IT was good to see First Minister Humza Yousaf so eloquently challenge the anti-abortion MSP John Mason, a member of his own party (Humza Yousaf takes SNP MSP to task on buffer zones, thenational.scot, Mar 14). Yousaf is correct to point out that it’s not up to men to decide how the women being targeted by anti-abortion protesters outside hospitals feel. For Mason to dismiss women’s trauma and label it an “overreaction” is gaslighting and misogynistic.
Speaking of gaslighting, as the article also detailed, in parliament last week Bishop John Keenan referred to anti-abortion literature disseminated outside some UK clinics as “factually accurate”.
This was very quickly debunked by MSP Sandesh Gulhane, a doctor, who said it contained “concerning misinformation”.
READ MORE: Abortion access could be under threat south of the Border. Here's how
In the days following International Women’s Day 2024, this serves as a reminder that there are some institutions which women can never trust. Bishop Keenan serves the same powerful institution that was locking women in Magdalene institutions as recently as 1996. Some high-ranking members of the church have simply moved onto a new manifestation of misogyny in recruiting anti-abortion protesters to harass women like modern-day witch-prickers.
With men like John Mason in positions of power, it will be a long time before women can trust our political institutions, but the First Minister, at least, is setting the right example. If Mason refuses to listen to women, perhaps he should listen to his party leader.
Gemma Clark
Johnstone
I’M pleased to see that John Mason and his fellow MSPs found Lesley Riddoch and Charlie Stuart’s latest film challenging and thought-provoking (Riddoch film got us thinking outside the box, Mar 16). I suspect, or perhaps just hope, his article was designed to bring the subject to the attention of readers rather than to highlight his and his colleagues’ own lack of awareness of the topic.
Many of Lesley’s pieces in The National, together with work by others such as Darren McGarvey in his BBC/Open University mini-series The State We’re in, have drawn attention to the contrasting models of UK and Scandinavian society. If SNP MSPs do not have this in the front of their minds whenever they are “arguing over a penny less or more on income tax, or worrying about tomorrow’s headlines” then we probably need to review the people we’re voting for.
READ MORE: Humza Yousaf defends Scotland's higher taxes in spat with Martin Geissler
If those in power in Holyrood had been more focused on the strategic direction the country should be moving in rather than tinkering with the details of our current predicament, we might have been independent by now.
Where is the state energy company, tasked amongst other things with maximising the public benefits from renewables? Where is the radical reform of land use and the replacement for council tax that will help facilitate it? Where is the root-and-branch review of early-years education to shake it out of the mid 20th century? Why are there no citizens’ assemblies working on these and other key issues if MSPs are too busy counting beans to address them?
Yes, combating Westminster-imposed austerity is important, but without positive movement towards a new and radically different model for our society we simply continue to paint ourselves into an ever smaller corner, frantically trying to do more and more with the same or less funding.
Cameron Crawford
Rothesay
IT is no secret that in spite of enormous tax revenues from oil and gas production in the North Sea, for decades Scotland has effectively been denied major infrastructure investment by the UK Government relative to the huge investment in the south-east of England. Surprisingly, therefore, it appears to have passed the notice of most commentators on the recent UK Budget that while Scotland gained a relatively modest allocation of £295 million in “consequentials”, Canary Wharf, at the heart of London’s affluent financial market, gained £242m in “levelling-up funds”.
READ MORE: MSP calls for donations cap amid 'shameful' Frank Hester saga
This latter allocation is startling when it is recognised that the Scottish Government’s capital budget has been reduced in real terms by 10% and even the building of new hospitals (while the NHS is under extreme pressure) has had to be put on hold. Furthermore, this latest London-centric financial investment follows the £235m allocated to London for fixing the city’s potholes when the northern leg of HS2 (Birmingham to Manchester) was recently scrapped.
As it is also no secret that the economy cannot grow significantly without investment, one could be forgiven for thinking that the UK Government is not only intent on frustrating Scottish aspirations for independence but on ensuring that devolution (supported by close to 75% of voters in Scotland) will fail.
Stan Grodynski
Longniddry, East Lothian
AS a founder member of Alba perhaps Jim Taylor (Letters, Mar 15) can explain why Alba has not taken the lead and set an example for others by bringing its MPs home from Westminster to form the nucleus of an independence promoting and debating hub in Scotland.
John Jamieson
South Queensferry
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