IN her comprehensive article on the redistribution of voters in Scotland between Westminster constituencies, Abbi Garton-Crosbie revealed that 49 of the 57 constituencies are to be changed; as this is repeated in the final proposals for the rest of the UK – 470 of the 533 in England and 31 of the 32 in Wales – it is certainly the most extensive rearrangement of constituencies we have ever seen.
The equalisation of voters by number in each constituency might make little difference to the overall result of a General Election but the reduction by two constituencies in Scotland and eight in Wales will almost certainly affect these countries more than the resultant gains will affect England.
READ MORE: Scottish constituencies to change at next election - see how you're affected
However, a quick read through the Boundary Commission’s report for England shows that there appears to be a similar pattern with one to three seats being lost or gained by each region, with the exception of the south-east of England region, which gains seven seats.
What is concerning is that the overall result of the review will be an increase of 15 constituencies south of a line between the Bristol Channel and The Wash. Twelve of these new constituencies will be in London and south-east England, which then will have a third of all UK parliamentary constituencies.
READ MORE: East Renfrewshire Council set to call for inquiry into boundary change
The demographic allocation of voters to constituencies and a first-past-the-post voting system will result in the UK Government becoming even more London-centric.
Yet another addition to the many reasons why Scotland must obtain its independence before our natural assets are squandered underpinning the restructuring of a union that is of no benefit to its people.
John Jamieson
South Queensferry
WITH regards Derrick McClure’s letter (Jun 28), the march from Stirling to Bannockburn was advertised as being 4.9 miles long. Yes, it is one of the longer marches but it is the same route we took last year.
As for another point that hasbeen continually raised here, the SNP are a political party and their objective is to gain independence by a legal and democratic means. I should say that also goes for Alba, the Greens, SSP, and the Communist Party who all support Scottish independence. That puts these political parties in a difficult position as they can only advocate debating the issue and letting the electorate decide the final outcome.
READ MORE: Here's my vision of what an independent Scotland would have to offer
Their duty is to debate and make laws and therefore they must uphold the laws and conventions of the time, even if they disagree with them. As is the case right now, if they can’t get an agreement to hold a legal referendum then they must find a solution.
Like many contributors here, I would also like to know how we can get past some of the obstacles that are being put in place by Westminster and the English Supreme Court. In that respect I’m with Salvo, who want to take the matter to the international courts. I have to fully agree with Andy Anderson (Letters, Jun 28).
I’m fully of the opinion that once we win the legal case in an international court, a lot more people will realise how we’ve been used by Westminster and the English system.
We have to ask what is the alternative to a judicial review in the international courts and the alternative is some kind of civil unrest akin to the poll tax action of over a generation ago, or else we find some people in the mould of Ian Hamilton, Kay Matheson and Gavin Vernon.
Alexander Potts
Kilmarnock
IN the interest of balance I’d like to propose a column in The National about why we should support the Union. I think the readers could supply the reasons. Below is my contribution.
Why we should vote Labour:
Gordon Brown thinks his brand of federalism will save the UK. Not so far-fetched, after all, wasn’t he the man who saved the world during the banking crisis? Well maybe not, but he did save the banks. And the taxpayer has been paying for it ever since. Not to mention crippling the councils with his PPI.
READ MORE: Labour 'not proposing' devolving more benefits to Scotland
Why we should vote Tory:
Just like HS2 and Crossrail, Covid contracts etc etc, it looks like the Scottish taxpayer will now be paying for the Thames Water bail-out. This would be the Union dividend, then.
Why we should vote LibDem:
Of course there is always the LibDems if you think Scotland, as a country, should never exist again. You’ve had your Euro finals then.
James Arthur
Paisley
BEING unable to attend the SNP’s conference last weekend I was especially keen to read Lesley Riddoch’s article in Thursday’s National (The grassroots are finding common cause ... leaders must do the same). I wasn’t disappointed. Ms Riddoch is a fine writer and broadcaster, and she captured my own thoughts, having read various reports, almost exactly.
I for one am tired of the relentless attacks on other parties by members of the political elite. And I’m talking about all independence-supporting parties, including the SNP. It’s boring and it pushes forward the independence project not one iota. By all means debate policy differences in robust and respectful terms, but the increasing vitriol and personal attacks need to stop. I’m not impressed by their personal political ambition if that’s what it is. I will be impressed by statesmanship, leadership, and energy focussed on achieving our goal of independence.
As Lesley Riddoch says in her article: “Travelling across Scotland, these past three weeks, all I see is common cause between SNP, Alba, Greens, socialists and non-party Yes activists at grassroots level. It’s high time for those further up the food chain to dial it down and bury the hatchet.” Time for the grassroots to lead by example if our political leaders cannot. We can do it. We WILL do it.
Robert Fletcher
via email
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