IT is interesting that some would claim that the Scottish Parliament, comprising 129 MSPs of which 72 (majority of 15) were elected with a manifesto commitment to hold a referendum in the new parliamentary term, does not have a mandate for such a democratically endorsed action.
In addition, for comparison under the still preferred voting system of the UK Government, the SNP on its own secured a majority of 52 MSPs in the primary constituency vote (62 of 73, 84.9%) which at Westminster would have equated to an overwhelming majority of 454 MPs.
READ MORE: Majority of SNP voters want party to form coalition with Greens, poll finds
Mischievous politicians, such as Michael Gove, have attempted to suggest that because some individuals may have voted for the SNP in spite of not supporting independence at this time, the democratic legitimacy of the Scottish Parliament to hold an independence referendum is undermined. These same persons deliberately fail to acknowledge that there are a large number of Labour and Liberal Democrat voters, as well as some Conservative voters, who support the democratic right of the new Scottish Government to conduct a referendum on self-determination.
Clutching at another tenuous straw, some have even duplicitously claimed that because the SNP and Greens obtained “only” 48.4% of the secondary regional vote that a majority of voters are against independence, yet were content to accept a UK Government, with 43.6% of the “first-past-the-post” vote, dictating a Hard Brexit negotiated and implemented through the most severe periods of the coronavirus pandemic.
Only those intent on denying the people of Scotland their democratic right to determine their own future would support any attempt by the UK Government (now under the guise of “Team UK”) to ignore the democratic mandate of the Scottish Parliament by seeking to prevent an independence referendum after the coronavirus health crisis has ended.
Stan Grodynski
Longniddry, East Lothian
WE are filled with joy at the prospect of reunions with loved ones in our homes tomorrow after months of lockdown [with the exceptions of Glasgow and Moray].
On the same day Norway is celebrating over a hundred years of independence. Having lived there for three decades I have experienced the great pride and joy Norwegians feel on May 17th. Parades take place in every town and small village across the country. Primary school children are part of the parade led by brass bands – many of which are primary school bands. Everyone dresses in their best outfits, with many adults and children wearing their local national costumes. It is a sight that lifts the spirits when refugee children march with their classmates waving Norway’s flag as well as the flag of their homeland.
READ MORE: Scotland can look to Arctic and Nordic councils for new horizons - here's how
Imagine this scenario in Scotland with pipe bands leading independence parades all over the country and our Saltires flying proudly. Not a Union Jack ever to be forced upon us again. Then and only then would we know how precious and wonderful independence is.
This dream is closer than ever before to becoming reality, so we must not allow ourselves or our independence-majority government to waste a moment in preparing for indyref2.
Moira Lindsay
via email
I UNDERSTAND the list vote system, which is intended to ensure that the number of MSPs in Holyrood reflect the votes each party won overall. However, there is one serious weakness in the way it is administered.
It is to me crazy that some list MSPs can be in parliament for years simply because their party puts them repeatedly at the top of an area’s list. There are some list MSPs who have been at Holyrood since 1999 and never won an election. Nor do list MSPs have busy constituency offices.
To resolve this gravy train – because that is what it is – Holyrood should change the rules so that no list MSP can stand for more than two parliamentary elections.
Robert Anderson
Dunning
IT worries me a bit that these days some people will just not accept the democratic will of the people and will take to the streets and cause insurrection when Scotland has its indyref2 and becomes independent. A good example of this was given in America recently when Trump’s supporters just would not accept the election result.
Now in the UK a 51% majority has always been accepted to declare the winner and many political parties in the UK have been elected on not much more than that, not to mention Brexit was enacted. So, what to do when the Unionists in Scotland start to cause trouble when the result is not what they want? (Let’s not kid ourselves, many will seek to overturn the result by bringing spurious claims to court etc.)
It would be dreadful if new laws had to be brought into force to control such folk but I really don’t see any other way.
Alexander Smith
Isle of Bute
A WEEK on from the Holyrood election it was back to the polling station for voters in Airdrie and Shotts for a Westminster by-election. The victors were once again the SNP and just like in the previous week’s Holyrood election, the SNP were defending the seat. Voters sent a clear message, albeit with a reduced majority.
READ MORE: Anum Qaisar-Javed pledges to be a role model for minorities after by-election win
It is not so many years ago that this seat and the whole surrounding area would have been painted red. It was once the constituency of Labour Home Secretary John Reid, and Labour’s Scottish Secretary Helen Liddell, so was this result yet another catastrophe for Scottish Labour ? Did the UK Labour party even notice the result? I ask in light of the result of the Hartlepool by-election only last week, when Labour lost the long-held seat to the Conservatives. Sackings, reshuffles followed for Sir Keir Stammer, yet all quiet on the Airdrie and Shotts front!
Catriona C Clark
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