RUTH Davidson has let off another “damp squib”: SNP need outright majority before Westminster will allow Indyref2!

Methinks Ruth doth panic! The Claim of Right focused on the people of Scotland, and if the people through their party representatives vote in Holyrood to have Indyref2, then it will be!

The next outburst from the increasingly hysterical Ruth Davidson will probably be a hoarse screech demanding that only when every voter votes SNP can there be an Indyref2!!

All that and more outrageous screeches can be expected. How long will it take before the parties and persons calling for Indyref2 are labelled terrorist?

We are in uncharted times democratically with threats to parliamentary democracy being openly mouthed by persons like Davidson, Raab, Hancock, Johnson and others in the nasty party as English politics are in utter confusion. The Duke of York has now entered the fray arguing that post-Brexit will be hard but surmountable in some sort of way. Royalty are meant to stay out of the fray, now that myth has been burst. A wee job lined up for him as roving globalist to sign deals, perhaps, and impress the natives?

Sajid Javid, Ruth Davidson’s latest hero, who seems to run the Home Office under the caption “If in doubt, send to Dungavel”, is claiming more money for police to counter post-Brexit protest and anger across the country.

John Edgar

HOW many more times has Ruth Davidson got to lose an election before she realises that she is out of step with the people of Scotland? Since she became the leader of the Tory branch office in Scotland she has declared that every election has been a mandate on whether the SNP could call another indyref – and each and every time she has lost! What makes this serial loser think that losing every vote on this issue means that she can still dictate terms on when the Scottish people can have a referendum on our independence?

The SNP Scottish Government holds multiple mandates on having the power to call a referendum within the lifetime of this Scottish Parliament – because they actually won those elections and votes. I know Ruth Davidson is not exactly known for consistency – flip-flopping on any and every policy to please her bosses in London – but surely someone must be able to get the point across to her that losers don’t get to dictate the outcome of votes.

We know Ruth’s wee pals in the media will always protect her from difficult questions – such as “How many elections will you have to lose before the Tory branch office sack you?” – but maybe the rest of us should treat her with the utter contempt she deserves?

Cllr Kenny MacLaren

WHEN the Scottish Parliament was set up 20 years ago the parliamentary term was set at four years. This worked well until the Liberal Democrats convinced the Conservative party that Westminster should have five-year fixed-term parliaments.

It was decided that the people of Scotland could not cope with a Westminster election in the same year as a Holyrood election, so the 2015 Holyrood election was postponed until 2016.

What is to stop us returning to the four-year cycle and having an election in 2020? This could become a de facto referendum, with the Scottish Government making it clear that a majority vote for independence-supporting parties would be a mandate for exiting the United Kingdom.

We also need to work on the voting system we use for these elections. I am in favour of proportional representation, but clearly the list system as currently applied is not fit for purpose. The current system allows the political parties to appoint MSPs for life, as against constituency MSPs who may lose their seats if it is the will of the people. I have seen it suggested that no list MSP should serve more than two consecutive terms. This would be better than having MSPs who have never won a seat at any time, but remain MSPs because they have been appointed by their parties.

Robert Mitchell

I WAS fortunate enough to be at the England-Scotland game. I have recovered my voice, but I haven’t been able to escape either Brexit or the PM leadership farce despite still being away.

Hunt and his fellow contenders have found it surprisingly easy to deliver soundbites and promises to appeal to the 130,000 or so Tory party members entitled to vote.

But where’s the evidence of ability and vision that will deliver bread-and-butter policies, provide jobs and incomes, fill cupboards and close food banks and secure the futures of generations to come? Who amongst them has done anything in the way of actual forward planning that would do the day job beyond the end of October, whilst taking account of monumental changes we’ll experience post-Brexit?

Instead, we hear of pledges to cut taxes for higher earners from Boris, to be offset by saving all that bus money not going to the EU. But wasn’t that tipped for the NHS? Apologies, I forgot, we won’t have an NHS since it’s going to be privatised and we’ll all need private health insurance.

Javid has launched his campaign by including the information that he’s built a reputation for doing multibillion-dollar deals, some of the largest the world had ever seen. Does that remind you of anyone? Begins with T, ends with P.

It doesn’t matter which of the candidates you spotlight, underneath it all they sound the same, because they parrot the same: the Tory ideology of one nation. But their kind of nation. One that is set to continue to weaken and deprive those weakened and deprived by their austerity programme. A nation that demonises outsiders ( remember all those Turks that were set to come), and one that wants to normalise homelessness and rough sleeping, and in-work poverty

Some candidates then, some choice, some outcome! Unless of course we take the option we should have taken in 2014.

Selma Rahman