READING between the lines, Theresa May is to make a speech in Florence on the Brexit situation – or is it Brexit failure, or disaster pending?
This speech has been known about for several weeks and speculation is rife. What is there to say that cannot not be agreed by the Cabinet and taken back to Brussels? Then we hear that the Cabinet will meet about 24 hours before the event to have input. Obviously, there is not really much substance to the speech yet.
So has Theresa May been ploughing a lone furrow? Are there any firm positions on anything at the discussions to date in Brussels or has No 10, under David Davis, been treading water?
Why the big speech now from a continental city? Why not at Parliament? Or is Theresa May feart she might be heckled by her own side? She displayed a reluctance to engage here during the last election when she failed to demonstrate these strong and stable qualities she claimed she possessed. She, in effect, hid behind robotic phrases.
Big speeches never achieve much. The problem with the UK Brexit team is they have lacked substance and detail. Big speeches never go into minutiae either. The histrionics and soundbites always leave many questions unanswered.
The Brexit delusion within the May lame-duck government is forgetting that it has no real clout, no veto and no real say. Out means out and it can only ask to be heard. Yet, it has had nothing specific to offer quid pro quo in its claims to have the same deal it had as a member! That circle cannot be squared. The EU made that clear. No 10’s only real route from within its Brexit parameters is to leave with no deal and face the known and unknown consequences. Perhaps Theresa May will signal that final break-out!
The Tory Party and their propagandists in sections of the media have really created this MayHem in waiting.
John Edgar
Stewarton
IF you read Boris Johnson’s article in the Torygraph carefully, you will see the cunning in the wording.
Of the £350 million a week, one-third does not exist as a result of Mrs Thatcher’s automatic rebate, a sum which never leaves the Treasury. Of the remainder, approximately one- third is returned to the Treasury to be allocated to farming and other subsidies as directed by the EU.
Johnson says “we can take control” (meaning the Tory Government) of this and the one-third that remains with the EU to spend on the NHS. Devolved administrations and local authorities will also miss out on £1-1.5 billion of direct subsidies from the EU. Mrs May has stated frequently “nothing will change after we leave the EU” but it now becomes clear that Boris is setting her up for yet another volte-face to sit alongside the many she has already perpetrated.
Mike Underwood
Linlithgow
I CANNOT tell you how angry the letter from the self-satisfied Brendan Dick has made me (The National, September 20).
BT, Openreach and, of course, the BBC are all experts at low-hanging fruit. I, and who knows how many thousands of Scots, live without a useful service from these three and certainly would weigh down their statistics if we were included but of course nobody asks us!
The originally nationalised services were for the benefit of us all, but no longer is that the case. How would we feel if the NHS or, say, the school system was set up to only reach 90 per cent of us?
Mr Dick seems satisfied with a job well done but those of us who are outside that 90 per cent are denied ever having a decent service, apparently.
I live in Argyll, not known for its huge signal-blocking mountains, nonetheless not a single BBC signal reaches me. Not TV, not radio. Certainly not DAB.
BT provides and charges me for an 8Mb broadband connection, but I rarely see it at above 1Mb.
If I want to listen to the radio, and I do, I have to get it via the internet, but almost every few minutes the broadcast stops randomly for anything up to a minute before carrying on. This is clearly unacceptable but Mr Dick does not include this in his statistics.
They were giving away transistor radios at filling stations a little while back, but we had to pay £175 for an internet radio. Although you can get the Government’s voice through the BBC on your TV, that burns 50 times more energy than that transistor radio, so, no options really.
I live in a little village where nearly every house has a phone. When I asked for mine to be installed, BT sent me a quotation for £3600! I still have the letter! Scottish Telecom, as soon as we set it up, will be for Scots with the profits to benefit Scots.
Christopher Bruce
Taynuilt
YESTERDAY, BBC Radio Scotland’s lunchtime news was pleased to announce that some bod at University of Edinburgh had conducted some “research” and concluded that Scotland’s recoverable assets of oil and gas would be finished within a decade.
Without doing any research I know that a giant gas field in Scottish waters has just started production that will fulfil Scotland’s entire gas demand for at least the next forty years. In addition, a giant oilfield recently discovered in Scotland’s Atlantic margins, which will not start production for years, is being spoken of as possibly being larger than the largest oilfield in Saudi Arabia.
Oil & Gas UK has recently been telling us that Scotland’s future potential is enormous, so no wonder BBC Scotland were anxious to publish a load of baloney.
Bruce Moglia
Bridge of Weir
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