LAST week, I was pleased to take my nine-year-old son and march with our brothers and sisters in the wider Yes family from Stirling Bridge to Bannockburn battlefield on what was a beautiful and optimistic summer’s day.
As we arrived at the rally, I listened intently to the speeches and appreciated an appeal made by Alyn Smith MP, to those politically affiliated and unaffiliated, when he said: “The SNP does not have a monopoly on independence.”
READ MORE: It’s the collective responsibility of Yes supporters to make marches great
His words reminded me of the diverse tapestry of personalities woven into the movement in 2014. Political voices like Dennis Canavan and Jim Sillars as well as a range of artists, celebrities and musicians played a critical role.
It was unfortunate then, a day after the march, to read in the article “SNP members will have input on independence papers as party commits to national assembly” (June 26) that the SNP only intends to consult its own members on a new prospectus.
Were it to venture beyond its own borders, it would observe disquiet among independence supporters opposed to EU membership and oil and gas employees concerned about a net-zero agenda contained in the newly published paper.
READ MORE: A united front and a show of big hitters will help us win indyref
We cannot afford to alienate our greatest allies and will need all of the 366,000 SNP voters who voted to leave the EU in 2016 and as many of 110,000 North Sea workers who are pro-independence to carry us across the winning line in 2023.
To achieve our goal we must widen our tent pegs and return to the broad-church vision modelled in 2014 rather than lurching to what appears fashionable among the SNP base, which could potentially kill independence stone dead.
Ewan Gurr, Dundee
National Organiser, Sovereignty
THANK you, Neil Mackay, for your fulsome response to my letter of June 28. I won’t go into the semantics of word origin of political parties but will reiterate the point I made to you, Alyn Smith and letter readers.
If you voice vitriol – I refer to the word “scum” directed to Tories during the Bannockburn march – then you demean what is trying to be achieved by alienating those who may, by reasoned persuasion, see independence as the way forward. I also note you do not defend or deny your words that Labour and Liberal Democrats are “all Tories”. By this statement I take it only SNP, Alba, Greens and committed “Aye” and “Yes” supporters are the chosen few – the rest go hang as they are “scum”.
I would direct you to Alyn Smith’s article in The National regarding chants and the desire not to be seen as “nasty Nats” (Vilifying Tory voters will not help Yes win indyref2, Jun 29) and also to his speech at Bannockburn where he declared he would work with anyone, no matter what political persuasion, for the goal of independence.
Will you declare to do the same?
Frieda Burns
Stonehaven
NEIL Mackay (Long Letter, Jun 30) correctly states that Tory is derived from the Irish Gaelic word for thief/outlaw/plunderer.
However, this was not an economic reference. It was an 18th-century sectarian insult used by Liberals to suggest that the English Episcopalian High-Church Conservatives were little different from Irish Catholic plunderers.
In their turn, High-Church Episcopalians insulted Liberals by saying they were little different from the most extreme Scottish Presbyterian Covenanters. These extremists lived mainly in south-west Scotland and were called Whigamores (shortened to Whig). The origin of Whigamore is not clear. One suggestion is that carters in the south-west shouted this at horses and it stuck as a nickname for Covenanters in Galloway.
Councillor Tom Johnston
Cumbernauld
WHEN I listened to Nicola Sturgeon’s announcement to Holyrood on Tuesday, it was as if the curtains opened and let light into a darkened room.
Her tactic as to the route we take for the achieving of a referendum astounded and made clear to me the way forward on the issue.
Its basis was the democratic right to make our own decision as to our future in a voluntary union of nations while still leaving open to question of a negotiated Section 30 order. At a stroke it dismissed talk by the Unionists of “wildcat” or “illegal” actions.
READ MORE: Yes AHEAD in new poll on support for Scottish independence
What must accompany the now legal attempt is the building of a renewed, varied movement, better in so many ways than that of 2014.
Apart from the political condition of the UK at present, much more will happen in the coming months which will create other opportunities favourable to our fight.
It will be a win-win campaign (in terms of winning a ref2). If the legal attempt fails and the Section 30 also, our movement will have prepared the ground for a continuation into the next stage, which will be the 2024 (or one before it) General Election to be a de facto plebiscite.
The gates are now wide open, my only regret is that because of my age and fitness my participation will be a lot less than I would wish.
Bobby Brennan
Glasgow
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 here