JEREMY Corbyn yet again fails to understand what is happening in Scotland. It’s not for him to decide when we can have a referendum – it’s for the Scottish people. How dare he say he would delay it until a future Labour government has worked on its priorities and if there was a “legitimate and fresh” mandate for a referendum.

So who decides what is “legitimate and fresh”? The Scottish Government has got not one but three mandates to call for an indyref – we don’t need another mandate, we need independence.

Too many people were conned by Gordon Brown and co telling us all would be fine once Labour got into power – we’re still waiting, all the promises of The Vow have disappeared.

Labour politicians promoted Better Together knowing full well that we were heading for long-term Tory rule at Westminster. For all their tears about Brexit, this is a direct result of their campaigning for Better Together. And if you think you can trust Corbyn, just look at his record on Brexit. He could have stopped it sooner – or even opposed it – but waits til the last minute before putting up a half-hearted attempt at blocking it.

Corbyn cannot be trusted and any Labour politician saying we should wait for a Labour government to make things better is lying. They prefer Tory rule to an independent Scotland. We’re largely stuck in this Brexit fiasco due to Labour politicians using lies and scaremongering tactics to frighten voters into supporting a No vote. If it wasn’t for Labour, Scotland could have been independent by now – don’t forget that.

Cllr Kenny MacLaren

IT appears that Richard Leonard’s original immediate knee-jerk reaction was announced without waiting for instructions from party HQ, and that this is just a ham-fisted public relations exercise to save what’s left of his authority in Scotland (Jeremy Corbyn: I’d stop indyref2 initially under Labour government, August 29).

There is nothing new regarding the timing, Jeremy Corbyn’s original announcement made it clear that Labour would not approve an independence referendum for some time; at least not until Scotland had enjoyed/endured several years under a UK Labour government. He would not then oppose a referendum if there was still sufficient support for one in the Scottish Parliament.

In his latest announcement that criterion has been replaced by “a legitimate and fresh mandate” whatever that might be.

What exactly does Richard Leonard have in mind when he says that the present majority in Holyrood in favour of a referendum is not sufficient to meet the conditions of a legitimate mandate, now or in the foreseeable future?

What conditions is he proposing for a clear signal that the majority of people are in favour of a new vote? Does he no longer recognise a majority in Holyrood as a legitimate mandate to enact legislation?

In view of the fact that the referendum for Brexit is now three years old and was run on the basis of a simple majority. yet is still legitimate enough to take the UK out of the EU, Richard Leonard needs to spell out quite clearly what the conditions are for a fresh legitimate mandate to seek a Section 30 order for a Scottish independence referendum.

John Jamieson
South Queensferry

AS I left home to go to work on Thursday afternoon I was aware of Jeremy Corbyn’s visit to Abbey View. On the drive I pondered the reason for his visit. Why was he in Scotland in the middle of the prorouging scandal?

Why here? Why Thursday? Surely not for a photo op next to our recently burnt-out Woodmill High School? A chance to promote a candidate for a General Election that isn’t happening? A chance to build bridges with Richard Leonard over their split positions on indyref2?

As I arrived at my destination a quick check of social media proved a triple hit: backed up Leonard on no to indyref2; gave Ms Hilton a platform; and had a photo op next to a burnt-out school.

Obviously his team missed the optics. The obvious conclusion. The chance for Wee Scribles to pen a political satire. Making a cartoon out of Corbyn.

Labour, gowpin o’er a wa’ at a ruined public building that their PFI damage could only aspire to. A school well past replacement, saved only by the hard work of its staff and pupils. Pupils achieving great results, better than could be expected. Labour failures leaving three high schools locally requiring replacement, while 30 years of funds are spent on Labour’s PFI buildings with their inherent self certification problems. Aye, we won’t forget.

If I was a Labour special advisor I’d have advised avoiding having a photo at a burnt-out school. Wishing to let the community to heal, rather than add fuel to the bonfire of Labour’s dignity.

Brian Kelly