LESLEY Laird, the Labour shadow secretary of state for Scotland, usually in the shadow-boxing mode, is right to point out that the current instability and chaos has been caused by the Tories (Brown issues rallying call as MP says indyref2 could be this summer, January 19). However, she fails to add the crucial point. The additional root cause of this chaos is the “Precious Union” with England. Her Better Together party supports the Union in which the English and Welsh parts voted to leave the EU and so caused Scotland and Northern Ireland to be denied the right to remain. Her party insisted in 2014 it would be better for Scotland to remain in the Union as it guaranteed Scotland remaining in the EU.
READ MORE: Brown issues rallying call as MP says indyref2 could be this summer
In order to get out of this British-induced chaos, we leave the Union and end this Union-driven instability once and for all.
Furthermore, her English-party leader Jeremy Corbyn supported the Tory invoking of Article 50 before there was a plan. In fact, Jeremy Corbyn, a closet Leaver, insisted that David Cameron invoke Article 50 the day after the vote on 2016! The English Labour party is hopelessly split on Brexit too, a mirror image of the English Conservative party. The UK has truly KO’ed itself, with its Westminster system stymied. And Lesley Laird wishes Scotland to stay within it!
Hence, had Labour been in power then, the chaos and instability would have been even more serious.
The common denominator in all of this is the Union with England.
It always amazes that the “branch” party of Labour in Scotland – so-called by a former Labour leader in Scotland protesting that London Labour treats Labour in Scotland with contempt – never reiterated that its fellow Scots voted to remain in the EU! They deny that Scots voted to remain. They are content to let a party at Westminster, which Scots did not vote for, override the Scottish vote.
We would not be in this mess if we were not in this Union! But Labour in Scotland will always default to Westminster and Westminster parties; it is content to be lobby fodder and sidekicks to its Corbyn-led party. It even used a hand-me-down in its latest party political broadcast from its party down south! It has certainly hit rock bottom!
Furthermore, it works hand-in-glove unabashed with the very same Tory party at local government level in Scotland. How hypocritical is that? Its colluding in the “power grab” which took powers away from Holyrood, and previously in downgrading the famous Vow by its worst ever PM, Gordon Brown, shows it is a politically washed-up wreck well on the way to the breaker’s yard.
John Edgar
Kilmaurs
THE letter by Anonymous in the Sunday National (Let’s be clear about exactly what the Act of Union actually sets out, January 20) describes some of the many provisions of the Treaty of Union that have been broken routinely and comprehensively by the government in Westminster. Is there not a case for our MSPs, as representatives of the Scottish people, to simply rescind the Treaty? There must be some internationally recognised mechanism that would allow a broken and discredited treaty to be declared null and void. I would be interested in the views of anyone with expertise in this area.
READ MORE: Let’s be clear about exactly what the Act of Union actually set out
It seems absurd that the body responsible for all of the breaches can unilaterally deny, through rejection of a request for an independence referendum, the only recognised method of challenging the Treaty’s validity.
At the very least, I believe the contempt shown to the agreement, which itself was supported less than wholeheartedly by the people of this country when it was ratified by the Scottish Parliament in 1707, should have much greater visibility. Contrary to much common belief, a callous disregard for the interests and wishes of the people of Scotland did not start with the Thatcher administration. It has been ever-present in Westminster’s attitude to and treatment of Scotland for over 300 years, and will no doubt continue for the next 300 unless we do something about it.
Cameron Crawford
Rothesay
READ MORE: Joanna Cherry: Westminster fails to agree on anything as Brexit deadline looms
WHEN pundits or politicians say the UK should extend or can extend Article 50, they are talking rubbish. The idea that a single member state can unilaterally alter a binding provision of a treaty for an organisation of 28 which they are about to leave is just British exceptionalist nonsense. Faded days of glorious empire persist in the minds of some.
I think that the EU (who can act unilaterally in this matter) as a gesture of goodwill should give Britain an extra month to avoid crashing out. We would then cling on until April 28. This would have the advantage of not interfering in the European parliamentary elections in May. Theresa May’s deal, or a version thereof, is still unlikely to succeed, and Europe knows this, so they should indicate that a further extension is available, but on the strict condition that one or all of May’s red lines has been dropped or another referendum with a Remain option is to be held. The UK MEPs wouldn’t be replaced until we finally leave, or perhaps until Remain lose in a referendum. If a referendum results in the UK staying in the EU, belated EU elections could take place. Maybe there will be a good turn-out!
David Crines
Hamilton
I KNOW this may sound as though it should be in “pedant’s corner” in Private Eye, but I strongly feel that every time an English politician uses the term “the country” they should be pulled up and asked which country they actually mean. They can’t have it both ways!!
England voted clearly for Brexit – we didn’t. Force them to state Scotland isn’t a country. It suits them to continually conflate England and Britain.
Their mentality is that Scotland is no different to Yorkshire, ie a region of Britain.
We have to keep hammering home that we’re a country!! If our population don’t vote for self-determination (a better term than “independence”, which as your letters page attests, means a variety of things) then I despair for our future generations.
Barry Stewart
Blantyre
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