“WE must remember that no political party has a majority in the Scottish Parliament” , writes Roland Manoski (Letters, May 20). He is wrong of course. He just missed using the word “overall”, that’s all.

The SNP is the largest party by far, in a system specifically designed to prevent that from happening.

In a first-past-the-post system (employed and fanatically defended in the deep south), English Labour, English Tories and English Liberals would be mere shadows in Holyrood.

It should be remembered too that the swell, heave and sheer size of the SNP in Scotland is NOT well represented by its seats in our Edinburgh Parliament, but that is part of the trick you see. The world is forced to see them through the wrong end of the telescope.

Due to the fevered application of d’Hondt, imposed upon Scots, the SNP at Holyrood do not have an “overall” majority, and seem to be “barely hanging on”!

However, when you look at the figures for signed up members of these parties in Scotland, they are truly astonishing:

Scottish National Party – huge

Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party – zero

Scottish Labour Party – zero

Scottish Liberal Democratic Party – zero

“Huge” here means treble the figure the BBC would report and “zero” here means empty, and you know the noise those vessels make!

Christopher Bruce

I READ with interest the debate that has been going on in your paper about the teaching, or the lack of teaching, of Scottish history in schools.

In many ways it’s far too late for us older citizens of Scotland (I’m 64 years old) but not for our children or grandchildren to learn what is sometimes the most valuable of lessons, because without it we are in danger of repeating the same mistakes of the past. It is also the unique history of a nation that gels it together when the times get hard or you can’t see an end to a predicament. And furthermore, it is that unique history that ultimately makes us into a nation.

I have taken the initiative and written to my MSP on the subject and would advise others to do the same, and have requested that he becomes involved in the debate at a governmental level. I’m sure he will as he is already campaigning for more local history to be taught in local schools. Also, if we are to become an independent nation again, we can’t wait years for the powers-that-be to draw up a curriculum, we must act now and devise that curriculum today before independence and look both towards the future and the past. In this respect, I have asked my MSP if he could bring it to the attention of the appropriate people that our unique history be made a proper subject in schools with the appropriate exams and qualifications.

When we see our children and grandchildren proudly marching through the streets of Scotland, some carrying homemade banners and flags, demanding independence from Westminster, then we owe it to them to do something about the teaching of our own history and ultimately in rewarding them with the academic qualifications that they deserve. After all, they are going to be telling their children and grandchildren how they marched for independence and won it!

Maybe even some of us older ones can then go to evening classes and get the same Scottish certificate in Scottish history. I for one would love to be in that class so that we can prove to others that we are proud to be a nation.

Alexander Potts
via email

IN the summer of 2018 I found myself one morning with a friend drinking coffee on a terrace overlooking the River Elbe in Dresden. The conversation turned to the history of Scotland. I began one of my periodic rants in a loud voice. I bemoaned the reality that little Scottish history is taught in Scottish schools. Customers at adjoining tables who were waiting for The Albertinum to open, had been listening to this Scottish loudmouth, and one of asked a perfectly sensible question that rather deflated me: “You have had an SNP government for some years. Why have they not done anything about this?” I had to confess to my audience that answer had I none.

Hamish Kirk

I NOTE the English-based media are becoming a tad agitated that Uefa are proposing that, if Manchester City Football Club is found guilty of financial irregularities, which the club vehemently denies, then the recently crowned English Premiership League Champions would be barred from participating in the European Champions league.

I find this difficult to understand because the Brexiteers have “promised” – like the £360 million per week “promised” to the NHS – that if the UK leaves Europe then the UK will make its own rules and will be free of interference from Europe.

Have I missed something?

Thomas L Inglis