SO the three Unionist “amigos” – Stephen Kerr, Alistair Carmichael and Ian Murray from the Unionist branches in Scotland, writing in Scotland on Sunday – are calling for a Department for the Union to encourage “a better working” between the two governments. Which governments are they talking about? Is Wales to be included along with Northern Ireland? I thought we were already “Better Together”? It seems we are not!

They call upon English politicians to revolutionise their overtly centralised system of government. Now that shows the naivety of these three on the one hand and a tacit admission that the system is in urgent need of overhaul on the other.

They admit that it is actually the Westminster system that is over centralised! There is no English system, in fact there is no separate English Parliament.

If there is to be Department for the Union there has to be separate representation for all four nations in the UK! The problem is that there is no England government separate from the UK Government! The English entity determines the UK! All thee non-English nations in the “UK” are incorporated into the English system, in effect. Greater England. These three are deceiving themselves.

As these three branch amigos blabber on in utter naivety, their Anglo-Unionist parties are being politically mangled by the Ultra-Anglicised-Little-Englander Brexit-party south of the Tweed. As its former Ukip leader stood for destroying devolution for a return to a truer Britishness, the Unionist-devolutionist amigos must now be aware that their precious Union is imploding. They are panicking as their head offices are jointly under attack from rampant English nationalism and fuelled by xenophobia.

Their solution is a non-starter in the same way as that daft idea by about quasi-federalism by the Conservative Murdo Fraser. We can expect more daft and quasi-solutions by the score from the dying Union north of the Tweed as its adherents scramble to survive in a political world gone upside down.

John Edgar

I HAVE been most interested in the debate on cybernats initated by Kevin McKenna last Wednesday (My message to the SNP on ‘cybernats’: stop perpetuating a Unionist myth, May 8).

I am a cybernat, having been so defined by the SNP some ten years or so ago. I had written an article on two Labour party members in a limited-edition nationalist newsletter. I should emphasis that there was no element of personal attack involved.

At any rate the SNP’s “Disciplinary Committee” was set in action. For those still unfamiliar with what this is, it is eight people elected by National Conference to oversee internal party discipline.

It was scheduled to meet in Edinburgh at 11am on a Sunday morning. Since this was ten minutes before the first bus left Argyll for Glasgow I had no alternative than to submit my apologies.

The committee decided my article was so subversive and damaging to the Scottish political scene that I should be expelled from the party, and expelled I was. That was, as I said, ten years or so go so ago. Some eight months ago I decided to reapply to rejoin and due to health reasons was given a telephone interview by a committee of members, chaired by the normally scrupulously fair Ian Hughton. The committee rejected my application to rejoin for what I regard as generally superficial reasons.

I currently have a serious brain disease which affects my memory and can expect, according to medical advice, another three to five years, so the opportunities for another application to rejoin are practically non-existent since I am currently 83 years of age.

I have a long history of SNP activity, which included being part of Nicola’a campaign committee in the 1997 General Election. My wife and I have already postal voted SNP. Some things never change!

Alan Clayton

THE chickens are coming home to roost in the BBC. They pressed ahead with their elitist vision of what Scotland should have, disregarding the view of what the population wanted, which was a full Scottish Six.

To justify the extra money they were forced to spend in Scotland and to deflect from the Scottish Six issue, they boxed up a few programmes as the Emperor’s New Clothes, launched them on the new BBC Scotland channel before making them available on BBC1/2 a few week later. Instead of a Scottish Six they insisted it was a BBC Nine that the people were to have, whether they wanted it or not, despite evidence that no-one wanted to watch a news at nine during prime drama time.

In reality what they have done is given Scottish viewers what they have always had with a few sweeteners thrown in.The lack of funding shows, and when reality kicks in the public can see through the smoke and mirrors the Emperor has created.

Christine Smith