IT was interesting to read Mike Small’s observations in the Sunday National (Scotland in limbo, Aug 18) that, in his opinion, the SNP have reached a stage in both the governance of the state and fundamentally as a party where they urgently need to (in the words of Edwin Collins) rip it up and start again.
The post-Sturgeon SNP we are currently experiencing is beset with a myriad of issues, some admittedly not of their own making but others that are the result of indecisive leadership and astonishingly poor judgment.
READ MORE: SNP branch calls for Angus Robertson to be sacked from cabinet role
The withdrawal of the whip from the MSP for Glasgow Shettleston may give rise to a few media headlines but it represents the tip of a series of badly managed and injudicious icebergs that have called the SNP’s political direction and management into question. John Mason’s comments on Israel are genuinely offensive and utterly unpalatable but should come as less than surprising from a man who refuses to accept Amnesty International’s description of Israel as an apartheid state and who is a member of a parliamentary cross-party group “Building bridges with Israel.”
The fact that Mr Mason and Culture Secretary Angus Robertson both met with the deputy Israeli ambassador to the UK at a time when the genocide of the Palestinian people is transparently being implemented by the Israeli government is greatly disquieting and heinous in equal measure. The fact that John Swinney has sanctioned and defended this meeting has, in my opinion, made his position untenable and left his reputation as a “safe pair of hands” in tatters.
READ MORE: Where is the inspirational leader in the SNP who can lead us to indy?
John Mason is the quintessential loose cannon. He is a man who would plainly be much more at home as a member of a party like the DUP or a Trumpist Republican. He is a fundamentalist Christian who believes in creationism, is plainly homophobic and aggressively anti-abortion. Just why he remains in a party that may be described as a broad church but always appeared to be more socially democratic than other political groups in Scotland is open to debate surely.
This whole affair has exposed a party in freefall and public confidence in the SNP government at an all-time low. A restoration of faith in the party’s basic values and objectives is an urgent necessity. We are crying out for a leader who can inspire, unite and revitalise supporters of a socially inclusive and egalitarian independent Scotland. Stephen Flynn, the time is nigh.
Owen Kelly
Stirling
MIKE Small has written an interesting piece in trying to analyse England as distinct from Scotland. I have been a resident in Scotland for almost 14 years, having been born and bred in England since the Second World War. So technically I’m as English as they come and yet, due to some Scottish ancestral connection, I feel more Scottish.
That said, Mike Small, the author of Scotland in Limbo in the Sunday National, raises question about the “Brittania Unchained” style of terrorism seen recently in England, which contains the inability to exercise any form of English identity and culture. I have to say that in all my years living in that country I haven’t a clue about an English identity, or culture.
READ MORE: Ex-MPs give verdict on what must be debated at SNP election review
Indeed, with reference to Keir Starmer, I have no idea about British values (this was never taught in school), including the notion of Britishness or Englishness. As children we might have read about Robin Hood and King Arthur as English heroes, but in reality these are totally fictional stories. As Small writes, the Queen is dead. Others will say long live the Queen!
Small asserts that few people under 50 in Scotland would identify as British. I wonder how many people in Scotland over 50 would identify as British. People in Scotland that come from many countries, including those in this unacceptable set of United Kingdoms, do so for many different reasons, but under the Scottish policy that we are all welcome. Indeed, I personally have found this to be the case and even more so through my support to see Scotland, my home, as a fully fledged independent nation and country.
Small writes that “the case for independence will need to be rebuilt entirely from the ground up and on completely different terms.” I agree. I am quite happy with the SNP being in government. Their socialist values are also mine. Different terms? Yes! The 1707 Union was/is a voluntary deal, with no rules or constitution to govern it. I really believe that as much as Scotland was led into it, we can be just as easily led out of it, subject to a majority referendum vote, which we have every right to bring into effect.
We do not need Westminster’s permission, never have done, regardless of the fact that Westminster insists on its non-providing attitude. We have Salvo. We have a fully recognised Claim of Right. It’s time it was brought into effect.
Alan Magnus-Bennett
Fife
SOME of your correspondents are not happy about people who write expressing criticism or their frustration with the SNP’s lack of progress towards independence. But what other forum can be used? A letter to an MSP or a minister may elicit an unsatisfactory reply, but not from the person you wrote to. As representatives of their constituents and to keep abreast of current concerns, we have to assume that MSPs also read The National.
READ MORE: SNP 'still has serious questions’ to answer on Israel after John Mason
SNP MSPs who write comment pieces in your paper rarely address points raised by readers. For example, many writers have expressed anger that the currency question has not been resolved, 10 years after that subject helped lose the 2014 referendum. A Pound Scots has been put forward as a plausible solution, but no MSP has expressed an argument for or against.
Another competence that is within the Scottish Government’s remit is land reform. Well-constructed proposals have been advanced to reform local taxation with a Scottish Land Tax. But again, not a peep from the SNP. What are they afraid of – big Tory-voting land owners?
It’s a shame Graeme McCormick withdrew his leadership bid.
Richard Walthew
Duns
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