TODAY’S report on the search for Labour election candidates to fill a “talent gap” is further indication if any was needed that we are a very long way off seeing a Labour government in London, no matter how low Johnson’s popularity sinks.

The remnants of Labour Party members and supporters in Scotland have to realise that they can no longer bolster the party in the south. After his landslide win, Blair needed to fill his cabinet with experienced parliamentarians from Scotland; he needed their talent more than he needed their seats. That situation will not happen now and Labour will not win a General Election without winning in England. Votes for Labour in Scotland will not bring a Labour government to power in London.

READ MORE: Scottish Labour joins Keir Starmer bid to address party's 'talent deficit'

Labour in Scotland must now decide where their loyalty lies. Is their loyalty to a struggling party in the south that is trying to win by emulating the Tory party or should it be to Scotland and the chance of building a better future for all, not just the libertarians that have a chokehold on politics in England?

I look forward to seeing the Labour Party in Scotland joining the Scottish independence movement.
Ni Holmes
St Andrews

I READ with interest Fiona Matheson’s long letter (August 8). It makes an eloquent case for “do nothing”, indeed she believes that the current arrangements whereby the Regional Inshore Fisheries Groups, there are several covering all the coastal areas of Scotland, manages things just fine.

While respecting her view, so well expressed, her postulation denies the facts. These groups are ineffective, they are largely the fox looking after the chickens, being the very same fishermen causing the illegal trawling in Marine Protected Areas (MPAs), “policing” themselves. Non-trawling interests like creel men are largely ignored as are other sustainable options like hand diving.

READ MORE: Fisheries policy should be guided by the existing bodies, not back-door lobbying

These regional groups are fishermen – meaning trawlers – for the trawlers. I come from a long line, excuse the pun, of fishermen. Many generations.

I am long retired but I do recall after the UK Government withdrew the existing, for the best part of 100 years, “no trawl three-mile limit” around the entire coast, members of my family made a killing, in monetary and species terms, over the next three years before we had totally wiped out and destroyed most of the inshore spawning and nursery grounds.

It was ecological vandalism on an epic scale. We all agree, looking backwards, that it was the worst thing possible. Why then did we do it? We all thought: “If I don’t trawl it the other boats will, so why not?” That’s the mindset. It is up to the Government to legislate and police the coastal environment.

Open Seas and the Greens have my full support. It’s time not only to properly protect the MPAs but also bring back the no trawl three-mile limit around the entire coast.

Longer term, it is in the best interests of the fishermen.

John Scobie
Edinburgh

A COUPLE of points in response to the letter in the Sunday National (Fisheries policy should be guided by the existing bodies, not back-door lobbying) referring to a campaign to promote the reinstatement of the three-mile limit, abandoned by a Tory government, which would ban bottom-trawling around Scotland’s coasts.

The letter mentions Open Seas, but my understanding is that the campaign for a petition was by the umbrella body, Our Seas, of which Open Seas is a supporting organisation.

I do not believe that a campaign asking for those with concerns about the health of our seas to contact their local MSPs can justifiably be described as back-door lobbying.

In contrast, an excellent example of the latter would be meetings (25 over four years) between sectoral organisations (such as fish farming) with the former Cabinet secretary, where no minutes of the discussions took place.

My main response is by question – how can any fishery management organisation, which permits bottom dredging, be taken seriously in terms of protecting the marine environment and promoting sustainable fishing?

I agree that the issues of second homes, and affordable housing, are crucial to the wellbeing of local communities.

These issues which have been around for decades are coming to a head now; glacial progress is being made to tackle them.

How are communities to be expected to thrive when young people cannot get local affordable accommodation?

You don’t have to live in such places to understand the problem. The answer is not by fiddling with the planning system – that’s been tried and failed. Land reform and controlling a housing market, which is patently failing, is the answer, which the Government is endlessly circling around.

Roddie Macpherson
Avoch