IT is traditional in politics to talk about what you will achieve in the first 100 days in office. It’s a common timeframe, to allow a new government to show what direction it is taking and how it has made an immediate impact.
For “Scottish” Labour we haven’t had to wait 100 days. The “Scottish” Labour MPs supported the removal of the winter heating allowance from pensioners in Scotland, ignoring the fact that if any area of these islands needs a help with the cost of heating homes, it’s energy-rich Scotland.
We shouldn’t need to help our pensioners with heating costs. In a market with massive over-supply, you would expect costs to be as low as they can be.
READ MORE: All Under One Banner Scottish independence march postponed
Unfortunately, because we are shackled to the energy market in England, which uses our excess energy, we have to help subsidise its energy costs rather than help our own pensioners. This is a political choice, not a necessity.
The 37 “Scottish” Labour MPs, for all their supposed influence at the heart of the latest British government, couldn’t influence their actual boss Mr Starmer (below) to end the two-child cap.
This despite their pretendy boss in Holyrood supporting the repeal of this policy. Choosing to keep children in poverty rather than support them out of poverty is again a political choice, not a necessity.
As if keeping the most vulnerable in poverty wasn’t enough, the 37 “Scottish” Labour MPs couldn’t use their alleged influence to stop £800 million in funding being cut that the previous government has promised for a project at the University of Edinburgh.
This was funding for a state-of-the-art supercomputer which would have been 50 times faster than any current supercomputer in Britain. The University of Edinburgh had already spent £31m building infrastructure for this supercomputer.
This project would have put Scotland at the forefront of AI technology in Britain, benefitting Scottish industry, public services and society. Other projects have not had their budgets cut – so again, a political choice, not a necessity.
So the direction for “Scottish” Labour is clear – continue with Tory austerity measures. The immediate impact is to keep Scotland’s vulnerable, young and old, poorer.
As for the future – cutting funding for high-tech supercomputers isn’t laying a solid foundation.
It will be interesting to see in what direction our 37 “Scottish” Labour MPs steer in the remainder of the first 100 days of the latest British Government. Let’s hope their impact isn’t as damaging as it has been so far for Scotland.
Having our elected representatives at the “heart” of a feeble British Westminster government is not a necessity. The people of Scotland can make a different choice.
Paul Malloy, Greenock
Perhaps Clark’s letter (We could have our own team once again, Jul 24) said more than the SNP government can face up to. If what he says is correct, then it wouldn’t be too much for them to establish an Olympic Committee and enter a Scottish team again.
This would put an end to the “Team GB” that the BBC is so fond of talking about. We certainly have enough athletes of our own and, regardless of whether we have or not, joining the nations who only have their participation and the occasional medals, such as Ireland or Algeria (in gymnastics), would do us no harm.
While on this subject, it is possible that lack of such impetus resulted in the recent election result.
READ MORE: Scottish students discover grades as SQA releases exam results
Had the SNP shown the Scottish people how different the future could be then they might have attracted more votes.
For example, they could have gone ahead with the planned Scottish energy company which they planned years ago, with the result it might have prevented Labour’s proposal to steal Scotland’s renewable energy with no benefits to the people.
They could have enacted proposed changes to the Tory council tax. All the above and much more was possible within the restrictions of devolution but the Scottish Government showed no spirit. They did nothing and as a result they got Labour into power at Westminster. More of the same will do them no good in 2026!
Paul Gillon Leven, Fife
With the breakdown of order in several places in England caused by right-wing agitators, why aren’t the police using the tactics used in the 1980s industrial disputes?
Could it be the high-ups in government have more sympathy for right-wing troublemakers than for workers trying to protect their jobs?
Drew Reid, Falkirk
Alex Salmond’s (below) great article in Saturday’s edition of The National (SNP took country from debt to development by axing PFI) indicates his financial understanding and skills, exactly what Scotland desperately needs right now.
Tom Gray, Braco
Those on the right suggesting there is justification for neo-fascist racially motivated rioting are echoing Donald Trump’s (below) “good people on both sides” madness of Charlottesville.
We must instead take a long hard look at, for example, the clear correlation between areas that have attracted the hate riots and those that voted strongly for Brexit and all its inherent xenophobia.
Then, instead of hinting that there is some sort of rationalisation for the violence because of the horrific murders of three innocent girls, we can be a little more precise.
We need to acknowledge the years of vitriolic right-wing rhetoric, including the nonsense over small boats, deportations to Rwanda and the blaming of migrants for many of the ills that should rightly be placed at the door of austerity.
READ MORE: Mhairi Black's viral fascism speech resurfaces as far-right riots continue
We must be honest about the fact it is this, over time, that has whipped up the dangerous neo-fascists who are always waiting in the wings and created just the right circumstances for the current disgusting violence.
Hate must not be justified.
Amanda Baker, Edinburgh
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 here