I’M deliriously happy. I mean, I’m the lucky recipient of a piece of £8.6 million.
Yes, truly. Me, my city, my capital is getting that, no strings attached.
What a boost to Edinburgh after the wee hiccup that was the loss of the Filmhouse, and oh, what stress over the King’s.
How’s Leith Theatre doing? And the Fringe, without a permanent, jazzy upmarket home, as opposed to what, up a close?
No matter other arts and culture sectors’ needs across the nation.
So thank you so much. I mean, with culture being – what was that word? Ah yes, “devolved” – direct action was obviously required. No need for time-wasting, dialogue and engagement, just cut out my government and hand it straight to local authorities.
Hunt said it’s “better be independent than dependent”. But what happens when you’re denied that? When you’re in an abusive relationship that claws away at your very identity, deliberately denies your abilities, demeans your actions and undermines your relationships? Withholding monies is such a common tactic in power struggles within unequal partnerships. But when one blatantly steals from the other? How much of a violation is that in a supposedly equal Union? Stealing resources with one hand and making you pay for its very return? Fancy that: Tory London has managed to make us pay for wind!
So that’s where we’re at. The very obvious new tactic from the power-hungry “we won’t let them go” Westminster Unionists. Just ignore our Parliament. Don’t abolish it, bypass it. No aggro, no public platforms for conflict. Or when a response is required, legalistic or parliamentary,
just say “no”. The presumption being that we’ll be worn down, frustrated, thrown off kilter by a leadership battle, leading to at least a hiatus, or at worst, a major loss in support, and parliamentary and local authority votes. Or that we’ll be bought over with bribes because that’s what we’re seeing. Bribery.
Attempts to demonstrate that while the Union gives, the Scottish Government wants …wants independence and can’t deliver. The very idea of “good government” delivered from Holyrood that might attract more to vote Yes is being undercut at every angle.
So, since I’m not an SNP member, I have no vote in this election.
In the future, though, I will continue to vote for independence. But I have to ask, how do I get independence? What, use my vote? What’s the plan to make my vote count? How will it enable independence?
Selma Rahman
Edinburgh
FURTHER to Richard Walthew’s letter regarding land tax (Mar 14), I too am seriously concerned about this subject.
Having read Graeme McCormick’s book a few years ago, I was astounded that the SNP had done absolutely nothing to implement this system which would almost immediately eradicatepoverty, regain the ownership of our land or collect the financial benefits for Scotland.
At a Zoom meeting, I asked Equalities Minister Shona Robison why this had not been implemented. Her response astounded me. It was: “We have looked at this but cannot afford it”.
My next question which went unanswered was: How is something which is self-financing unaffordable?
I must say that I seriously question the intelligence of our elected representatives and their commitment to the citizens of Scotland and their freedom.
I would recommend people read Graeme’s book, which lays out the details in easily understood terms.
John Robson
Uddingston
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