A LOT of well-produced coverage of the D-Day commemorations on all main television channels, but BBC Scotland, yet again, is seen to be the politically biased channel it is even at a time of commemorating all countries of the UK fighting fascism.

The BBC national news at 1800 hrs had, it has to be said, very good coverage of the day’s events, including a speech by the virtually unemployed leader of the Tory government in Westminster, one T May.

Fast forward to BBC Scotland news at 1830 which, quite rightly, because of the date, is broadcast from Normandy and covers, as you would expect, the slant on Scottish military involvement in the D-Day landings. But did we hear any of the speech from the FM of Scotland, who is attending the commemorations? Nope, just given a general coverage of what she said, no appearance, just basically brushed aside. Aye carry on BBC Scotland, we’re no surprised any more, after all who in Scotland would care about what our FM has to say?

Hang about at Pacific Quay, soon we will have a true Scottish news channel and in the meantime you lot can keep the seats warm!!!

Ian Heggie

WHILE lavish attention has quite rightly been focused on the D-Day landings and the role played by the British, American, French and others in the liberation of German-occupied Europe, one should not forget the Soviet Union’s crucial role in winning the war.

Starting in 1941, the Soviet Union bore the brunt of the Nazi war machine and played perhaps the most important role in the Allies’ defeat of Hitler. By one calculation, for every single American soldier killed fighting the Germans, 80 Soviet soldiers died doing the same.

The Soviet Union paid the harshest price: though the numbers are not exact, an estimated 26 million Soviet citizens died during World War Two, including as many as 11 million soldiers. At the same time, the Germans suffered three-quarters of their wartime losses fighting the Red Army.

The Russians paid almost the entire “butcher’s bill” for defeating Nazi Germany, accepting 95% of the military casualties of the three major powers of the Grand Alliance.

The epic battles that eventually rolled back the Nazi advance – the brutal winter siege of Stalingrad, the clash of thousands of armoured vehicles at Kursk (the biggest tank battle in history) – had no parallel on the Western Front, where the Nazis committed fewer military assets. The savagery on display was also of a different degree than that experienced further west.

By some accounts 60% of Soviet households lost a member of their immediate family, and we shouldn’t forget their key role in winning World War Two in Europe.

Alex Orr

ACCORDING to Thursday’s National, teachers work an extra day every week for nothing (Most teachers work an extra day every week, June 6)! Now, would that be a normal person’s day based on a 40-hour week, or a teachers day based on 22.5 hours in front of a class per week?

Willie Rennie at Thursday’s FMQs suggested OVER eight hours, which would mean that his idea of a working week exceeds 40 hours.

Two things then spring to mind: firstly, if an average teacher only spends 22.5 hours per week in front of a class, that means there are 17.5 PLUS Mr Rennie’s eight hours to do everything else. Where are all the time and motion people when you need them?

Secondly, given that teachers are given more than 14 weeks’ holidays per year (98 days), that would mean they are complaining about working an extra 38 days. I think they are well up on the deal.

After a 13 % pay rise, they now want a 20-hour week, and to also keep their massive holidays. There is only one question to be asked: who do these people think they are ?

Jim McGregor

JULIA Pannell (Letters, June 7) asks if other contributors to this particular saga on EU membership agree with every SNP policy. Personally, I don’t think we should be in Nato and I don’t think we should retain the monarchy.

However, the difference between me and her (and others seem to agree with me) is that I believe the way to approach policy differences in a democratic organisation is to make your views known and do what you can to influence others to support you.

However, once the majority view is reached, you either abide by it, with the greater goal of independence in mind, or if you cannot accept the decision you get out. What is not helpful is the sight of a group of individuals who adopt a dogged determination to to continue to carp about majority decisions with an apparent equal determination to undermine the SNP, who will always give us our best chance of obtaining independence. There’s just something very self-indulgent about this way of behaviour, with the hint of historical enmities attached to it.

Ms Pannell says she has not received straight answers. She has, and I’ve acknowledged that her concerns are valid. She also says that she was not triumphalist about the Brexit Party winning an MEP seat. Well, we’re going to have to agree to disagree on that one, but, having help to vote one in, can she confirm that she also supports their policies?

Douglas Turner