HOW much detail would the Scottish Government have to release to satisfy those who are branding the due diligence carried out on firms receiving public cash from the Scottish Government as superficial?
In the past, we have heard allegations that lenses made by a Scottish company could be fitted to gun sights manufactured by another company that could be fitted in aircraft made by another company that could be bought by the Israeli Air Force.
The emphasis appears to be concentrated on Scottish companies that manufacture as part of their business components that could be used in equipment bought by the Israeli government.
Should the Scottish Government be carrying out due diligence on companies such as Teva that in 2024-2025 had around 20 contracts to supply NHS Scotland with numerous medicines?
READ MORE: Bare-knuckle boxing unlikely to return to Glasgow venue after mass brawl
Are these charities only concerned with companies that might be supplying the arms industry – what about those providing finance, medicines and many other services?
Why does everyone avoid the elephant in the room?
If governments were to hit Israel where it really hurt, by boycotting Israel’s massive pharmaceutical and semiconductor research and production industries, the repercussions would be worldwide, immediate and immense.
John Jamieson, South Queensferry
MONDAY’S National included an article by Jim Osborne of the Scottish Currency Group (SCG) headed “Why we believe these fears about post-indy pensions are unfounded”.
I assume it was in response to several recent letters critical of the group’s policies on currency. There has of course been no response from the SNP or the Scottish Government.
The article has clarified a few issues but raises a few more. In the view of the SCG, “a workplace pension being paid in GB£ will continue to be paid in GB£”.
I rather suspect that for a Scottish workplace, in Scottish local government for example, that might not automatically be the case.
Either way, this raises the question if goods in the shops are priced in Sc£, who will pay the currency conversion fees? This leads us straight on to the question of the exchange rate. As Mr Osborne clearly states, “it is impossible to predict the exchange rate”.
Apparently the SCG does now accept that there will be a “possibility of some moderate depreciation of the Sc£ in the first few years”, and that “the Scottish current account will be in deficit at independence largely because of the large outflows of profits earned by foreign investors”.
Sadly, there may also be a large outflow of capital as well. Investors, both foreign and domestic, may well decide that the value of a new Sc£ is not a concept they wish to depend on.
Mr Osborne goes on to state this does not matter as “purchasing power depends on the prices of goods and services in Scotland”.
As sadly much of what we purchase is imported into Scotland, the value of a Sc£ matters a very great deal.
In this frankly nightmare scenario, Mr Osborne suggests: “With our own currency, the Scottish Government would have much greater scope to implement policies which would help to manage prices, especially the prices of food, energy and housing”.
This has all the hallmarks of an economic fantasy land not far removed from the Soviet Union in the 1950s.
Mr Osborne ends by stating “There is no doubt whatsoever that pensioners will be better off in an independent Scotland provided we have introduced our own currency from the start, whatever the exchange rate of the Sc£ might be”.
There are sadly no facts in his article to support this bold assertion. It also has to be noted that – as far as I am aware – current SNP policy wants the GB£ retained for an indeterminate period of time. I am beginning to see why that is the case.
The SCG continues to fail to address the fairly obvious question of mortgages and loans owed by Scottish customers to English banks and building societies.
Presumably they would insist that repayments would continue to be made in GB£. Any devaluation of the Sc£ against the GB£ would incur corresponding, potentially large, increases in mortgage or loan repayments.
Mr Osborne’s article was of course unable to answer the fairly fundamental question – why the Scottish Government and the SNP appear very reluctant to get involved in attempting to effectively answer the currency question with any degree of credibility.
IF, and it’s a massive IF, we ever get to hold a referendum or decide that an election should serve as a referendum, plausible answers to the currency question will be required.
John Baird, Largs
FOLLOWING monumental political events in America, where good has triumphed over evil, Prime Minister Andy Burnham is re-opening discussions on Brexit.
Shevaun Haviland, director of the British Chambers of Commerce, has urged the PM to repair the damage of Brexit, adding that “the UK’s current trading relationship with the EU” was “bad for business”! Scotland would certainly agree.
With a “Celtic Alliance” of devolved nations committed to self-determination and independence, this open-minded PM will struggle to keep the UK together, especially when a cost of living crisis, the rise of the far right, control of AI, amid worsening climate events, all take precedence.
In Scotland, with the growth of many forms of renewable energy available, along with a record independence majority in Holyrood, there is a chance of real change where “Scotland’s Right to Decide” must be honoured – as described by Andy Burnham.
Grant Frazer, Newtonmore
Share