THANK you for publishing such a wide range of letters in your excellent paper.
I hope the SNP leadership reads and acknowledges the passion and commitment that your regular and not-so-regular readers convey in their contributions to your letters pages.
I myself am in the latter category, and I salute the gallant few who make regular contributions.
It is in that light that I am motivated, as we have entered the tenth anniversary year of Scotland’s year of shame, 2014, when 55% of our residents voted against their own independence!
We know, of course, that that failure was in large part the direct responsibility of the then leadership who presented an unconvincing case whereupon Scotland could be independent but at the same time, would rely on the Bank of England and the UK Treasury to run its fiscal policy!
A naïve positioning – and a gift to our opponents, as it undoubtedly lost us the vote.
It is incredible to read in the current SNP currency leaflet, issued only in the past few weeks, by the SNP-owned Yes.Scot website, and available to your readers, that the party, under the current leadership today, is still advocating “sharing” the UK pound sterling until an as-yet-undefined time when they will – or worse, might – issue a Scottish currency.
Let me be clear, I want independence yesterday.
We could have had it had the SNP leadership in 2014 had a proper strategy on currency and a vision and the ambition to articulate just how profoundly being our own currency issuer would have transformed Scotland for the better. A missed opportunity.
Sharing sterling was never going to convince anyone.
So what now in 2024?
I have three New Year’s resolutions to suggest to our current SNP leadership.
The first is to commit to being capable and ready to issue our own Scottish currency on day one of independence.
You may know that 95% of payments today are not in paper notes nor coin – they are electronic, by debit card, direct debit, bank direct credits and credit cards.
The Scottish Government needs to start planning for our own interbank settlement capability now.
The idea of relying on the UK Treasury and Bank of England to facilitate payments upon an independent Scotland’s behalf – even only for days/weeks after independence – is a folly of imaginable proportions. Imaginable because I can just see the shenanigans of the UK in such a controlling position. To think they will be an honest broker – as the current SNP leadership appears to believe – is an act of continuing naïvety beyond my belief.
The second New Year’s resolution is to adopt Graeme McCormick’s proposals for introducing a land tax. As Andy Anderson (Letters, Sunday National, December 31) so eloquently puts it, this is a win for the SNP whether or not the legislation – if approved by the Scottish Parliament – is enacted or not. But were it enacted, it would have overwhelming support across the Scottish electorate.
In a country where 50% or thereabouts of private land is owned by less than 500 people, let’s tax them until their offshore accounts are emptied. If it were challenged by Westminster or the UK Supreme Court, that would play well into the independence support.
The third SNP New Year’s resolution I would suggest is “get belligerent”.
I agree with Iain Bruce (Letters, Sunday National, December 31) that the SNP should, by policy, start disrupting every vote in Westminster at every opportunity by using whichever archaic procedure they can muster. The objective being to cause the maximum disruption within the rules. There is, after all, very little benefit to Scotland happening there, quite the reverse actually. Belligerence should be the rallying call in that place!
Oh, and finally, no more calls for a referendum.
We will never be “allowed” one ever again.
So let’s get real on “asking”.
Majority of votes at any election and we take it to the United Nations.
Ian Stewart
Uig
I APPLAUD former Scottish Police Federation chief Joe Grant for handing back his MBE and absolutely support his reasons for doing so!
Sadly, many recipients of these tainted baubles do not consider the symbolism of accepting awards that by their very name attempt to glorify the shameful story of Britain’s genocidal empire!
Drew Macleod
Wick
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