I HAVE known Michael Russell for many years, I have not always agreed with him, but I have always respected him. Michael is a hard worker for his political objectives and I have no doubt he is as determined as I am to see an independent Scotland, although his vision of that Scotland may differ from mine.

In his article in The National on Saturday he makes a call for unity (The two things that must happen if we are to have united Yes movement, June 5). He says correctly that the pandemic has delayed the independence progress. He is right about that, he is also right that we must build unity in the broad Yes movement, and of course the SNP is at the very centre of the movement for independence, as he says.

READ MORE: Michael Russell: The two things that must happen if we are to have united Yes movement

Many of us strongly agree with him and entirely accept that we can disagree on some issues, but still manage to work together on fundamental issues such as independence. What is not possible, Michael, is to be less than honest with each other and fail to acknowledge our own mistakes when we are trying to build unity.

Michael says “we shouldn’t cheat the voting system.” Well, Michael, just who in the independence movement is suggesting we do that? We had a gross misrepresentation on the recent ballot paper which was intended to, and probably did, rob the Greens of a seat or seats. There is dark money being used to support Unionist candidates, and as Michael knows I did a report which shows that the 2014 referendum was “interfered with” in the postal ballot.

None of this is being done by independence supporters, as Michael knows. So yes, Michael, cheating on the voting system is happening, but not by Yes supporters.

What Michael is implying, which he knows is untrue, is that people like me who support independence are “cheating” when we decide to use our votes at a Scottish election to support the SNP with our constituency vote and Green or Alba with the regional vote. This is not true, it is a misrepresentation, designed to claim abuse of the electoral system where no such abuse is involved.

If Michael wants a united front, he needs to accept that honesty is required to build and maintain this. The truth is that if everyone in the Yes movement had followed the SNP’s stupid mantra “both votes SNP” it is entirely possible that we would have seen no Greens elected, because they got many thousands of votes from SNP voters who did not intend to waste their regional vote.

The SNP leadership’s policy could have seen us lose our independence majority in the Scottish Parliament, and only the good sense of the electorate who ignored the SNP mantra prevented that from happening.

So Michael, climb down from your high horse and acknowledge that the SNP got the election strategy entirely wrong. And let us all try and work together by a new honest start.

Andy Anderson
Saltcoats

AS a campaigner for independence for over half a century I fully endorse Mike Russell’s article on Saturday and express my irritation at those who apparently seek to undermine the SNP leadership which has so constructively brought us to where we are today.

I remember all too vividly the wilderness years when we were a lunatic fringe – the isolation of people like Winnie Ewing, John McIntyre, Gordon Murray and Billy Wolfe who set about proving that we were capable of good governance, and by God we have proved that in both local government and certainly at Holyrood.

It is preposterous to blame “both votes SNP” for the election of people like Stephen Kerr. The blame lies fairly and squarely with the Tory party’s selection process which put him first on the list in Central Scotland.

Mike’s article emphasises the need for unanimity over the common cause. That is fundamental. By definition a common cause includes all manner of different views, and the most perilous time is when the end is achievable and the differences begin to matter. As a local councillor I have had disagreements with Mike when my constituents’ interests were at odds with party policy, and over the years I have engaged in sometimes bitter squabbles over issues including Nato, social housing, planning, and the critical issue of the layout of tables for a jumble sale.

The most difficult of all was the mashing of neeps for a Burns Supper.

My point is simple: our differences are trivial compared to the future of our nation. Of course we are impatient to achieve it, but do not betray those of us who have campaigned so long and so carefully and patiently by your impatience. The prize is now there for the taking. Do not lose it by creating or causing division among us.

When we are a free nation again we will doubtless have a splendid squabble, but in the interim let us try to unite about the ordinary decency that we expect our nation to exhibit to the rest of the world to which we belong.

KM Campbell
Doune

THIS year’s Sir Humphrey Appleby award for mangling the English language goes to David Frost. No, not the famous one, the one given a peerage and parachuted into the government to hurl abuse across the English Channel.

With regard to the Northern Ireland protocol, he has accused the European Union of legal purism. Taking him seriously – if that’s at all possible – does Frosty really want laws to be less pure, more subjective, open to interpretation? Perhaps he wants treaties between countries to be abandoned altogether and in place a rip-roaring, corporate free-for-all Tory dream of unlimited wealth – for themselves, naturally.

Maybe Frosty should take a few tips from Sir Humphrey, who bent, distorted and manipulated the rules but never broke them.

Mike Herd
Highland