I AGREE with Roz Foyer (‘Workers will be scarred for years to come’, Sep 4).
The Scottish Government must impose a wealth tax on the super-rich! As well as raising much-needed revenue for local services, this is the type of bold and radical measure which will put Labour on the back foot and give the SNP a real chance of retaining power in 2026.
Roz is correct to criticise John Swinney and Shona Robison for their timidity on this issue, but why is she not slating Anas Sarwar and Jackie Baillie for their silence as Labour deliver devastating Tory austerity despite their promises to the contrary? Why is she not holding them to account?
The staggering hypocrisy of the Scottish Labour leadership since the election fully justifies their former colleague Neil Findlay’s description of them in his book Hope & Despair as a “bunch of snakes”!
READ MORE: Scottish Labour charge more than cost of Winter Fuel Payment for party
The context for his comment was that apparently there was a meeting between Jackie Baillie, Ian Murray, Angela Rayner, Lord Willie Haughey and other wealthy donors who said they would not donate to Scottish Labour unless Richard Leonard was replaced by Anas Sarwar.
Richard was then called by Starmer, who asked him to stand down. Sarwar and his supporters never accepted his defeat in the leadership contest and did everything to make sure Richard failed. Like Corbyn, a decent, honourable man has been deposed by a bunch of snakes.
Alan Woodcock
Dundee
I AM getting really tired reading the reactionary and negative letters regarding the SNP conference. I had friends attend it and their take was upbeat and positive. The only downside was not having Nicola Sturgeon there as leader.
The elderly lost the referendum for us and the reactionary right-wingers who voted Alba or supported the negativity surrounding the transgender policy contributed to us losing the General Election.
Added to that was the sad, shocking demise of Nicola Sturgeon. She led us into so many successful elections and we lost the one she didn’t lead. Let us be honest and admit it! We underestimate the following she had, particularly among the younger electorate. They will be the independence generation, so let’s have more progressive policies, not fewer.
PS it would be interesting if those writing letters gave their ages as well as their names and residence areas. Why not?
Kate Reid (aged 78)
Edinburgh
LYING awake in early hours the stark truth crossed my mind – united we rise, divided we fall. Those allegedly seeking independence who are quick and vociferous to disparage others in the movement might well be divisive individuals seeking failure of the independence movement.
In fact even more so than the openly declared supporters of Unionist parties.
Roddy MacPherson in Tuesday’s edition raised the prospect that there might well be fifth columnists within the movement. I do not doubt he is correct!
Recent years have seen a steady fall in newspaper readership alongside a rapid rise in social media use and influence. It would surely therefore be logical to find those same devious individuals lurking and adding their influence at every opportunity on social media pages.
Tom Gray
Braco
TONY Blair took office just eight years after Thatcher’s water privatisation. Labour then had nearly two decades to reverse this most heinous and damaging of political treacheries.
But Blair was rather busy taking us into an illegal invasion in the Middle East. Not to mention opening doors to the private sector in both the NHS and schools infrastructure.
Selling off arguably our most vital natural resource into the hands of those only interested in profit was only ever going to have the outcome we see (smell) clearly today.
And here we are, just a few short weeks after Labour was eased into their very large majority by a despised, dysfunctional Tory Party, and Labour’s idea for sorting out the horrors of mass waterway despoilment in England and Wales is to be “tough on bonuses of water bosses”.
Let’s be clear. The Tories, whose high priestess of privatisation gave away this resource for profit, already had wrist-slapping over bonuses in the pipeline – no pun intended.
So, it’s no change on keeping children in poverty with the two-child benefit cap. It’s no change on the failed approach to Gaza or any attempt to mend the UK’s horribly damaged international reputation.
It’s no change on curbing bankers’ bonuses and – in reality – it’s no change on dealing with England and Wales’s devastating and embarrassing water crisis.
Regarding muttered background noise about potential jail time for the profiteers – we’ll believe it when we see it. But mainly – and pun intended here – just more shaping the turd.
Amanda Baker
Edinburgh
SOME Unionists, when attacking the stated aim of independence supporters, often like to use the emotive term “separation” rather than “independence”.
However, they never tell us where they would find the money to pay the enormous cost of cutting a deep, wide channel across Britain from the Solway Firth to the North Sea – the only way that Scotland could be physically “separated” from the rest of Britain.
What large numbers of Scots wish to see is economic and political “independence” from the rest of Britain – by no means the same as “separation”. They wish to remain on good terms with their closest neighbours but to have the freedom to organise their own lives in their own way without this being controlled by someone else.
Peter Swain
Dunbar
APROPOS of P Davidson of Falkirk’s letter concerning the tale of the cold wee boy and his jaikit, I was reminded of a story an elderly retired schoolteacher which an aunt of mine used to tell.
Wee Jimmy had written a story for his teacher containing the line: “Ah wish ah hudny goed.”. The teacher’s response was: “Poor grammar, Jimmy! What should it be?” After some consideration, Jimmy’s resourceful reply was, “Ah wish tae goad ah hudny went!”
Chris Foster
Kelso
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