SO John Swinney was surprised to find out that only Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer would go head-to-head in the first televised leaders’ debate of the General Election campaign on ITV on Tuesday evening. What else did he expect? Despite being the third-largest party at Westminster, the SNP are basically considered as irrelevant in that arena. Unless they hold the balance of power after July 4 (an unlikely event), they will continue to be so.
STV are hosting a leaders’ debate on Monday night with the four party leaders in the Scottish Parliament, three of whom will no doubt concentrate on matters devolved to that parliament – to the detriment of the SNP. What is the point of a so-called debate when the relevant UK subject matter which should be debated is almost entirely reserved to Westminster?
READ MORE: ITV to host General Election debate with all major parties following SNP snub
If STV really feel the need for a debate, why not have four or more candidates who are actually standing in the UK election? Stephen Flynn and whoever Labour, the Tories, Liberals and even Alba and the Greens can muster. That might be a programme worth watching!
The SNP have also criticised the BBC for its entire election coverage. I know this will prove far too radical a suggestion for the SNP leadership, but perhaps the time has arrived for them to take the next positive step and promote a campaign of non-payment of TV licences. “No pay without a say” has a certain ring to it. If they are unwilling to do this they lose the moral ability to complain when the BBC continue on the same policy track until and beyond the Scottish Parliament elections in May 2026.
READ MORE: It seems democracy and fair play mean little to the UK's broadcasters
In any case I think I will try my best to avoid all of the debates. In my 50 years of being interested in Scottish politics I can only remember one occasion where the outcome of an election was influenced in any real way by a TV debate. In November 1988 Jim Sillars overturned a Labour majority of 13,000 in Glasgow Govan. Jim got 14,677 votes to Labour candidate Bob Gillespie’s 11,123 – a swing of 33% from Labour to the SNP. By most accounts the turning point, in what was already a brilliant SNP campaign, was a last-minute TV debate which took place between the candidates. Gillespie was completely wrong-footed by Sillars, who asked him for his position on European Community policy in language Bob just did not understand.
Brian Lawson
Paisley
LET’S upset the biased media. We all know Monday night's debate should be among Westminster candidates: Stephen Flynn; Ian Murray; a Tory, say John Lamont; LibDem, Alba and Green candidates who are all standing in the General Election.
Let’s not play their game, let’s send Stephen Flynn (no disrespect to John Swinney) and keep the answers to only reserved matters.
READ MORE: John Swinney tells crowd not to boo BBC journalist at SNP campaign launch
This is nothing but a MEDIA TRAP and we are walking straight into it with both feet.
Act now, SNP, and be radical. I don’t want on Tuesday to say “I TOLD YOU SO”.
Ken McCartney
Hawick
AS a humanitarian I like to think that at a very basic level we must all have something in common.
I, for example, like Jacob Rees-Mogg do not own a pair of jeans…
A small, insignificant detail, but I found it.
However, when it comes to Boris Johnson’s latest attention-seeking announcement I draw a blank.
READ MORE: Ruth Wishart: Trump may make us weep but are politics in the UK much better?
Following Trump’s criminal conviction on all 34 counts (previously, it should be noted, he was found liable in a civil court for sexual abuse and then defamation of his victim), Johnson decided that a good way to get the media pointing back in his direction was to state that this was a “liberal stitch-up”.
I have followed the tortuous proceedings before an experienced and endlessly patient judge, from the initial fear and intimidation of potential jurors to the final outcome. But you do not need to have done that to know that the latest de Pfeffel Johnson blithering is turd soup.
Whether even he believes what he says or whether, like Farage, he sees some future for himself beside the orange ball of vitriol, is both up for grabs and immaterial now.
The very fact of the big red bus liar saying something so undermining of democracy, so crass, so cunningly calculated to cause nothing but more harm to our trust in the political system, sets him and decent people so far apart I do begin to wonder about the whole notion of common humanity.
Amanda Baker
Edinburgh
WHEN you think about it, Trump’s behaviour is not so different from that of a toddler. Neither really thinks that there are rules that apply to them, and when there are consequences he throws a tantrum and tells you it’s unfair.
It’s not difficult to see the same behaviour among MPs and MSPs of certain parties, but we have been so conditioned to thinking they are all the same or can’t be bothered arguing with the false equivalences that many of us just give in to the tantrum.
Alan Thompson
via thenational.scot
SOME time ago I scribed on this page about the seat in the Western Isles being gifted to Labour due to arrogance and blatant petulance. Alas, in the intervening period nothing has changed and Labour will cruise to victory due to a split independence vote.
What a sorry state of affairs this is. If this is a taste of things to come then we are sunk without trace in 2026. It is a totally unsatisfactory situation. We will be a laughing stock and rightly so.
READ MORE: The islands deserve more than just a mention as campaigning heats up
I have confidently added Labour’s Torcuil Crichton to my accumulator for the General Election as he looks to be a shoo-in. No doubt the answer after the vote will be that the usual lessons will be learned. If the vote goes the way I think it is going to, I am sure I will not be the only one who will most certainly learn a lesson.
Old John
Ayrshire
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