SIR Keir Starmer’s claim that Labour are “the true party of English patriotism” denies the party’s origins in Scotland and underlines the real need for England’s independence and an end to the Union. Westminster, already the government for England, cannot function as the government of a United Kingdom, because of a very real conflict of interests.
Let us therefore consider how soon the United Kingdom could be dissolved and England, Scotland, Wales and a united Ireland be formed. Each nation has been independent in the past and has its own parliament building or assembly, England at Westminster, Scotland in Edinburgh, Wales in Cardiff, and Northern Ireland in Belfast, where decisions could be taken about their nationhood.
READ MORE: Keir Starmer says Labour are the 'true party of English patriotism'
With the full levers of government, each nation would be free to prosper and determine their futures and their relationship as neighbours, which could improve substantially, in the way Nordic countries already work in harmony.
The Republic of Ireland already benefits from being a small nation in the European Union, which Northern Ireland is now benefitting from with their free movement agreements. With a Sinn Fein First Minister,there is, perhaps, a better opportunity for a united Ireland to be given consideration.
Scotland has, of course, the strongest case for independence of the four nations, but I believe that all would benefit from this constitutional change and overcome the log jam which is currently before us.
Robert A J Moodie
Kingsbarns, Fife
IT’S right that the English should be proud of who they are, their heritage and culture. Given that, they must also recognise Scottishness and that Scotland is a separate country from England with a different culture and heritage to England.
It also needs to be recognised that the four nations that make up the UK are in a voluntary Union and as such have the right to leave that Union and once again be independent nations.
READ MORE: Parties warned against 'blurring lines between Englishness and Britishness'
England may be denying these rights, but it needs to prepare for the break-up of the UK and start negotiating with those nations that want to leave in order for a smooth transition on both sides. Forcing a country to remain in the Union against the wishes of the people will not go well for England.
In the case of Scotland, few want to have bad relations with England in an independent Scotland, but as long as Westminster keeps denying Scotland’s democratic rights, resentments will grow. Forcing any one of the four nations to remain governed by England will in the end fail.
One only has to look at the countries of the British empire who are now free of British (English) rule, despite Westminster’s efforts to stop them. By fighting against the democratic rights of the people of a country, Westminster will in the end always be the loser. Better to work with these countries to bring about solutions satisfactory to both sides.
Sheila Le Mottee
via thenational.scot
I HAVE to ask members of the Scottish Green Party one thing. Namely, do they realise just how much the Bute House Agreement has cost the SNP?
Although the Gender Recognition Reform Act was blocked by Westminster, it has cost the SNP its party unity, its membership has fallen and its support in the polls has also fallen thanks to giving support to this “Green” policy.
READ MORE: Will the SNP push the Greens out of government before they jump?
Furthermore, Patrick Harvie also intervened in the SNP leadership contest, threatening to walk away from the Holyrood government unless his party got the leader they wanted to see in charge of the SNP. Indeed his co-leader has gone on record to say that “independence isn’t a deal breaker” if they were asked to work with a Unionist party in government.
Now because of emission targets the Scottish Green Party members want to break up the current coalition. What is not known is by how much the carbon emissions targets would have been missed. Is it by a few percentage points or by a lot? That is something which needs to be considered. Furthermore, instead of blaming the SNP for this, should members of the Scottish Green Party not be asking sharp questions of their own MSPs? After all, I know what collective responsibility means.
Despite all of this, I have continued with my SNP membership and support. Indeed, I will continue to do so. Why, you may ask? The reason being that three generations of my family worked in the Scottish steel industry, and an aunt farms near Rosyth. I am only too aware of what Scotland and her people mean to the Unionist parties. To be wooed when votes are needed, only to be thrown to the wolves when English seats are at risk.
I know that to create a fairer, better, greener Scotland, we MUST have independence and as quickly as possible. Perhaps instead of asking how committed the SNP are to independence maybe, and especially given what Lorna Slater has said, people should be asking that of the Scottish Green Party?
From Tuesday morning’s headlines a Unionist paper has a columnist suggesting readers join the Scottish Green Party to vote against the Bute House Agreement and derail the SNP and the cause of Scottish independence. Will any member of the Scottish Greens please explain what steps are being taken to prevent this from happening?
Andrew Haddow
Glasgow
IN his letter of April 22, Brian Lawson writes: “At the 2021 Scottish Parliament election 2,706,683 people voted.” Brian has clearly made the mistake, as I did, of accepting the figure that is on the Wikipedia entry regarding that election.
When I couldn’t make sense of some of the numbers given by Wikipedia I decided to check other sources – the 2021 election results on the Scottish Parliament website and the various regional declarations. The total number of valid votes was actually 2,706,761 for the constituencies and 2,712,794 for the list.
Michael Follon
via email
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