CAN Scotland afford another year like 2022? This is a pertinent question to politicians from all paries, because 2022 was a political year like no other.

Gift-wrapped from Westminster, we got three prime ministers, four chancellors, five education secretaries, three home secretaries, plenty of political shenanigans, dodgy deals, crashing the economy and much more – begging the question can we afford to continue this relationship much longer.

At the last Westminster election, Scotland soundly rejected the Conservatives, yet we are saddled with their austerity policies.

Just how many people would have sat home alone, cold and hungry on Christmas Day if it were not for the enormous generosity and goodwill of charities?

READ MORE: 2022 to be warmest year on record for the UK, Met Office says

As demonstrated in the Scottish Budget statement by John Swinney when he increased the higher rates of income tax, there are huge differences between the economic policies and priorities of Holyrood and those of Westminster.

A couple of examples being that the Scottish Government does not believe in taxing the sick through prescription charges and that they have reached out to struggling families with the introduction and roll-out of the Scottish Child Payment.

Westminster still has reserved powers over energy, which includes domestic/commercial energy costs which are of crucial importance to households and businesses.

The Westminster government must rein in the energy companies’ profits. It is an outrage that those who have worked and contributed to the economy all their days are now, in their later years, wary of putting their heating on as it will eat up more than half of their state pension! The ways of Westminster are no way for a socially just society going forward into 2023. We simply cannot afford another year like 2022.

Catriona C Clark

Banknock, Falkirk

I WAS critical of Nicola Sturgeon in a recent letter I wrote to The National because she had referred to recent wage offers being “fair” and I can’t accept that any wage offer to essential workers which reduces their real income could be considered “fair” in any sense.

I must, however, give praise to Nicola for meeting with trade unions and attempting to address their needs, something which stands in sharp contrast with the conduct of the UK Government.

The Royal College of Nursing has taken the view that the offer made to nurses in Scotland was not sufficient for them to agree to settle, so the Scottish Government must continue to negotiate and search for ways to further support our health service workers to maintain their living standards, and to widen the gap between their conduct and the behaviour of the Tories at Westminster and Labour in Wales.

Of course, this is not easy, with the UK Government grabbing our natural resources and restricting our national income, but this is a crisis which needs special attention and the Scottish Government must be prepared to start thinking outside the box.

Graeme McCormick’s idea of a land tax is one that needs exploring. Such a tax has three advantages: a) it can’t be evaded if we do it right; b) It can bring in substantial revenue at very little or no cost to the average taxpayer; and c) It will fall heavily on the super-rich, who have been using our land for ages as an asset often to help them evade tax.

It is true that it would take a little time to collect this revenue and the need is urgent, but taking steps to address the revenue issue will help the government find short-term temporary finance to fill the gap, and it will show these workers, who are also voters, that the Scottish Government is listening to them and is working to help them.

The Scottish Government has done well so far. They must maintain the initiative and drive forward in a leading position, because the UK Government’s strategy on this will fail and when it is eventually forces to pay more to the nurses and other workers, the Scottish Government will pick up the Barnett consequentials.

Andy Anderson

Ardrossan

THERE is no denying that the figures for A&E waiting times are shocking, as are waiting lists for appointments. But this is not just happening in NHS Scotland, it is the same or worse the length and breadth of Britain.

%image('9505798', type="article-full", alt="Who would Douglas Ross and Anas Sarwar be happy with as a replacement for Health Secretary Humza Yousaf?")

Yet Douglas Ross and his millionaire socialist chum Anas Sarwar want Health Secretary Humza Yousaf sacked. Where would the First Minister find a replacement that would appease Dumb and Dumber? And where is the much-needed magic wand coming from? Surely it would have been used by now if it existed – it is pantomime season after all.

Robert McCaw

Renfrew

I READ further claims yesterday that the English and Welsh NHS was “the world’s first universal public health service”. The facts are rather different. It had a Scottish precursor, the Highlands and Islands Medical Service (HIMS) founded in 1913 by a committee headed by Sir John Dewar, and it was undoubtedly the world’s first public health service, where professional fees were kept to a minimum and people could still get treatment even if they were unable to pay.

READ MORE: Unionists divided on Scottish gender reform amid independence concerns

It started with a cadre of trained doctors and nurses recruited for areas where there were no medical services and gradually incorporated hospitals, or founded new ones, and even created its own air ambulance service in 1933.

It was hugely successful and was incorporated into NHS Scotland in 1948. At that time the NHS in England and Wales was deemed to be universal, but NHS Scotland was not, as half of its landmass had already been covered by HIMS for 35 years.

Bruce Moglia

via email