WELL, I know people warned that Labour’s mask would slip, but I think this is something of a record, isn’t it? I refer to the interview given on Tuesday morning by Ian Murray.
Asked about new powers for Holyrood, he said that it was a case of using existing powers better. In which case, why did Labour commission Gordon Brown to write a report on reforming devolution only to simply ignore its recommendation? Hardly “change”, is it?
Furthermore, the new Scottish Secretary wants to turn the Scotland Office into a spending department. When we’re being warned how tight money is, just where exactly is the funding coming from? Is it by cutting funding to Holyrood? Is channelling funding to Scotland and bypassing Holyrood not exactly what was proposed by Alister Jack and his Tory pals? Not the change people voted for.
So, instead of blaming and tearing lumps out of each other, shouldn’t independence supporters unite and turn their energy and fire on the Unionists? After all, “attack is the best form of defence”.
Andrew Haddow
Glasgow
AS I write it is five days since the election. What have we discovered?
Rachel Reeves wants massive house building with changes in planning laws but Labour won’t be doing any of the building.
A possible wealth fund to be created, financed by oil and gas.
GB Energy, which will take years to set up and get going and will depend on 75% private investment – PFI 2.
We will probably be forced to have nuclear power stations in Scotland – Ian Murray on Good Morning Scotland refused to rule out using the powers of the Scotland Office to bypass Holyrood.
Tendering is under way for cable and converter work for Eastern Green Link 3, which will link Peterhead with Norfolk in England. Great for upgrade of the National Grid, but my question is will electricity cost the same in Peterhead and in Norfolk?
Then of course there is Sarwar claiming Scottish Labour has a mandate with 37 seats but SNP had no mandate with more than 50. Same old, same old Labour and the BBC still backing them up by misreporting Scotland – telling us of Sillars’s comments on Nicola Sturgeon but forgetting to tell us Ian Murray would not rule out nuclear power in Scotland.
Winifred McCartney
Paisley
HAS someone given Rachel Reeves a copy of Professor Gavin McCrone’s 1974 report on the potential oil revenue from the North Sea, and has that prompted her to raid Scotland’s oil and gas sector to set up this investment fund? The Norwegians did that from the outset of their oil production and now have a sovereign fund worth $1.2 trillion, a missed opportunity for Scotland.
Gordon Walker
via email
SIR Keir Starmer, the new Prime Minister, after his inaugural Cabinet meeting in Downing Street, explained that he had a clear “mandate” to govern, having secured a majority in England, Scotland and Wales. With 412 seats, this is indeed true. However, with 33.8% of the popular vote, those advocating for a proportional-representation system may argue his mandate is a little thin.
Continuing with the theme of mandates, however, it is interesting to note that the SNP secured 47 out of a possible 56 Scottish seats in the 2019 General election, 45% of the popular vote, yet this was not considered a mandate for a second referendum by the then Conservative government.
Later in 2022, with a nationalist majority in Holyrood, the UK Supreme Court, with reference to the UK constitution, again denied Nicola Sturgeon the right to hold a referendum. At the time, the then leader of the official opposition, Sir Keir Starmer, said he would oppose a second referendum even if the Supreme Court deemed it legal.
And now in the run-up to the July 4 UK election, Sir Keir, again insisted he would not enter negotiations on a second referendum with John Swinney, even if the SNP won a majority in Scotland.
Surely this prompts the question, when is a mandate not a mandate?
Stuart Smith
Aberdeen
THE National’s headline on Monday was “Scotland will get more respect”, and written below was “PM holds Bute House talks with Swinney”. May I respectfully suggest this should have read “FM hosts Bute House talks with Starmer”.
Dave Bathgate
Capielaw
THE north-east of Scotland has the opportunity to play a significant role in the global race to net zero. However, this will not be possible without the political will. We know that the Scottish Government is ready to do all it can to ensure the north east becomes a renewables powerhouse but we are yet to get confirmation of that from the new UK Government. A good starting point would be for Sir Keir and his Energy Secretary to base their GB Energy project here in Aberdeen. Any other location would be a betrayal of the industry and the wealth of talent and expertise we have in the workforce. Countless UK Governments have used the north east as a cash cow and it is time they start to pay that back. GB Energy must be based in Aberdeen.
Logan Unwin
Aberdeen
I FIND it rather strange that voters have to produce ID but Reform UK seems to prove that candidates can be ghosts, and everyone knows that ghosts cannot be photographed. Another piece of Westmonster wisdom. Own up, who voted for them?
M Ross
Aviemore
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