WILLIAM Ross’s letter (Letters, June 16) gets the EU fundamentally wrong, and contains a number of serious factual inaccuracies.
His central contention is that the EU is undemocratic and “imposes” things on Scotland. This is flatly false.
The EU is not dominated by the Commission. All laws must be amended and agreed by the democratically elected European Parliament, where just like in Holyrood we can team up with like-minded elected politicians to achieve progressive outcomes for our citizens: such as the ban on excessive bonuses in banking, an initiative originating in the Parliament.
Laws are also agreed to by democratically elected governments in the Council. [William Ross talks about Britain losing 72 votes out of 72] but what he doesn’t tell you is that, although the UK was on the “losing” side 72 times, it was on the winning side 2,466 times, ie 95 per cent of the time – laws are not “imposed” on us but on the contrary are agreed to by us.
The House of Commons Library has shown that a majority of our laws do not come from the EU, in fact only 15 per cent do – and as I’ve said, the vast majority with our agreement.
European Treaties have not been imposed on the UK: everyone was signed by a democratically elected government answerable to the people at elections.
William Ross asks why we need the EU for progressive rules. We need to work together with our European partners in order to deal with challenges which are beyond the capability of one country to act: abolishing roaming charges, tackling tax avoidance, fighting climate change and building cross-border energy and transport infrastructure are just a few examples. Co-operating in the EU enhances our ability to act, it does not diminish it, and we have more allies across the rest of Europe than in Westminster.
To briefly deal with the other points: immigration is a benefit to our society in a multitude of ways, not least the £55 per second that they plough into our public finances, and far from putting public services under pressure they underpin them: 10 per cent of the doctors in our NHS were trained in another EU country.
We have seen a wilful austerity programme defunding public services. To see then these same politicians blame immigration on such shortages as exist is nothing short of sinister, I would hope no nationalist would collude in such deception.
To lightly dismiss the importance of EU funding to key Scottish constituencies like farming (EU subsidies are worth almost double the market income of farmers in Less Favoured Areas) is as churlish as to complain about richer countries making a larger contribution to a common project than poorer ones, based on ability to pay.
On trade, yes we will continue to trade but certainly not on the same favourable terms as now. Tariffs are still significant on a large number of items, such as around 20 per cent for animal products, 12 per cent for clothing and 10 per cent for cars – that’s leaving aside the costs of customs checks and adapting to EU rules we would have no say over. Don’t believe for a second that such a negotiation will be easy: 13 per cent of UK GDP is linked to EU exports, while only 3 per cent of EU GDP is linked to UK exports – they will have the upper hand in trade talks.
Besides, the EU has been great for Scotland. The EU is the greatest project in world history to replace the rule of force with the rule of law; to replace arbitrary power with consensus and compromise. Let’s not turn our backs on it. We have more allies across the European continent than we ever will in Westminster.
Alyn Smith MEP
Edinburgh
SOME people say the EU Parliament is “undemocratic”.
Whether you intend to vote Leave or Remain, please consider how democratic the EU and Westminster parliaments are.
All 751 members of the EU Parliament are democratically elected as MEPs and all have equal voting rights. The UK Parliament currently has 1452 members, but only 650 are elected as MPs (44.8 per cent), whilst there are 802 unelected members (55.2 per cent)
After the 2015 General Election, David Cameron’s Conservatives had a majority of only 12 MPs in the House of Commons, but used it to change the law and banned 40 Welsh, 18 Northern Irish and 59 Scottish MPs from having equal voting rights.
Therefore only 82 per cent of MPs and 36.7 per cent of the UK Parliament have full voting rights and the Conservatives now have a massive 103-seat majority for English laws. Their decisions on English issues could ultimately affect Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland.
The UK Parliament currently has 89 hereditary peers who have parliamentary seats assured purely by accidents of birth. This is due to the forgotten glorious or shameful exploits of their far distant ancestors, however they can continue to pass laws for the rest of their lives. Current membership includes the 3rd Baron Lyell, who was only four years and 31 days old when he succeeded to his peerage, and the 4th Viscount Goschen and the 4th Viscount Astor who both succeeded to peerages before their sixteenth birthdays. No other European country gives parliamentary seats to unelected aristocrats.
Prime ministers and political parties regularly exercise great patronage by giving Life Peerages to their friends, political advisors and to former MPs who have been defeated in democratic elections. Life Peerages have also often been “bought” by people donating millions of pounds to their political parties.
The UK Parliament currently has 687 life peers, several of whom have served prison sentences for crimes including: arson, dangerous driving (during which someone was killed), perjury and fraudulently claiming Lords expenses. Despite their crimes, they can continue to pass laws for the rest of their lives.
In a mostly secular country, why should 26 Church of England bishops be given seats in the UK Parliament and why must it be they’re all from this one specific Christian denomination? Also, why should the UK Prime Minister be responsible in their nomination? It should be noted that the only other country which gives parliamentary seats to religious leaders is Iran.
Whether you intend to vote Leave or Remain on 23rd June, please consider which Parliament is more democratic. The EU Parliament, which is 100 per cent elected, or the UK Parliament, which has only 44.8 per cent elected members and only 36.7 per cent with full rights.
Roddy MacNeill
East Kilbride
TO save time and newsprint in future, can I just assure all celebs, VIPs and those of a creative bent, that we little people honestly don’t need their advice on who or what to vote for and we don’t actually care who you vote for either, or the reasons, they are wasting their time (Eighty of nation’s artists give full support to Remain camp, The National, June 15). After the 2014 referendum, Scots in general are more mature than elsewhere in the (supposed) UK and we no longer take any notice of the famous, infamous and/or gut-wrenchingly artistic.
We are no longer swayed by your undoubtedly heartfelt and well-meaning round-robin views or your excellence in whichever field you dig in. You and your opinions are no more or less important or influential than those of the rest of us because you wrote a book, acted in a play or appeared on the box. Vote how you want, feel what you want, I give you permission. Just leave the rest of us to do the same.
Robert F Henderson
Fort William
HAVING voted Yes in the 2014 referendum and intending to vote remain in the coming EU referendum, I wish to put my case for remain clearly and succinctly. The EU is by no means perfect but by remaining, the UK can be a force for change and improvement. The alternative is unthinkable, we become the 51st state of America.
Terry Keegans
Beith
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