NICOLA Sturgeon has (deliberately?) missed the point of Jeremy Corbyn’s speech about EU regulations specifically excluding agency workers from abroad from living wage/minimum wage legislation and many benefits.
The use of agency workers from abroad by employers is one of the reasons why very many Yes voters did not vote Remain and are very uncomfortable with the uncritical support for the EU given by the SNP and the Greens.
(The other main reasons were the disgusting treatment of Greece, the EU’s failure to tackle tax dodging, the insistence on private tendering for public services and the failure to organise a humanitarian pan-European policy to support refugees.)
To equate Jeremy Corbyn’s reasoned criticisms of the EU’s failures with the racist claptrap of Nigel Farage is clearly wrong and does Ms Sturgeon no credit. He was clearly attacking exploitative employers and the agencies they use.
He was not attacking workers from abroad who lack basic protection from arbitrary dismissal, who are not entitled to most UK benefits and whose pay does undercut the living wage.
Corbyn has come under fire from Scottish Labour right-wingers who do not back his agenda.
That disunity should be the focus of Nicola Sturgeon’s remarks. Equating Corbyn with Farage’s little Englanders is wrong and undermines support for independence.
John Dennis
Dumfries
REFLECTING on the threatened loss of devolved powers especially, but also on retroactive application of immigration rules, I am reminded of a wee rhyme my old mother was fond of reciting (my additions in brackets):
Give a thing, take it back
God will ask you: “what is that?”
If you say you do not know (or do not care)
He will send you down below (it’s Hellish hot there).
So, it’s clear where our UK Government is heading.
If only they would go there now!
Alan Adair
Blairgowrie
“DAVIDSON and Gove call for fast EU exit on fishing” (The National, March 12). An unlikely alliance as the two of them join forces to hint at a small success for Brexit.
The trouble is that although there will be enough fish for Scotland’s fishing industry, a large percentage of the fish was destined for the EU market, who may take unkindly to EU boats being restricted from traditional fishing grounds – leading to tariffs or restricted access.
Meanwhile England’s traditional fishing ports will be investing – with Westminster’s help – in super-trawlers and factory ships to plunder the fish around Scotland’s coasts, and with factory ships they can bypass fish markets and fish processors in the north-east of Scotland.
The answer is for Scotland to take control of all marine biological resources in Scottish territorial waters and manage them through Regional Committees of local fishermen. These committees will also have the authority to auction licences to EU fishing boats with the money received going towards the local committees.
The Scottish Government will concentrate its efforts on maintaining effective conservation of fish stocks and developing fish processing to add value to the catch. Let’s keep Westminster’s hands off Scotland’s fishing industry. We don’t want any more Thatchers gambling away Scotland’s fishing for a budget rebate.
George Leslie
North Glassock
I NOTE with interest that no-one proposed similar legislation for Brexit to that employed in the first Scotref whereby a simple majority wasn’t sufficient. There had to be a minimum amount before devo would be “granted” by our masters in Wastemonster.
The Brexit vote was arguably more important and life-changing than the devolution referendum, yet apparently a wafer-thin two per cent in favour of Leave means the country has “spoken”. There are many organisations whose rules state certain radical changes can only be achieved by a two-thirds majority or similar, but not apparently on this occasion.
Barry
Blantyre
I AGREE with the letter by James Ormiston (The National, March 12) regarding access to Yes Groups online.
Like George I have no intention of joining Facebook or Twitter ever, but would like to get to know the address of my local group in Perth. I will do this by asking a friend who uses Facebook to help me out. I choose not to use social media or any other online database unless absolutely necessary.
Once you have had someone try to steal your identity you will understand.
Robert Anderson
Perthshire
THE Wee Ginger Dug refers to an Empire biscuit “well past its sell-by date” (We need to tell the Tories: Hands off our Parliament, March 10).
As a child in the 1930s I liked “German biscuits”, sort of shortbread with icing sugar on. Then when war with Germany started I was told they were now “Empire biscuits”. Then I got “German measles” and insisted that it was “Empire measles”. Logical, but not necessarily appreciated by those in charge!
David Stevenson
Edinburgh
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