PRESENTATION is as important in politics as it is many areas of public life – maybe more so.
The Downing Street press briefings are held in an impressive wood-panelled room, the speakers flanked by two huge Union Jacks.
The Welsh government spokesperson stands between two Welsh flags, with the emblem of the Welsh government prominently displayed behind them with the title in both English and Welsh.
READ MORE: 'Ridiculous': Sturgeon slams Sunak on Covid-19 and the union
Our FM usually stands at a lectern with the “Stay Safe” message on it, and if you look closely behind her you might see the Scottish Government titles in English and Gaelic. A wee Saltire is also just visible – it appears to me as if it is almost apologetically there.
I appreciate, of course, it is the content of her message that is important. The FM’s daily appearances are also very effective – why else are the Scottish Tories complaining that they amount to an SNP daily broadcast?
Donald Trump rarely appears without the American flag nearby, indeed he wears the stars and stripes on his lapel. Boris Johnson thinks nothing of spending nearly £1 million of taxpayers’ money to turn an RAF transport into a giant airborne flag-waving platform.
READ MORE: Nicola Sturgeon praises Scots for wearing face masks in shops
Boris Johnson’s government have taken to describing the governments in Edinburgh and Cardiff as “devolved administrations”, a deliberate policy of demeaning and belittling our democratically elected legislatures.
I happened to be watching BBC breakfast news on Saturday morning and Nicola Sturgeon was being interviewed. She was in the same room as her daily briefings, only this time she appeared to be sitting “off stage” as it were, half in sunlight, half in shade. It just looks poor, and it looks unprofessional – Nicola Sturgeon and her advisors I think need to take image much more seriously, because the opposition certainly does.
Let’s see the emblems of Scotland and her government proudly displayed at every opportunity.
Eugene Cairns
Prestwick
I COULD not agree more with the sentiments expressed by David Pratt in his article in Friday’s National regarding the Yes movement’s seeming obsession with internal squabbling (This kind of internal squabbling in the Yes movement borders on idiotic, July 10). It’s verging on self-destruction.
READ MORE: David Pratt: This kind of internal squabbling in the Yes movement borders on idiotic
Messrs Carlaw, Gove, Johnson and Mogg-Rees must be absolutely ecstatic when they hear about some of the in-fighting and back-stabbing that’s becoming increasingly prevalent in our movement.
Come on folks, let’s just stick to getting this done when we are so close. There is plenty of time and opportunity to set up all sorts of splinter groups and new parties once we become independent, but for now, for heaven’s sake, just stick to the script and stop doing the Better Together lot’s work for them by presenting them with an open goal.
Robin Hastie
St Andrews
WITH all the talk about which constituency/list “strategy’”should be best used in the 2021 Holyrood election, may I ask a simple, objective question? Can the experts please tell those of us who are not in the know exactly how the SNP managed to win an overall majority in 2011 with an “SNP 1&2” approach, but didn’t manage this in 2017? What made the difference?
A clear answer to this question may be helpful to those of us who are becoming confused with the current mixed messages.
Dennis White
Lanark
WITH all the debates and arguments about the list vote option, why have we not seen some models of what did and what would have happened with a pro-independence party?
For example, take the actual data from a few seats where there was a reasonable list vote for the SNP but it did not result in an appointment. Then assume the same number of votes were for another pro-independence party, with all other votes as per the actual result, and see what the outcome would have been.
Initially leave the Greens vote as per the actual result, then look at models where the votes would have gone to the Greens.
Carrying out modelling in this way might convince SNP voters which way to vote, rather than all the gloom and doom warnings coming one way or another from politicians and pundits.
James Macintyre
Lesmahagow
WE don’t need another independence party. If we care about our planet then our second vote should be going to the Greens. The SNP government should be recommending that we give our second vote to the Greens. It would enhance their credentials as a party who care about the planet, and let Scots have confidence they are willing to be held to account by an other independence party that is working towards a greener future.
F Paterson
Dunlop, Ayrshire
I AM an SNP voter through and through, but I am considering giving my second vote at the Holyrood elections to the Greens. A strong Green party supporting independence can only help Scotland going forward in the right direction. The UK should be at the forefront of the green revolution, but being attached to England I feel could slow this process.
The virus lockdown has highlighted our ability to successfully alter our lifestyles, which has inadvertently reduced our carbon footprint. But there is a great danger in an attempt to boost the economy quickly. Governments’ actions may throw all this progress away.
Scotland’s progress with regard to renewables needs to continue and our reliance on oil and carbon fuels must decrease. A strong, influential Green party could keep an independent Scotland on track and ensure a better future.
Robin MacLean
Fort Augustus
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