UK bid to prevent talks with foreign officials may come back to the UN

Although this legal opinion is new to Alba, it may not be new to the Scottish Government.

Like most governments, the Scottish Government obtains legal opinion from a number of sources in confidence so does not publish that legal opinion.

It is good to see that Alba are seeking this kind of advice but as published it does not reveal any advice on how the Supreme Court would deal with these matters and the possible outcomes.

The route to the International Court of Justice is well documented.

Before embarking on that route, any internal legal processes through parliament and the courts must have been attempted and there has to be a clear majority in favour of independence.

The electoral system imposed by the UK Government on the Holyrood parliament was designed to prevent the legislature ever having a majority of members in favour of Scottish independence.

It is absolutely clear that all routes through parliament and the courts have been exhausted – in fact the UK Government will bring in new legislation or change existing law, even retrospectively, to foil attempts through the courts.

The position on the demand for independence is unclear. Opinion polls are the only available source as the UK Government will neither release its own data nor permit the Scottish Parliament to conduct a referendum.

The Supreme Court has ruled that Scotland is not a colony, in fact it has gone beyond colonisation as Scotland has been subsumed into England as all matters are now dealt with by departments directly under the control of a UK/English government.

Although the Scottish Government has no input into deciding UK Government policies and spending, it is forced to contribute an arbitrary share (calculated by the UK Government) of the cost and debt incurred by the UK Government in the operation of these departments.

There is little doubt that in the light of the actions of the UK Government, Scotland can present a very good case for being added to the United Nations list of non-self-governing territories.

The Scottish Government now needs to persuade a United Nations member state to take forward the case for referral to the International Court of Justice on behalf of the people of Scotland, Perhaps this explains the recent draconian attempts by the UK Government to prevent the Scottish Parliament debating anything that is not a devolved matter and any member of the Scottish Government meeting a representative or minister of another country except through and under the supervision of a UK Government department.
John Jamieson
South Queensferry

MUCH as I respect a journalist with the undoubted talent of The Times’s Mr Kieran Andrews, who hails from these sunlit uplands, his machinations regarding former first minister Nicola Sturgeon’s press conference at Holyrood really take the proverbial biscuit, and verge into the realms of fantasy.

The former First Minister made a statement regarding her arrest and expressed her continued innocence of any wrongdoing, then opened to questions. Several questions which would have required an answer that would involve treading into the police investigation were deftly deflected. When asked if she thought he husband was innocent, she rightly explained that she can only speak for herself, and so did not violate any police investigation by answering direct questions.

Mr Andrews used the former first minister’s answer, then restructured it in his piece in The Times to claim that Nicola Sturgeon had refused to defend her husband, which is factually incorrect. Such is the fear that the non-supportive media outlets believe we readers do not notice the manipulation.

I am not surprised that many of my friends and family are very surprised that we Scots are very interested in independence based on these types of misspeaks or misreports.

Perhaps it is worthy of another novel.
Alistair Ballantyne
Angus

THE UK Government has tabled its long-threatened Economic Activity of Public Bodies (Overseas Matters) Bill, or anti-boycott bill. If passed, this toxic piece of legislation will prevent public bodies, like local councils or universities, from cutting ties with companies engaged in human rights abuses or environmental destruction in any foreign country. This legislation will stifle a wide range of campaigns for justice, erode local democracy and present a threat to freedom of expression.

Although this bill affects many campaigns for justice, the Government has made clear that its specific target is campaigns in support of Palestinian rights. Within the bill, they have made a special unique exception for Israel, granting it immunity from accountability not extended to any other state in the world.

While the bill allows a government minister to grant permission to public bodies to divest from companies involved in rights abuses by some states e.g Russia for its invasion of the Ukraine, this singling-out clause says that no future government can give permission to divest from a company because of actions in support of Israel’s rights violations, including within the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

The bill was released on the day Israeli forces killed at least five Palestinians in Jenin adding to the more than 170 killed in the West Bank and East Jerusalem since the beginning of 2023. It was released on the day the Israeli government announced plans to continue expansion of illegal settlements, with nearly 5000 more units about to be approved. The UK Government is on the wrong side of history, just as it was in the 1980s when it introduced a similar law in an attempt to prevent local councils taking action to divest from South African apartheid.
B McKenna
Dumbarton

WHY are so many “experts” unable to see that the Bank of England raising interest rates actually contributes to inflation and is keeping it unnecessarily high?

Back in the late 1970s when neoliberal dogma took over, it was assumed that inflation was caused by too much demand in part caused by people having too much money thanks to excessive wage demands. It may have been the case then, though that is far from certain, but clearly is not true today. For most people, the purchasing power of their earnings has either stagnated or gone backwards since that time. Only the wealthy have seen the opposite and it is well known that they tend to spend proportionally less of their income.

The B of E has wholly embraced this dogma which says the tool to use to combat inflation is to raise interest rates so people have less to spend. But, as one commentator put it, if your only tool is a hammer, then every problem becomes a nail.

Raising interest rates in our present circumstances adds to inflation because not only mortgage holders feel the pain but landlords’ costs go up and these are usually passed on to renters; because many businesses rely on borrowing so if rates go up they often – especially the big ones raise their prices.

Faced with this rise in the cost of living, ordinary people try to protect their purchasing power by asking for wage rises but the B of E then tells them they should just accept they will be poorer. Very few wage rises have kept pace with inflation yet many employers pass on these increased costs.

Why is the B of E so keen to inflict so much pain on so many? Is it part of the neoliberal policy to redistribute from the many to the few? Is it because they want to cause a recession?
Andrew M Fraser
Inverness

WHAT is the value of independence?

How much value do we each put on it?

If folk don’t want to go down the James Connolly route, who was executed for his part in getting independence for Ireland, then the route of the great advocate for Norway’s independence would be a natural choice.

Fridtjof Wedel-Jarlsberg Nansen is listed as “an explorer, scientist, diplomat and humanitarian, he weighed in heavily for dissolving the union with Sweden, and personally travelled to the United Kingdom, where he successfully lobbied for British support for Norway’s independence movement”.

Successfully? I guess it wasn’t resources that the Brits wanted that were at stake.

Is it just a policy or collection of policies and if these are not accepted, then it’s “oh well, I’ll just go on doing the job I have?”

We know that the opposition don’t want a debate or arguments they would lose, so instead of listening to what we are voting for, they try to tell us what we are voting for according to their own agenda.

That is so far from our voices that the connection is broken.

Then what value do we put on independence, what personal security would we trade for it?

Across the world, country after country value their independence, celebrate it, fought for it, argued for it.

It is important because the independence of each of us is being devalued chunk by chunk, through loss of rights, loss of having a say in our own resources, loss of having a say on having a say.

Is making do with these losses the best we can expect?

Not for me.
Brian Powell
St Andrews

SUCH a letter on Wednesday (Voters in Catalonia are punishing parties’ lack of action on indy).

With eyes that do not see, with ears that hear, but do not listen, with minds that are closed to change, are we to suffer the same as Catalonia?

I salute you, Jordi Oriola Foich.
Selma Rahman
Edinburgh

RUNRIG. OK guys, you’ve had a well-deserved break. But there’s still much to give for Scots and Scotland.

And your immense talent and patriotism can deliver it.

Please come back for the final push to our de facto referendum. Please remind us of the value of our being Scots. Please stir our hearts to deliver the destiny our country deserves.

Scotland needs Runrig more now than ever before.

One reunion tour. It’s a lot to ask. But there’s hunners o’ thoosands of us asking.

Please! You can make the difference.
Jim Taylor
Edinburgh