ONCE upon a time, I think, we regarded our political leaders, specially the Prime Minister, with respect – I mean Heath, Wilson and Callaghan, when I became more interested in politics. Now as we watch the unseemly bunch vying for the top job, I despair.
Closer to home my regard for Conservative politicians has declined to zero minus. David Mundell was a junior minister at the Scotland Office when Alistair Carmichael was the Secretary of State for Scotland; Carmichael was a Liberal and this was in the period when there was a joint Tory/Liberal coalition, which destroyed the Liberals. When Carmichael published a smear against Nicola Sturgeon in what she was alleged to have said to the French Ambassador, Mundell was conveniently looking the other way. What was his role at the Scotland Office for, for heaven’s sake?
Mundell became Tory Scottish Secretary in 2015, as he was the only Tory MP in Scotland! Since then he has been in the Cabinet, but not in the loop; he has made statements of principle which are at odds with each other; it is my opinion he wouldn’t know principle if it came up in the street and spoke to him.
We must also consider the other Tory pretender, alleged leader of the Scottish Tories, Ruth Davidson; she has that jolly Tory approach, a female Farage. However she also shilly shallies as to whomever she is prepared to back. She decried Boris Johnston, then agreed with him, and settled on Sajid Javid as a credible replacement as interim. Mr Javid has financial links to a Serbian warlord which will damage his reputation. In his defence one must note that he is the Home Secretary responsible for Serco changing the locks on doors in Glasgow to get rid of asylum seekers – a true man of action.
The two most prominent Tories in Scotland are classic hypocrites – at least they excel in that class.
Jim Lynch
IN regard to Susan Roseberry and her letter in Saturday’s National, it was warming to find that her friends in the south-east of England find moving to Scotland would enhance their lives.
As a rural dweller I can confirm that many in my humble area have also settled – in fact I’m sure I read around 14% have made the move from the south-east.
They proudly pronounce that the benefits the Scottish Government has introduced and our fantastic public services have made their lives so much better.
This is all to be admired and lauded but there is a sting in the
tail, as an independence activist and one who talks regularly on
the doorstep.
Many of these new Scots vote Conservative and are very much in the Union camp.
I have no problem with their point of view, but when you point out that by voting Conservative and promoting the Union all these benefits will be put at risk, many just don’t make the connection.
I wish all these new Scots the
best of luck in their new homes but there is already a shift in rural areas where native Scots are being outgunned when it comes to buying a house, resulting in them leaving for towns and cities just to get accommodation.
These are real issues for many rural dwellers and it should be understood and at least noted by the Scottish Government.
Bryan Auchterlonie
Perthshire
JEREMY Corbyn is correct to advise against jumping to conclusions that Iran was responsible for the recent attack on oil tankers.
The Foreign Secretary has called him pathetic for not backing British intelligence. Britain spends a fortune on gathering intelligence, yet they failed to predict that Argentina would invade the Falklands, that Saddam Hussein would invade Kuwait and start Gulf War 1 (remember that?), and then that Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction.
Corbyn said the UK should be trying to ease tensions, rather than fuel a military escalation. I think on this he is right.
David Ritchie
North Ayrshire
IF one searches BBC Scotland online news one eventually finds a report on the large independence march through Oban on Saturday.
It finishes with the statement: “The pro-union group A Force for Good said it videoed the rally and counted 1,757 people taking part.” So the question is, who and what is “A Force for Good”? What official status does it have in any sense?” Why was its opinion allowed to be reported in a BBC news item?
Did the BBC ask the march organisers how many people they estimated? Who produced this unacceptable and completely inaccurate report for the BBC? Who supervises their news output and the reliability of it? Can they provide any evidence that this report was checked for accuracy?
There is considerable footage of the march and the numbers can easily be checked. Did the BBC think to do so? I was there. 7000 is a conservative estimate.
David McEwan Hill
Sandbank, Argyll
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here