WHILE Anas Sarwar continues to make out that he has the ear of Prime Minister Starmer and thus has influence in UK Government decision-making, especially with regard to reflecting Scottish opinion, the facts tell a different story.
The abolition of the Winter Fuel Payment for the majority of pensioners, including those in Scotland due to the sudden late withdrawal of previously allocated funding, and the refusal to remove the “two-child cap” in spite of Labour messaging in Scotland prior to the General Election, demonstrate that any such influence is misleadingly only token.
READ MORE: Scottish Labour candidate sees off rivals in tight by-election victory over SNP
With the assassinations of those claimed to be the leaders of Hamas and Hezbollah, the obliteration of most of Gaza and now areas of Lebanon, plus the slaughter of nearly 50,000 defenceless civilians, there is no longer even the slenderest of excuses for the continued mass killings.
Were the release of the hundred remaining hostages the main priority of the Israeli government, the massacres would cease, Palestinians held in Israeli prisons without trial would be increasingly freed on condition of the release of Israeli hostages, and the huge volume of desperately needed aid would no longer be prevented from reaching the millions of tragically suffering civilians. It is not “war” when one side has overwhelming military and intelligence advantage and has wiped out the leadership of its enemy; it is in effect calculated annihilation.
READ MORE: Anas Sarwar's chief of staff appointed new Scottish Labour role
If still we hear nothing but platitudes from PM Starmer over this human catastrophe with no serious immediate action to suspend all weapons-related sales to Israel, as well as military and intelligence support, then the Scottish public will know that the words of London Labour’s puppet in Scotland, in continuing to falsely pretend that our views will be acted upon by the UK Government at Westminster, are simply a cynical con.
Stan Grodynski
Longniddry, East Lothian
RUSSELL Findlay is not the only politician to seek political advantage from our penal system (Andrew Tickell: A Tory with attitude: What Findlay gets wrong about law and order, Nov 10). Politicians from all parties do it. How long, for instance, before politicians begin their annual complaints about prisoners having “luxury” Christmas meals that their constituents cannot afford?
Prisoners are an easy group to criticise because there is no-one to speak up for them. Prisoner advocacy groups are ignored or given only scant attention by the media. Prisoners themselves face huge difficulties trying to form any sort of collective voice.
READ MORE: Scottish Tories take three seats from SNP in by-elections
Very few prisoners have the right to vote in elections. No administration of any Scottish Government has consulted with prisoners on a proposal affecting prisoners. All other consultations do make some effort to consult with the parties most affected. When it comes to prisoners, however, change is made without even seeking their views. The Scottish Prison Service has no formal consultation process for involving prisoners and their families on proposed policies and procedures that affect them. Again, change is done to rather than with prisoners and their families. Politicians as a group rarely, if ever, seek the public’s views on our criminal justice system as a whole, especially prisons. They can therefore always say they are speaking for their constituents, since who is to gainsay them.
Regardless of whether one wants prisoners to be punished or rehabilitated, we know the current penal system does not work, as evidenced by the high recidivism rates. We need a national discussion leading to a consensus about the purpose of our criminal justice system, especially our prisons. By agreeing the system’s aims, politicians may then be less inclined to criticise the system simply to score political points.
READ MORE: Five by-elections show Reform are on the rise in Scotland – should we be concerned?
Perhaps Andrew Tickell could initiate this national discussion by interviewing our political leaders on the aims of our criminal justice system, including prisons. Do we imprison to punish or to rehabilitate? What do we mean by the terms punish and rehabilitate? By building a consensus we can also recognise the impact imprisonment has on everyone involved; including prisoners’ families. They did not commit the crime, but they are affected by their loved one’s imprisonment. They too are victims. That should not be controversial, but, with limited exceptions, it is not something one hears a politician say.
We do not need “penal populism” with one group, usually prisoners, pitted against another group, usually a politician’s hypothetical constituents. Simply saying we need “change” is not enough. We all need to know, understand and agree the aims of our criminal justice system; especially the point of imprisonment.
David Logan
Milngavie
THE Scottish Health Secretary was doing his job while being driven in a ministerial car to attend free football matches, Gillian Martin has said. Really?
He went to see three Aberdeen matches and he is an Aberdeen Football Club supporter.
Does Gillian really think Scots are that stupid?
READ MORE: Minister defends Neil Gray amid free football matches row
It’s bad enough one SNP minister doing the wrong thing without another one trying to defend it.
Isn’t time SNP politicians threw away the spade and stopped digging the hole and making it bigger?
The sooner the SNP gets new leadership, the better.
Daibhidh Beaton
via thenational.scot
TO Davide pere, to the author of Bill and the Banana Bender, to Papa, to Big Dave, to the Silver Shadow, to Davey Duck, to David Crines, the best letter writer, to Dad. Happy 70th birthday! We couldn’t love you more.
All the Crines weans, grand weans and great grand weans x
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