I WISH to write in support of the letter by Jim Taylor in Thursday’s National in which he argued against others that the SNP should withdraw their MPs from Westminster in protest against our share of the budget and the treatment of our principal party.
Others claimed that the SNP should remain to argue Scotland’s case and to participate in the systems of Westminster “democracy”. If you sit under the King’s table you are always going to catch some crumbs, but is this the best you can do?
READ MORE: We can't trust Westminster with Scotland's energy
It was admitted that filibustering was used to give Keir Starmer time to fix it with the Speaker to change procedure to deny the SNP their motion on Gaza. Then a budget announcement that Scotland’s share was only 3.5%. How much clearer can it be that Scotland and our principal representatives are being treated with contempt? How much longer are we prepared to just lie still and allow sand to be kicked into our face?
Jim makes the excellent argument that by withdrawing their MPs from Westminster, the SNP can make a far greater constitutional argument to the world, about the democratic deficit facing our country.
Our representatives could be much better employed lobbying other governments in defiance of the Foreign Office and on our streets rallying our population in support of our desperate need for independence. The rebellion against Thatcher’s poll tax wasn’t won by our opposition MPs! Is was won by the mass mobilisation of our population by direct street action.
READ MORE: Cabinet Office refuses to release 'State of the Union' report
Sadly though, I cannot see our SNP representatives giving up the comfort of their positions in Westminster and Holyrood to get out amongst the rain and our citizens to promulgate the cause of independence they claim as their prime objective. They demonstrate no clear strategy of how to convince the clear majority of our population that independence is the way forward, of how to achieve it or how Scotland can become a much improved place with it!
They are complicit in playing the game at Westminster and with devolution in Holyrood that allows the mainstream media to convince about half our population that they are better off within the Union. And this when we have our despicably immoral and incompetent Tory government and the unrecognisable Labour opposition of Keir Starmer!
Referring to the excellent but harrowing comment by Simon Forrest on February 27 in which he detailed how we allowed our energy resources of first coal and then oil to be taken from us without adequate recompense, then how we are allowing renewables to be taken in the same way, I despair at how our representatives seem to be content with the inadequate crumbs of power they have to affect our destiny. Time for more defiant action.
Campbell Anderson
Edinburgh
JIM Taylor, I wish that withdrawal of the SNP’s MPs from Westminster could trigger your scenario, but their departure would hardly even make the headlines in the UK’s Unionist-supporting media, let alone find its way to the media in other countries.
The LibDems would triumphantly return to the front bench vacated by the SNP. There would be no constitutional crisis. With no written constitution, the UK parliament simply avoids these by adapting its procedures as a situation arises, for example it coped with the recent destabilising sequence of unelected prime ministers and on the SNP’s opposition day debate broke with long-established convention after discussions with the Speaker that lasted only a matter of minutes.
READ MORE: Scotland’s block grant to be ‘lowest since devolution’ - SNP
The SNP’s exposure of the block grant being the lowest ever, as a percentage of UK spending, has been ignored by the media. In fact, in the original article by James Walker a Treasury spokesman had already countered by saying: “The Scottish Government is currently receiving a record £41 billion per year funding settlement from the UK Government – the largest in the history of devolution and one that was further topped up by decisions taken at Autumn Statement.” And for good measure the UK Government added that Scotland receives about 25% more funding per person than equivalent spending in other parts of the UK.
Full-time attendance by MPs isn’t compulsory, so the UK Government would just leave the departed SNP MPs to get on with whatever they were doing outwith Westminster.
READ MORE: ALL Scottish party leaders back The National's Gaza aid fundraiser
The Scottish Parliament would continue with its day job – dealing with devolved matters funded through a fixed set of rules. The departure of the SNP’s MPs from Westminster should have no immediate impact in that area.
Of course UK Government departments would monitor and report on the situation in Scotland’s NHS, police, local government, education etc so that parliament itself could assess and debate the continuing performance of its devolved arm in Holyrood in case it deteriorated and intervention was required.
SNP candidates would have to fight a General Election campaign trying to convince the public that voting for someone who would not be there for the next five years was a better option than voting for any of the candidates who, if elected, would be attending Westminster.
There might be a case for leaving voluntarily to symbolically break the final bond as Scotland was on the verge of regaining its independence.
Until then, the SNP’s MPs must continue to represent the constituents who elected them.
John Jamieson
South Queensferry
FASCINATING article on the “Bottlecelli” mural (Mar 7) telling us what it was made of, who helped to make it, what inspired its creation, complimentary words about Lidl and their recycling scheme ... everything we could want to know ... except... where the hell is it LOCATED!!! The west end of Glasgow is a bit vague for anyone wishing to see it.
Barry Stewart
Blantyre
Editor: ‘Bottlecelli’ can be found at SWG3 at 100 Eastvale Place, 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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel