“I HAVE no problem with bypassing Holyrood” stated Douglas Ross to a fringe meeting at the Conservative & Unionist Party Conference in Manchester over the weekend. He would prefer Westminster run Scotland fully again.
It is understand that Mr Ross would prefer not to have a Scottish Parliament, but we have one, and how ironic, as Mr Ross is now in the same situation as the independence-supporting MPs in Westminster.
All parties in Scotland would prefer to be able to make the changes needed to fully support the little guy, as opposed to supporting the laundering of money through the London financial industry, as exposed by the Panama papers and yesterday’s revelation the Pandora papers.
READ MORE: Douglas Ross: 'I have no problem bypassing Scottish Government'
Douglas Ross says that the Tories are the party of “working Scotland”, yet I hear that the Joseph Rowntree Foundation are highly critical of the removal of the £20 Universal Credit uplift, increases in National Insurance, amid the cost of fuel and gas etc with winter fast approaching.
Mr Ross’s statement is an actual affront to the Scottish Parliament. Wouldn’t this be viewed as a contempt of the UK Parliament should it be uttered in Westminster?
Yes, I think Mr Ross is on the fringe of the Conservative & Unionist party and on the fringe of Scottish Politics, no matter how loudly he shouts.
Oh and my Covid passport works fine now, a few issues over the weekend.
Try, try and try again…..
Alistair Ballantyne
Birkhill, Angus
THE Pandora Papers confirm what we already knew: that significant amounts of tax are avoided by keeping financial transactions outside this country. In some cases the owner of the property is impossible to identify.
This means more tax has to be paid by the rest of us.
A first step towards fairness is this: the title deeds to all land and structures in Scotland must, by law, be held by an individual or organisation which is located within the jurisdiction of Scottish law.
READ MORE: Pandora Papers data leak exposes secret wealth of billionaires and world leaders
Non-residents could still have an interest in Scottish assets but would have to hold these through a Scotland-based company. That company can be held accountable
to the government and local authorities for statutory responsibilities such as taxes, keeping the property safe and in reasonable condition, mutual repairs, licensing (such as for holiday letting), and annual accounts (if the property is used for trading).
That company ought to be required to identify its ultimate owner, wherever in the world they may live.
If the company failed to comply with the statutory requirements an ultimate sanction would be the compulsory sale of the property.
To allow time for adjustment this law would take effect from (say) January 1 2026.
If it were to lead to a lowering of property prices, this would disadvantage some but introduce social and economic benefits to many.
I can see no reason why every MSP will not support this proposal.
Norman Braidwood
Edinburgh
JOANNA Cherry, like others, mentions the lack of Scottish content in Sir Keir Starmer’s speech to the UK Labour conference in the far south of England (Starmer might have to say yes to indyref2 if he wants the keys to No 10, Oct 1).
READ MORE: Joanna Cherry: Labour must decide if this Union is a hostage situation
Sir Keir is well aware that the Conservative posters across England at the next UK election will have a giant picture of Nicola Sturgeon with a wee Keir Starmer peeping out of her handbag – a simple re-run of the 2015 England-wide, Tory, anti-Jock posters, which featured Alex Salmond with a little Ed Milliband keeking out of his breast pocket.
Sir Keir has to bow to current strong, right-wing English nationalism by carefully avoiding any Labour link to the Scottish Question. And what better way to kick Scotland into the long grass than through a commission led by Gordon Brown?
Councillor Tom Johnston
Cumbernauld
THE latest scandalous revelation is that the convicted murderer Wayne Couzens had in the past been on duty with an all-areas pass in the Commons. The speaker, Lindsay Hoyle, has now been reported as asking for an urgent meeting with the police “to discuss how this person could have been deemed suitable for deployment here”.
Here? HERE? It is sadly typical of the man’s breed that his request did not end with “deployment anywhere”. The House of “Commons”? Aye, right. Reasons for getting out of this putrid Union ... oh, damn, I’ve lost count.
Ian Duff
Inverness
MAY I respectfully suggest that Mr A Ballantyne needs to calm himself down (Bank chief’s quip about challenges ahead was not funny, Oct 2). I thought the “swarm of locusts” comment was rather good in the context in which it was made, and not meant to be invested with all the miscellaneous baggage attached to it by Mr Ballantyne.
Alan Bell
Edinburgh
I HAVE a dream!
In it, I see Boris made to visit Scotland, and taken – with only the clothes he stands up in and the money in his pocket – to live in a minimally furnished, damp, neglected, single end in a poor part of Glasgow.
He is then forced to apply for Universal Credit, beg for an advance loan while he waits for it to be processed, and has to start paying it back off the amount he eventually gets. A couple of months seem to be enough to see him grovelling for release from this life of dire poverty.
Can someone please wake me up from this impossible dream?
P Davidson
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