National readers react to Boris Johnson's plan to visit Scotland

We are in a curious situation in Scotland, with a First Minister who has been highly praised for her cautious and empathetic approach to Scottish citizens whom she wishes to protect from the ravages of Covid-19.

Prime Minister Johnson, by contrast, has been invisible for periods of time, with a range of Cabinet ministers standing in for him. He has also shown some urgency about opening up the economy while Covid-19 numbers are still high in England.

READ MORE: Nicola Sturgeon not told about Boris Johnson's planned visit

What I find extremely difficult to understand is the desire of the Conservative party to hold onto Scotland when they clearly don’t like us very much. They are probably very keen to hang onto the tax revenues from whisky, oil, fish and Scottish beef etc. But the party’s performance in Prime Minister’s Questions demonstrates no respect or mutual regard for the northern citizens of “this great Union”!

The other aspect of the puzzle is why Mr de Pfeffel Johnson is making the trip. We are unlikely to get a timetable of venues and meetings because he tends to be inaccessible to the public, judging by previous trips. He seems to be aware that he is not a popular figure in Scotland so, understandably, keeps a low profile! So why come? To collect party funding from Scottish entrepreneurs? Who knows what they get up to behind closed doors?

If Michael Gove et al are getting anxious about the polls supporting independence, you would have thought they would at least have begun to be less rude about us – if only to keep their own Scottish supporters happy.

A mystery, that’s what it is!

Maggie Chetty
Glasgow

IN Kathleen Nutt’s article, Johnson’s failure to inform the Scottish Government of an impending whistlestop tour is described as an “act of gross discourtesy” (FM not told about Johnson’s visit, July 21). Some people might describe this action as an oversight, others as an absolute insult but to some, me included, it is seen as one of a number of calculated acts of international gerrymandering.

READ MORE: Kirsty Strickland: Boris Johnson plans to seduce Scotland but we know he'd rather be anywhere else

In 1933 the Montevideo Conference of American States defined in international law the criteria for statehood as follows:

1. A defined territory

2. A permanent population

3. A government

4. A capacity to enter into relations with other states.

Scotland of course meets all of the above criteria. Furthermore, article three of the convention states that “political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states”. This series of judgements have come down into the body of international law and are therefore generally recognised across the planet, but only by countries that adhere to the morality of those laws.

When one takes into account all of the comments spewing forth from the sewerage system that is the UK Government – that for example there is no Scottish/English border, or the complete ignoring of the SNP, Scottish Government and the people’s input on Brexit etc – this is far more than discourtesy but in reality an extremely calculated series of decisions designed to convince the world that Scotland does not truly exist outside the borders of the United Kingdom.

Alan Hind
Old Kilpatrick

SO Boris Johnson has decided to emerge from the Downing Street fridge to bring his Tory clown car to Scotland.

No doubt Johnson will be well briefed by watching a couple of episodes of the White Heather Club. That this incompetent, offensive imbecile is coming to Scotland to tout the "benefits" of being a ruled by an venal, useless unelected Tory government is a gift to supporters of Scottish independence.

Johnson's government gave a measly £21 million to Scotland in the last Budget. The Unionists like to lecture Scots that an independent Scotland would not have been able to afford the furlough scheme. Oil-rich Norway is paying for Covid-19 by withdrawing $37 billion from its wealth fund.

READ MORE: Boris Johnson has 'almost colonial' approach to Scotland, FT commentator says

Johnson's risible response the Covid-19 is because he prioritised the maintenance of capitalist rule above the lives and health of the population. His government has criminalised the problems caused by poverty.

Johnson's represents a nationalism which is brutal, unreasonable, parochial, allied to racism, tribalism, and bigotry, invested in ignorance and hostile to questioning. It glorifies militarism and war. It thrives on nostalgia.

Boris Johnson is a blatheing buffoon and a fantasist. His whole world view of a post-Brexit Buccaneering Britain resurrecting the Empire is a pipe dream. Just as Nero fiddled as Rome burned, so Johnson bumbles as the UK disintegrates.

Alan Hinnrichs
Dundee

ISN'T it rich, that Boris is to visit Scotland to talk up the Union and put us back in our box. This smacks of the previous case when the leaders of the main Westminster parties conned us with The Vow.

This now is the successor government of the British Empire, who used a "divide and rule" tactic repeatedly as in India, Palestine, Ireland and their many other colonies, until they erupted in violent acts.

I am not advocating that Scotland has to follow this route, but when a clear mandate for independence is flouted repeatedly, frustration can boil over.

We have an election next year (hopefully) for the Scottish Parliament, and if the result goes as the polls are suggesting, this will be further indication that the sovereign people of Scotland deserve another referendum on independence.

This will be rejected once more by a PM whose party has no mandate now, and is unlikely to improve on this situation any time soon. If he does refuse our right as a nation to self-determination, our MPs at Westminster should immediately walk out in protest, and take no further part in this farce that Westminster has become in relation to Scotland.

The last time they did this, membership of the SNP and other independence-supporting organisations rocketed, and I suspect the same would happen again.

We were placed in this "Union" in 1707 by a ruling class, with no input from the common people, but if this is an equal union, then we should have the right to withdraw from it. Otherwise we are not an equal partner, but rather a prisoner of our more populous neighbour.

The independence movement itself should be showing that we are united and determined to not fall for the "divide and rule" tactics which those supporting the Union will try to employ.

Graham Smith
Arbroath

WHY worry about Boris not telling our FM of his planned visit to Scotland? Not doing so means it is not official and therefore there is no need for the expense of deploying any police to supervise it.

L McGregor
Falkirk