THIS letter is to endorse the views expressed in a recent letter by Mr Alan McKinney, former National Organiser of the SNP (Letters, August 31). I write as a former Vice-Chaimran for Organisation of the party.

In a matter of some two years, SNP membership has risen from around 23,000 to 125,000, with a matching surge in MSP and MP numbers. Next year, ideally, there is a matching expansion of councillor numbers. However, the party elected structure to deal with this growth essentially remains the same.

Rapid growth puts strain on structures when they are not geared up to match the vastly expanded potential and demands, potentially creating a self-created brake on progress. The strength of the SNP is in being a volunteer organisation. So these proposals emphasise volunteer effort, not more staff and expenses.

There are currently four contenders for the one deputy leader role. I suggest a rethink.

A sole deputy is a hostage to misfortune as proved to be the case with Mr Hosie. Sound succession planning would suggest a safer and more democratic process is to have multiple options in the future as to who might be the First Minister’s successor.

A long “apprenticeship” proved highly successful in the case of the current talented incumbent. Fluking a single successful successor is risky. Four deputies of diverse focus would provide succession choice, training and share some of the workload, which will increase dramatically with the rapid onset of impending historic changes. Events have a habit of arriving with unexpected speed and it pays to be prepared.

The four contenders for deputy emphasise four different organisational development priorities: local government, party organisation, party-Westminster co-ordination, and EU diplomacy.

The current scene is set for a choice between these as if they were competing options. They are not. They are all urgent necessities that all need addressed. Preferably by volunteer champions who step forward to take on the very different but essential development roles. As has been recognised spontaneously by the contenders. If there are other contenders for these roles, so much the better.

Since changing the formal organisational constitution is probably much too much to ask, I therefore suggest that no matter which champion of which function wins the deputy role, the optimal outcome is the same. The party appoints the other contenders as well; to be the spokesman/ official representative for their chosen field of endeavour. Harness all the development ideas, energy and drive. Do not choose one and let the others get less attention. They are all urgently needed.

Extending that process, the party organisation would benefit from Topic Champions (titles to be determined) for the following, with an emphasis on a step-change in the use of internet strategies:

- Better Internet Resourcing and Information Provision for the Cyber-politics Debate

- Likewise for the Scottish Diaspora (unlike expatriates in England, the wider diaspora is markedly more pro self-government in orientation)

- Postal Vote Fraud Prevention

- Election or Referendum Day Voting Integrity

- Communication of SNP Government Successes to Electors (the mainstream media blank it out and no, virtue will not automatically be recognised and rewarded)

- Negotiation Terms and Strategy for Dissolution of the Union.

- Overseeing Planning Preparations for Repatriated Government Functions.

I trust that these views stimulate debate and prove of benefit.

Brian Innes-Will, Address supplied

Fear factor is key to how voters perceive immigrants

AFTER reading Michael Fry’s article on immigration and I can see where he is coming from, but let’s look at it from the other side of the coin (Immigrants can offer the drive that is vital to our economy, The National, September 22).

Angela Merkel’s Christian Democrats received a bloody nose in the latest local elections in her home region in Germany, with her party coming third behind a newly founded anti-immigration party. Amid rising violence in Germany she has admitted that she has lost control of the refuge crisis.

Donald Trump looks like he could win the presidency of the USA on an anti-immigration ticket. After the terrorist attacks in France, Marine Le Pen’s far-right National Front party could make sweeping gains in the next French general election.

Italy, Greece, Spain, Austria, Holland, Norway and Sweden to name but a few are all democracies whose governments are there at the whim of the people. They are elected to protect and preserve their way of life, and if it is perceived that they have failed in this task they will be replaced at the ballot box. If the governments of these democracies fail to address the concerns of their electorate we could see the rise of fascism and the end of democracy.

The British people voted to leave the EU (even after all the scare stories) because their main concern above everything else was immigration. They struggle, they see their children and grandchildren struggle to find decent paid work. Companies will hire tradesmen from other countries rather than start apprenticeships. Why? Because it’s cheaper.

Michael Fry looked at immigration from a humanitarian and economic point of view but failed to address the fear factor, the concerns of the plebeians, Joe Bloggs, the man in the street. Government of the people by the people for the people rings as true today as it did in 1863.

David Mckeen, Leven, Fife

ACCORDING to existing Westminster legislation, English waters stretch at their North Easterly point to 56 degrees 36 minutes north – that is over 100 miles North of the border at Berwick, and North of Dundee.

In 1999 Tony Blair, abetted by the Scottish traitor Donald Dewar, redrew the existing English/Scottish maritime boundary to annex 6,000 square miles of Scottish waters to England, including the Argyll field and six other major oilfields. The idea was specifically to disadvantage Scotland’s case for independence.

The pre-1999 border was already very favourable to England. In 1994, while I was Head of the Maritime Section of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, I had already queried whether it was too favourable to England. I little anticipated that five years later Blair would push it seventy miles north!!

I should explain that I was the Alternate Head of the UK Delegation to the UN Convention son the Law of the Sea, and was number two on the UK team that negotiated the UK/Ireland, UK/Denmark(Shetland/Faeroes), UK/Belgium, and Channel Islands/France maritime boundaries, as well as a number of British Dependent Territories boundaries. There are very few people in the world – single figures – who have more experience of actual maritime boundary negotiation than me.

The UK’s other maritime boundaries are based on what is known formally in international law as the modified equidistance principle. The England/Scotland border was of course imposed, not negotiated. It is my opinion that this border lies outside the range of feasible solutions that could be obtained by genuine negotiation, arbitration or judgement.

Beverley J Burns, Dundee

IN your story on the Kelpies winning an award (Kelpies scoop pioneer prize at canals awards, The National, September 22) you stated they were in Grangemouth – this is an error.

The Kelpie attraction’s own literature states that they are in Falkirk, and as a postal worker I can confirm that the Kelpies have a FK2 postcode, where as Grangemouth has an FK3 postcode.

David Reid, Address supplied

YOUR “Quick Crossword” is too difficult.

Dave Williams, Bo’ness via text



Letters I: The US position on the war in Syria reeks of hypocrisy