DO we have, in Scotland, such a thing as a political oncologist? I believe there to be a need for such a body because Scotland is suffering from a political malignancy called “the Union”.
The latest toxin, excreted by this Westminster Tory neoplasm, is called the “Internal Market Bill”. Now most people who yearn for an independent Scotland know this bill is nothing more than a not-very-well-disguised plan to neutralise devolved power and emasculate the Holyrood parliament.
The current SNP treatment regime seems to be to use each and every Westminster blunder as a panacea for this because, with each blunder and display of open contempt for Scotland, the case for independence and support for it is strengthened (58% and counting). But, just like with chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy, which is available to the clinical oncologist, there is the side effect of serious debilitation for the bearer of the malignancy; which is usually consistent with the duration of its growth.
READ MORE: SNP demand inquiry into 'rampant cronyism' at heart of Tory Government
Should we not, then, endorse the arguments of Joanna Cherry and Ruth Wishart that, the sooner this carcinogenic aberration called “Westminster” be excised and consigned to history, less will be the number of people who suffer and the better and healthier Scotland will be?
This tumour has had extensive opportunity for cell mutation and has, most certainly, altered the DNA of Scotland with the 300 years of Westminster nucleotidal changes inflicted on it. The patient struggles and suffers but still thrives, despite these toxins excreted by the Westminster tumour, and is capable of restored health if the people of Scotland are able to survive the current and debilitating therapy!
Let us also be mindful that, with the need for the current and future UK governments to address the climbing costs of the Covid pandemic, the Brexit fiasco and “balance the books” for the Westminster Treasury, their need to cling on to Scotland’s revenue resources is only going to increase the potency of Westminster-excreted toxins!
Can the patient survive this wait, or is emergency surgery our only salvation?
Ned Larkin
Inverness
WITH Section 30, without Section 30, with UDI, without UDI, with one indyref2, with indyref 2A and 2B, all a somewhat academic and somewhat illusionary choice, if the UK Parliament with its pro-Trump, pro-Brexit majority simply says “NO!”, before or after any mandate from the sovereign people of Scotland.
Independence negotiation, if within the next five years, will likely by default to be limited to the simplistic assertion that this side of the Border and all assets within are ours, and that assets on your side are yours, whether via UDI or otherwise.
READ MORE: Michael Gray: An indyref in 2021 is out of the question – but that's no reason to give up
International support will be required to go any further, and given that the USA and the EU have struggled to protect the Good Friday Agreement in Northern Ireland from the pro-Trump, pro-Brexit UK Parliament, both these parties will again be required, but this time perhaps bolstered up by China.
Opportunities for encouraging international support must be prioritised, and there are opportunities to coalesce around the international climate change response gathering (COP26), or even a common rail gauge for trans-national low-carbon trade, and of course the Covid-19 pandemic response/suppression/eradication.
For the avoidance of doubt, both Plan A and/or Plan B, will require international support, and there will be a cost, there always is.
Stephen Tingle
Greater Glasgow
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel