ROBIN McAlpine writes (The National, November 2) that 2018 and 2019 “do not look feasible” for a referendum and that we should “be ready to fight an independence referendum from 2020.” Long before then the English regime will force through Castillian-style legislation on the strength of English votes (for everyone’s laws), alleging it illegal for Scotland alone to hold any referendum on constitutional issues.
At the present time we have the so-called Section 30 Order. This neither grants nor denies permission for a referendum, though the Yoons are under the impression it gives them a veto. It does not. It is a device whereby London and Edinburgh agree that any referendum will be binding and they will respect the outcome.
Currently the Scottish Government is legally entitled to hold a referendum on any issue. If it does so minus a Section 30 Order request, then the referendum is simply classified as a non-binding one. If we vote Yes, the English regime could say it doesn’t recognise it as binding. However, the EU vote was a non-binding referendum, which Scotland emphatically rejected, so we could equally say we don’t recognise it as binding on Scotland.
Remember, we are in a union with England on the basis of an internationally agreed treaty between two sovereign states, and may withdraw from that union just as the English have chosen to withdraw their country from the EU union. There is a window open now which will remain open into 2019, after which the English regime will move to subvert the Treaty of Union and defraud Scots of their constitutional and legal rights.
Linda Horsburgh
WE are used to surprises in politics but who would have expected Corbyn’s shadow defence Secretary, Mia Griffith, to be attacking the Tories for spending too little on defence and insisting that a Labour government would spend more, probably at least another billion pounds (BBC Sunday Politics, November 5). This from a Corbyn team which has not committed to reversing the Tory welfare cuts. So military hardware comes before the poor or the NHS.
It was of course known that caught between the vice of the GMB union and Unite in England (Scottish policy is different), Corbyn caved in on his life-long opposition to nuclear weapons and went along, not just with the existing Trident, but with the full and costly Trident renewal programme. There has been no evidence that he has been fighting to reverse that position. What change can we really expect from any future Corbyn government?
Congratulations to Sarah Smith for challenging Ms Griffith on whether Labour would sign the UN Nuclear Ban Treaty negotiated by 122 countries in July. Labour will not. This important international development has been ignored by most of the UK media and it is good to see the issue being raised.
Isobel Lindsay
Biggar
WITH sex, power and money all wrapped up together, various sections and members of the establishment, groups and structures are coming apart.
When the country is still gripped by austerity, when some of us are about to launch a winter appeal for back-to-school clothing banks, what does it say when the head of a rich, powerful family – who receives grants from us but pays only “voluntary” income tax of her own determination – is outed as having invested her monthly payments in offshore tax havens?
Does it say “we” care about “our” subjects?
In a UK where billions will be spent long-term on Trident and fixing Westminster, where England has 86 per cent of the population, Scotland has 8.3 per cent but 24 per cent of the national deficit, how much longer will we be silent?
Isn’t it time we spoke out even more to show the Scotland we’re prepared to “fight for” – through the mobilisation of thought, debate, discussions and interactions with as many people and groups as possible?
We have to be demonstrate that politically and socially, we’re no longer controlled by parties and their ideologies, but that we’re prepared to contest the status quo.
Stay involved with the indy movement and become even more active as we prepare for the inevitability of a second indyref.
Ask others to join, host a meeting, or go to one. Attend training sessions to find out how to engage positively without antagonising others, or how to use social media. But let’s face it, face-to-face and personal experiences often prove more effective. We have to be ready, and this time, aye, we will (I pinched that from Lesley Riddoch, at Saturday’s SIC conference at the Usher Hall).
Selma Rahman
Edinburgh
IT seems I’m not the only person to cite European laws in support of Catalonia (Catalan five report to police In Belgium, The National, November 6). You report Jan Jambon, Belgian vice premier, stating: “You have Spanish law but also international law, the European Human Rights Treaty and such things, and they come ahead of member state law. So I think the international community must keep a close watch”.
In respect of the extradition order issued by Spain, he reminds us – and, dare I suggest, the EU and international community – that it can be rejected if it “would violate the human rights of a suspect” and that discrimination on the grounds of the individual’s politics, religion or race is grounds for refusal along with fears the suspect would not get a fair trial, which is what Puigdemont has consistently claimed.
Lovina Roe
Perth
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