IN a recent piece on Newsnight it was highlighted that out of 23 Western European countries the UK had more mortalities of children under five years old per 1000 births than 21 of the others. The worst country was Malta. The presenter stressed that of all the reasons for this pondered over by various experts there was one outstanding one and I quote: “It’s becoming clear that there’s one word that cannot be ignored. That word is deprivation.”

However, what gets me is the UK is the continent’s second largest economy so how come it can’t properly look after its bairns/weans? The piece established statistically that the poorer the background of the child, the greater the chance of early death. Around three times greater in the poorest communities compared to the wealthiest.

Professor Sir Michael Marmot, author of the seminal government commissioned report in 2010 into health and inequalities, stated the country that has the best five-year-old mortality rate is Finland at 1.9 per 1000 live births. The UK is 3.9 (ie double). Also, at age 15 the UK’s ranking for child wellbeing out of 38 rich countries was 27th, well below the average. The presenter asked him “How have we got to this position?”.

A discussion ensued which I’m not going to elaborate on because as normal, it didn’t state the obvious. My answer to the question is as follows:

The reason why such a rich country as the UK has such a high level of deprivation is:

  • Since a certain individual called Thatcher became Prime Minister of the UK Government in 1979 working class people that didn’t agree with her policies have been totally disparaged, the heavy industries many of them were employed in paying decent wages were shut down and they were told to “get on their bike” to find work;
  • The greedy were encouraged to be greedier. Many of them making “loads of money” working in jobs that in the recent pandemic would have effectively made them pretty worthless. For example they weren’t doctors, nurses, carers, supermarket workers binmen, lorry drivers, etc. What they were good at was playing the capitalist game to the advantage of themselves and their own families;
  • When a Labour government was eventually elected Blair was so keen not to “scare the horses” (ie the rich and powerful) his governments policies not only failed to close the gap between the rich and the poor, it actually became worse!
  • Since the Tories have been back in power from 2010 those on the bottom rungs of the wealth ladder have been systematically stamped on. Since Brexit many working class voters in England have been brainwashed into blaming immigrants, asylum seekers, Europeans, the “politically correct”, etc (ie anybody but the Tories) for their plight. Meanwhile the rich keep getting richer and guess what, the poor keep getting poorer.

If the foregoing is anathema to anyone in Scotland currently against independence, at least see the thread that runs through this. It has been UK Governments, even a Labour one, that have been responsible for this situation for more than 50 years. Do you honestly think this will change any time soon?

All the evidence points to this state of affairs continuing well into the future. Please, please, please, just let that penny drop!”

Ivor Telfer
Dalgety Bay, Fife

I REFER to the comments from Mark Ruskell, the Green Party climate spokesman, in Wednesday’s article “Greens hit out at Cambo oil field ‘doublespeak’”.

He is accusing Deirdre Michie, CEO of Oil and Gas UK, of “doublespeak” but at least she demonstrates some knowledge of her subject.

While there remains strong demand for heating and transportation fuels, Scottish oilfields are needed to save the planet.

Scottish oilfields produce some of the lightest and “sweetest” crudes in the world, easily transported to north-west European refineries, being easily refined and naturally rich in gas oil and lighter fractions – just what the market needs.

As the older North Sea fields expire, they need to be replaced or else supply gaps will be filled from the vast resources of the Middle East, eg Saudi Arabia or Iran.

Middle Eastern (ME) crudes are “heavy”, with a naturally lower content of gas oil and lighter fractions compared to Scottish oil. Each barrel of ME crude will be more expensive to ship and more barrels will be needed to produce the same volume of gas oil etc. Of course, many refineries will be able to use catalytic cracking equipment to squeeze out extra gas oil from the heavier ends of the ME crudes, but that entails more expense and yet more energy consumption.

The National:

Some crudes, such as from Nigeria, are closer to Scottish crudes in quality but transportation would be much more costly. Some crudes, such as from Venezuela, are even heavier than ME crudes.

Mark Ruskell, I hope you can see where this is heading.

Yes, unlike Deirdre Michie, you have been speaking tommyrot.

Until we can significantly reduce demand for oil derived heating and transportation fuels, “new” Scottish oil fields are needed to minimise emissions from the production and refining of crude oil.

Alternatively, if we could prolong the life of existing Scottish oil fields and avoid premature expiry, then there may be some justification in blocking “new” Scottish oil fields. One way or the other, we need to maintain Scottish oil field production at least at the current level, to help save the planet.

The Green Party should forget about oil supply issues and focus on demand. That would be much more helpful.

Alan Adair
Blairgowrie

REGARDING Wednesday’s long letters on Hamish MacPherson’s excellent double-page spread on Gerry Cairns’ biography, of the Revolutionary Ruaraidh Erskine of Marr. Readers Councillor Andy Doig and Frank Casey would appreciate the fact that Mr MacPherson could not cover everything in two pages. Frank Casey complains of the inaccessibility and problems in purchasing Gerry Cairns’a informative and well-written and researched book. No doubt Mr Cairns, or his publisher, will reply shortly on how to obtain your copies.

Cllr Doig complained of the misrepresentation of the great Roland E Muirhead, of which I am sure he is confident will soon be corrected by Hamish. For some reason, such an important figure in our movement seems to be written out of history. R E Muirhead was indeed a Republican Socialist, albeit a millionaire, who spent generously on the cause. As pointed out, he owned the tannery business at Gryffe, near Wemyss Bay. He bought the SNP premises at the corner of Bath Street and Elmbank Street, Glasgow, now a cafe with a dunnie. The SNP sold it off and moved to Edinburgh after the historic by-election victory of Winnie Ewing, now in a care home near Weymss Bay, near Roland’s old, and still functioning, family factory.

Roland was a founder member of the Scottish National Congress and bought their premises in Elmbank Crescent, supplies with a great selection of books and propaganda pamphlets for sale, which deserve to be saved not only for prosperity but for today’s activists and historians.

He practically founded and ran the annual Wallace Society rallies in Elderslie. This is not to be confused by the current “Apolitical”, anti-Republican Socialist, anti-Irish, anti-SCND and pro-Jacobite Siol nan Gaidheal dresser uppers. The current Society of William Wallace is now a “charitable trust”.

William Wolfe, another neglected figure, took over the running after Roland Muirhead, along with the local SNP branch every year. The mass rallies were universal and open to and attended by a wider movement, unlike today. They lack the organisational skills of the all-inclusive, “All Under One Banner”.

If Roland E Muirhead was alive today, he would turn over in his grave at the antics and right-wing politics of the money-making “Trust”. It is time the SNP took back control of these rallies.

Donald Anderson
Glasgow

IT was with disgust and shock that I read in your paper that a majority of Scots are in favour of retaining the monarchy. How can this make sense to those who want independence for Scotland?

Independence should mean complete independence and not remaining tied to the apron strings of absurd rituals and traditions. It seems from what is going on at the moment that this family of mediocrities (the Windsors) are allowing themselves to be used as tools by the English nationalist Tories to convince Scots that independence is not a good idea.

From what recent statistics show, the move towards independence is sliding backwards. The SNP are hardly helping matters by being involved in inter-party squabbling and generally making fools of themselves. The Scots in general are making fools of themselves being split into cringers, fearties and the middle class who are indifferent to national identity.

No other nation in Europe would put up with this lame attitude toward national independence. 300-odd years have left the Scots apathetic and virtually bereft of real national identity. They were the victims of one of the worst treaties in history, helped by the betrayal of their own aristocracy who succumbed to the bribes of the English and under the threat of invasion if Scotland did not submit to English pressure.

James Dobbie
Wabern, Switzerland

IN response to P Davidson’s letter of Wednesday regarding the flouting of Scots law by English businesses, I would say that I am in complete agreement and share her sense of outrage. However, we are not, as individuals, totally without influence; we need not wait on government to take action on such matters, desirable as that would be.

Over the past 30 years I have been acutely aware of this problem and have had some little success in addressing the matter personally. I have been in the habit of returning documents sent to me by English companies requesting the alteration of clauses in agreements imposing English law on Scottish people in their own country.

My position is that if the alterations requested are not made I refuse to do business with them. They usually fall into line. On one occasion, at a board meeting in a prominent Scottish company a contract was proposed by an auditor containing just such an offending clause. The auditor was a well-known international accountancy firm in Glasgow with clear access to Scottish legal advice. They got their advice (but not from their own legal advisers) and very smartly corrected their miserable mistake. I would exhort all of us to take appropriate personal action when such offences or any like offences are committed.

George Muir
via email