HAS Gordon MacIntyre-Kemp hit on our way out of the Union? He says any borders and restriction between Northern Ireland and other parts of the UK would void the Treaty of Union (This is why Westminster’s choice is between Brexit and the Union, October 18).
The Alien Act of 1705 meant all Scots except those living in England would be treated as aliens and major exports from Scotland to England would be suspended. Article IV of the Treaty of Union allowed for “freedom and intercourse of trade and navigation” (Tom Devine’s The Scottish Nation – A Modern History).
Gordon then quotes Article VI of the Act of Union Ireland 1800, which we can read on www.legislation.gov.uk, and fair enough, it says “that in all treaties made by his Majesty, his heirs, and successors, with any foreign power, his Majesty’s subjects of Ireland shall have the same privileges, and be on the same footing as his Majesty’s subjects of Great Britain.”
So as long as the EU insists that the Good Friday Agreement, which insists on no borders, must be protected, they seem to be saying we need a border of sorts in the Irish Sea in order to regulate the flow of goods, and services I presume, between the UK and Northern Ireland. I bet the Irish, North and South, know the details of the Treaties of Union!
If that’s not enough to gladden our hearts, Gordon then tells us if there were to be a new act of Union then the old Union would cease to exist and Scotland would “need” to sign up to the new Act for it to take effect.
Life gets more interesting every day. I may even see independence in my lifetime, and since I’ve already had my three score years and ten that could be soon!
Catriona Grigg
Embo
READ MORE: This is why Westminster’s choice is between Brexit and the Union
AN interesting, if also rather baffling, conflict of view yesterday (Letters, October 22) on whether the FM is right to decline to share platform space with Steve Bannon.
Extremist fanatics are by definition not amenable to reason, so any public conversation is only going to give the poisonous world view of a Bannon more exposure, without the least chance that the fanatic will modify their posture or concede any slightest shade of doubt.
Opposition will only “confirm” how “right” they are. Here, at the very least Nicola Sturgeon has rightly and honourably declined to aid and abet the poison-monger’s incessant quest for self-aggrandisement. Declining to be in the same space as this revolting hate-peddler is the only morally acceptable option.
Why the BBC is using my licence money to present this rabid rabble-rousing conspiracy-monger with an audience is another, and very troubling, question: either some decision-maker in the national broadcaster doesn’t see that allowing space and exposure to this foul mouthpiece for extremism is, in terms of rational debate, utterly pointless, or they actually think there may be some seed of reason in his views. I’m not sure which of those is more offensive, stupidity or sympathy.
Colin Stuart
Saline, Fife
READ MORE: Letters: The BBC hosting Steve Bannon is hardly surprising
AS a BBC licence payer (currently but I am losing my patience) I do not wish my licence fee to be used to pay for Steve Bannon and any right-wing Extremists to be guest on BBC TV/radio shows. I hold the BBC partly responsible for the rise in far-right extremism by them giving a platform to these people and their views, which contributes to the rise of power of the far right. Giving voice to extremists does not show impartiality but does show a lack of judgment.
One only has to look at the amount of air time given to Nigel Farage, who started off as a minority and fell away, and correlate that to the amount of air time given to Scotland and its elected representatives and you can see that the BBC is not operating an inclusive, fair broadcasting organisation. They cannot have these people on their shows stating it is go give freedom of speech yet not give that courtesy to others, ie Scotland, unions etc.
That air time continues to be given to Farage, a man who is irrelevant to the UK, tends to show that the BBC itself has become more interested in far-right voices than the voice of its own licence payers.
Christine Smith
Troon
READ MORE: Protest planned as BBC insists Bannon event will go ahead
I NOTE that David Cameron has been paid £800,000 up front for his memoirs. If he is stuck for a title I can offer him “How I wrecked the United Kingdom and ran away”.
Mike Underwood
Linlithgow
JUST looking at pages 6-7 of yesterday’s National. That photo of Theresa May seems to show her being met by two Santa Clauses, and by the look on her face they have just told her that Christmas has been cancelled.
Well, Theresa, here’s a bit of further future news. Unless you change what you are doing over Brexit and arrange a deal where Britain stays in the customs union and the economic area, Christmas will be cancelled for several years into the future.
Except perhaps in Scotland where, if Nicola Sturgeon gets a move on, we could well be independent and enjoying future Christmases with our European allies. The fact that an independence sceptic – or even septic – of Billy Connolly’s conviction has turned towards independence shows just how far down the line towards an independent Scotland we have moved.
Let’s grab our chance and take it before we lose all the commerce indicated by Carolyn Fairbairn of the CBI in Kirsteen Paterson’s article on the same page. We have to balance the chance of winning or losing the next referendum against the permanent commercial losses we could suffer if we wait too long.
Charlie Kerr
Glenrothes
READ MORE: Billy Connolly says Scottish independence ‘may just be the way to go’
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