I WOULD completely agree with most of Susan F G Forde’s thoughtful and informed analysis (New Treaty of Union would be in everyone’ s interest, Letters, October 20) except, alas, its conclusion.
Yes, of course, a new Treaty of Union could be drawn up but such a treaty would need to be based on mutual consent and trust, and that is exactly where the problem lies. I agree that ideally the current treaty should be officially revoked, but that trading relations with England should preferably not be jeopardised unnecessarily by such an action. Scotland cannot possibly consider itself bound by the terms of a worthless treaty and I am at a loss to understand why that vital point has not yet been taken on board by the Scottish Government.
I believe we have to look at the current position very realistically. Brexit has unilaterally altered the terms of bilateral negotiation (as its proponents had always intended it should). It’s clear that Scotland and Wales are no longer being given their place. To the contrary, a majority of Scottish voters supported the Remain option in the EU referendum yet that fact is wilfully disregarded. A power grab by Westminster of existing devolved powers is very much on the Brexit agenda.
It seems to me to make very little sense for Scotland, now escaping an ancient though fraying noose, to trustingly put its head into a fresh noose already being craftily prepared for it by those who have no care or love for the true independence of Scotland. Have we learnt nothing at all from the treatment of Scotland in the past 310 years? I would put it to your correspondent that true amity, which is desirable, will only be established when England finally understands Scotland’s enduring resentment at the historic overlordship of its affairs by absentee landlords, American tycoons and paid servants of the Imperial war machine. Devolution was, one might argue, the belated start of a healing process but, having worthily begun it, England – now directed by a right wing anti-EU government – seems callously intent on removing all the bandages and leaving the patient unattended. When England at last gives belated respect due to a neighbouring independent and sovereign country, then I think we can then begin to talk realistically of a Treaty of Accord (not Union).
We might take our cue, perhaps, from the relationship that now exists between Norway and Sweden –once conjoined but, since 1910, independent of each other. For the sake of the wellbeing of the people of England and Scotland, we can all join in hoping that sanity will soon be restored within the body politic and a just and lasting settlement reached.
Cris Hampton, Address supplied
I ENJOYED reading Mr Graeme Goodall’s letter (Oil and Gas should have changed this country forever, Letters, October 21). He mentions Sir Ian Wood’s criticism of estimates of Scottish oil reserves given by the SNP (24 billion barrels) in their much criticised White Paper.
A video recording of that criticism was much discussed at the time of the 2014 referendum. There is, however, a much less publicised video of the same Sir Ian Wood, dated roughly at the same time that the White Paper was published, in which Sir Ian gave an even more optimistic estimate of his own of existing reserves (25 billion barrels).
I think that earlier video should be given much enhanced publicity in the near future. It is somewhat late now to wish we had not allowed the Westminster government to squander our oil wealth. But we still have renewable energy resources, and we should be careful not to allow that advantage to slip though our fingers in the same naive trusting way into the pockets of the rich.
Hugh Noble, Appin
YOUR article on Friday stated that an electric train travelled between Edinburgh and Linlithgow early on Wednesday morning and that this was the first time that an electric train has travelled on any section of the route. This is not true. Scottish inventor Robert Davidson (1804-1894) built the world’s first electric locomotive, and the GALVANI was tested on the Edinburgh & Glasgow Railway in 1842. The battery electric locomotive ran at 4mph. It was unsuccessful as it was 40 times more expensive to run a battery electric locomotive than to burn coal in a steam locomotive.
Derek Ferguson, Cumbernauld
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