I WAS greatly saddened by the letter from Ian Heggie in Friday’s issue. While he is of course entirely entitled to hold his own personal view on all things political, I must state that I feel that the whole mood expressed in his contribution does nothing to help take forward the aspirations of those of us, including presumably him, on the independence side of the political spectrum.
Surely it is important at all times to behave in a courteous and decent manner when dealing with those of a different viewpoint to your own; that way you will invariably be “one up” on the opposition. By all means be as sarcastic and critical as you can – especially when dealing with those occupying the higher echelons of the political scene, and they are displaying unbelievable ignorance of the subject matter under discussion.
As a SNP member I certainly see nothing for which Hannah Bardell should apologise; remember also that even one person converted to your point of view is a success, and who knows just when that might happen? The silver lining to all of this was of course that it managed to upset Speaker Bercow, and that cannot be bad!
On a more cheerful note, I thought that Kirsty Strickland’s contribution (The great December con is now just about upon us, November 24) was absolutely great – just what we needed at this time of year.
George M Mitchell
Dunblane
READ MORE: Letters, November 24
I AM astounded at the reaction of Ian Heggie of Glenrothes to Hannah Bardell SNP MP taking the mickey out of the hallowed Westminster Chamber. He implies that the other MPs were Tories, but in fact there were three Labour and one Tory.
His castigation that Ms Bardell should not do anything but work shows his lack of understanding as to what goes on down there. Far better to have some social input rather than treat other MPs as deadly enemies, and spend time in the bars. I would have thought that creating some amusement and upsetting the Speaker would have got his approval; as a member of the SNP for more than 50 years I was amused, and in fact the coverage in the media has justified her action.
The House of Commons is not a divine institution in my book.
Jim Lynch
Edinburgh
THE headline on Jane Cassidy’s article, “Majority back gender self-identification change” (November 24) is grossly misleading although it is not until well into her second paragraph that the meaning of “majority” is revealed.
“More than 15,000 people” responded to the Scottish Government’s consultation, ie about 0.15% of the population, of whom “49% were Scottish residents, 38% were residents elsewhere in the UK and 13% were from outside the UK”. Then we read that 60% of respondents backed the government’s plan and 61% “supported the proposal for this to be open to those aged 16 and over”.
I am neither a mathematician nor statistician and I am certainly not homophobic nor against the right of adults to re-document their birth gender, but come on! How is it possible for the Scottish Government, on the figures stated, to come to the conclusion that a majority of Scots favour their proposal?
I realise that, by questioning the validity of this consultation, I am opening myself to the full wrath of the thought police now dominating out society but the majority of us – ie the 99.85% who did not vote, perhaps because they did not know the consultation was taking place – might feel that their views don’t matter in the Sottish Government’s decision-making process. I suggest that this is why so many people feel overlooked by and angry with politicians.
Perhaps, since the Scottish Government is so keen on the electorate having a second say in important matters, it might carry out this consultation again. This time advertising its existence widely.
Lovina Roe
Perth
READ MORE: Gender self-identification plan backed by majority of people
DURING his tenure as First Minister, I considered Henry McLeish to be a decent enough cove who actually believed in devolution and wished for Scotland to prosper.
That said, Henry’s latest bout of navel gazing regarding the constitution (Essay, November 23) had me baffled at times, in particular his statement that the majority of Scots are “patriotic” but “unconvinced” regarding independence.
According to my dictionary, a “patriot” is “one who defends or is zealous for his country’s freedom or rights”” I would therefore suggest that to describe someone who does not vote for independence as “patriotic” is at best an oxymoron.
On the other hand, of course, the patriotism to which Henry refers could be that which is extolled by those whose “unconvinced” status is due to their – in some cases slavish – acceptance of their invented, imposed, new national identity of Anglo-British.
Malcolm Cordell
Broughty Ferry, Dundee
READ MORE: Henry McLeish: Corbyn must act amid the Tories' Brexit chaos
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