Let’s not blame the Brexit fog over the wait for indyref2

READ MORE: If the British state is an acrobat Brexit has worn the safety rope thin

In an earlier contribution to the long letter (Surely the Queen can see that Johnson’s not fit to be our PM, June 24) I flew a kite that perhaps if everybody and their granny could see that Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson wasn’t a fit and proper person to hold public office let alone high public office then perhaps the nation’s favourite granny and 95-year-old ex-horsewoman, Queen Betty, might ride over the hill to our collective rescue and decline to appoint him as her prime minister.

READ MORE: Surely the Queen can see Johnson is not fit to be our PM?

I subsequently went in search of real evidence that when Black Rod bangs thrice on the big oak doors and summons Her commoners to hear Her speech on Her government’s forthcoming programme there might be some substance to the idea of the Crown in Parliament.

Unfortunately however, but perhaps my research was too superficial, it would appear that the pantomime that is the opening of parliament is no more than quality bread and circuses. There can now be no doubt following THAT interview that the honourable member for Uxbridge and South Ruislip is entirely unfit for high office. What was clear from the engagement with Andrew Neil is that it’s what’s in his head that’s important to him not facts written on paper before him with no better illustration than the Article 24 clause, 5b spat. And the preening air of public school entitlement might be enough to make the Masters of Eaton and Harrow blush even a little.

So whatever’s in his head about the Scotland Act and the Scottish Question will be entirely sufficient to bring about his guiding principle of uniting the country and saving it from the barbarians that live east of Dover. Meanwhile back in the real world we hear the constant refrain that a Johnson premiership is a gift for the independence cause and are encouraged by opinion polls on either side of the Border. All the while our esteemed leader is staying schtum, keeping her counsel and playing a waiting game but what she’s waiting for isn’t clear.

Let’s not take the fog of Brexit excuse, after all a captain of a ship that’s sailed into fog, knows his/her current position and charts a course through the fog to the intended destination. Maybe she’s doing her own impression of strong and stable. In his concluding remarks Andrew Tickell enquires reflectively “What does his success (Johnson’s) tell us about the rules of the game?” This entitles us to ask what might be our First Minister’s take on the rules of the game? For a lot of us in the Yes campaign we’re feeling more and more like the Grand Old Duke of York’s 10,000 men not quite knowing how far up the Independence Hill we really are. Perhaps we shouldn’t wait for our elders and betters with their softly, softly catchee freedom, in the style of Pete Wishart, perhaps there’s real opportunity in the leadership’s mushroom strategy.

Instead of accepting our benighted status let’s take matters into our own hands and with the clock counting down to a time when a delusional megalomaniac will hold all our futures in his distorted vision, let’s get our own individual answers from our own MPs and MSPs to the vital question: “What is being done to protect my EU citizenship on 1st November ?” It’s well established that loss of EU citizenship was to have been a game changer, a material change in circumstances sufficient to warrant action by the SNP. So let’s not accept the inevitability of a blanket and corporate communications SNP response. Instead by sharing our replies on social media we will be able to see if there really is a plan or if it’s all smoke and mirrors. Once we establish that we can start the freedom revolution.

Iain Bruce
Nairn

IN reply to Charlie Kerr, the requirement for a Section 30 order is not part of the Treaty of Union 1707. A Section 30 order is part of the devolved parliament arrangements. Effectively there is no provision in the Treaty of Union for its dissolution. As it’s a treaty between two nations (Scotland and England) then all that is required is for the recognised leader of one country to open up negotiations for separation of powers and the dissolution of the Union as it isn’t in their interests or the people of the nation to continue with the Union.

At the time when Westminster was in the process of setting up the devolved parliament, Labour was the dominant party in Scotland and could easily return over 60 MPs to Westminster and were expected to be the same after devolution and that they would share power with the other Unionist parties. It was never expected that the SNP would become the dominant party in Scotland and the Unionists expected that the SNP would go into decline and effectively cease to exist. As the three main Unionist parties are controlled by their English masters, a Section 30 order would be a mere formality to set or alter laws in Scotland if their overlords didn’t wish to involve Westminster.

Nobody expected the result to be as close as it was in 2014 and if Scotland is to obtain independence, then we need a plan of action because it will be a lot more difficult this time around. Unless someone is prepared to challenge the Treaty of Union, then it is the default position we are in and to which we are trying to resolve.

In 2014, we came from about 20% behind and at one time were in the lead. It will be a lot harder this time around and if people think that 50% plus one will put us over the finish line, I for one don’t think so. It may be the winning margin in a democracy, but Westminster has proven in the past that as far as Scotland is concerned, they aren’t democratic. If we are to achieve independence, then we need to achieve such a big margin that nobody will argue with us as to what it is we voted for. That means that we need to get people talking about the facts again, holding meetings, flying flags, putting stickers in windows, holding meetings and trying to convert the undecided and the Unionist brigade. Westminster will never be able to stop a people’s movement and that’s what we need to get now. We have around 12 months maybe about 16 months at most to get that majority and the more work put in now, the easier it will be nearer the date of indyref2.

Alexander Potts
Kilmarnock

THREE birds with one stone!

One day we will thank Mr Mundell for the new hub which has been built – it will be great for the Citizens’ Assemblies and can be renamed Winnie Ewing House, or anything else we the people of Scotland would like it to be called.

As for the drug deaths in Scotland it is a fact that the deaths in England are not recorded in the same way with the coroner deciding the cause of death in a different way. I am not saying there is no problem in Scotland but I am certain it is no worse or indeed better than anywhere else and is a product of poverty, austerity and hopelessness but of course it was used as an “SNP Bad” trope, despite the fact many who died were long-term users, starting when Labour was in power in Scotland and sent millions back to Westminster because they could not thing of anything Scotland needed by way of road, bridges, services or anything else.

Enjoyed article about holidaying in Scotland, years ago one of my children read The Boy with the Bronze Axe and was so taken with it, everyone in the family read it and we decided we would go to Orkney so that we could swim in Skara Bay – well we could have gone to USA for what it cost us and we had rented a small house on the island and could never have done it without a car. It is a bit better now with the RET (Road Equivalent Tarriff) but it is still too expensive. The cost of hotels was eye watering. So Lesley Riddoch is absolutely right when she says Scotland has become too expensive for the people who live here.

READ MORE: Everyone wants to visit the Highlands ... but are Scots priced out?

Winifred McCartney
Paisley

I HATE to quibble with National columnists but Martin Hannan’s assertion that important sporting events should be free to air may seem laudable but there is a problem with his argument. There is no such thing as free to air. Non payment of a BBC licence fee will land you a £1000 fine or jail. It is easy to forget that our state broadcaster is not free. Surely it is time that BBC transmissions are encrypted giving access to paid subscribers, then those who wish to watch the BBC can do so. It seems to me that the same model works for others including Sky, Amazon Prime, Netflix, Virgin Media, Now TV, VU TV, BT Vision, and Talk Talk TV.

Mike Herd
Highland

REGARDING the article by Karen Kenning in Seven Days (I hope my menopause misery will help others to avoid the worst, July 14), it is good to see a piece on the menopause – something that has been ignored for a long time.

READ MORE: I hope my menopause misery will help others to avoid the worst

A recent article in Edit 2019, University of Edinburgh magazine, by Rachel Weiss, pointed out that before she started her periods she knew what to expect, who to talk to and the options available. The same applied to her first pregnancy, and to giving birth: but she could find nothing similar about the menopause in books, fiction or non-diction, or in the media, and friends did not talk about it.

She set up a Menopause Cafe in Perth, and people attended, men and women. Radio, press and TV publicity followed and there is now a social franchise model so that volunteers world wide can set up their own cafes to encourage conversation about the matter.

This would be a good model for any other issue that needs to be aired more widely.

Susan FG Forde
Scotlandwell

KEVIN McKenna’s recent article concerning the apparent lack of action on the part of the Scottish Government has created much reaction.

However, let’s remember three good things. One: It’s good to air a wide range of views about the cause. Two: It’s good to question the direction of travel. Three: It’s good to remember that Nicola and the SNP have always said that they will wait till the Brexit mess is clear, and it is far from clear.

In the meantime, the two contenders for Number 10 are the best canvassers have could have, busily working away on our behalf. Because of them and their policies, more and more No people are turning to Yes, and this will only increase.

So, I understand the sentiment behind the article but not the logic.

However, I must challenge the comment made by Alex Armstrong (Website Comments, May 18) when he says he thinks that “Sturgeon is terrified by the prospect of independence and the logistical stress of years of negotiations that would follow”. This is an utterly ridiculous thing to say and goes beyond what I would regard as an acceptable level of criticism under items one and two above. It looks more like the kind of comment a Unionist would make, and certainly not from a pro-independence supporter who has been closely following events. We must all remember – timing is the key!

Dennis White
Blackwood