or get the gither and buy him a history book afore his next trip up here.
Mind you, he fairly maks the case for independence so we should nae be too upset at his total ignorance of the facts surrounding the ill-fated 1707 treaty, which was broken the very day it was signed! Sic a parcel richt eneuch.
James Cameron Stuart
Falkirk
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