BORIS Johnson’s mythical £350 million per week for the NHS has morphed into £3.50 per week for NHS staff. If you think that is a bit miserable for their heroic efforts during Covid, you have to consider the bigger picture: there are other competing priorities.
The top priority for the Prime Minister is how to fund his and Carrie’s extensive redecoration of their wee flat in Downing Street, which has apparently gone way over budget and beyond the means of a humble Prime Minister.
READ MORE: Downing Street spends £2.6 million on renovations for US-style TV briefings
Boris is not, of course, expecting the public purse to fund this necessary work. Oh no, he has a plan to establish a charity, to which Tory sympathisers who have a few bob slushing about can donate, without expectation of favour, to ensure that the happy couple, and young Wilf, can live in the manner to which they are accustomed.
Some might suggest that such actions are a bit indulgent, especially at a time when ordinary people are struggling to feed their families, but of course that is not the case. This young couple are used to the finer things in life, and have willingly stepped up to save the nation, and I can see no reason why they should have to accept lower standards just because poor people are starving. There is not a man or woman in the country who could fill his baffies, and we are very fortunate to have him. And her.
Les Mackay
Dundee
MOST of us will be astonished at the brazen duplicity of the inquisitors in the Salmond affair. Nicola has been subjected to a prolonged and vicious interrogation the like of which she might have expected had she been accused of murder or high treason. On the other hand, Boris Johnson and Matt Hancock have been accused of misleading parliament but it would seem that this causes little concern to our local Tories. Baroness Ruth et al would be well advised to read Matthew 7:5: “You hypocrite. First take the beam out of your own eye and then you can see clearly to remove the speck out of your brother’s eye.”
Willie Nicolson
Ladybank
THE BBC’s Martin Geisler on The Sunday Show, after listening to Douglas Ross’s heavily slanted assertions relating to the conduct of the First Minister, stated that “the Prime Minister, the Home Secretary and the Health Secretary have also been found to be in breach of the ministerial code or misleading parliament.”
Perhaps I have missed something, but as far as I can recollect the First Minister has not been found guilty following any legal charges while Boris Johnson illegally attempted to prorogue parliament, Matt Hancock illegally failed to publish details of contracts involving billions of pounds of taxpayers’ money and Priti Patel was guilty of bullying, leading to a pay-off of around half a million pounds. Regrettably no parliamentary or government-initiated judicial inquiries were conducted into these actions.
Certainly the application of the new code of practice by the UK civil service in Scotland (headed by Leslie Evans) was found to have breached the former First Minister’s lawful rights, but one wonders if the “state broadcaster” has so profoundly succumbed to taking its lead from Tory politicians that it is now regularly breaching licensing standards? This seems to be evidenced by increasing numbers of false statements by Sarah Smith, Laura Kuenssberg and others. Unfortunately, with Ofcom also in the pocket of the Conservative and Unionist Party the prospects of a fair and balanced presentation by the BBC of issues around the Holyrood election, never mind Scotland’s next referendum, do not look encouraging for those with open minds.
Stan Grodynski
Longniddry, East Lothian
I WAS impressed with the resilience shown by the First Minister whilst enduring an eight-hour-long cross-examination. Apart from the sheer memory and reference to detail this entailed, she exhibited a remarkable understanding of the many complex ramifications of the case, both legal and otherwise.
It also occurred to me that our own Prime Minister and his subordinates in government often pay scant regard to constitutional issues, whether emanating from Brexit or from other matters such as immigration, to take but two examples. Rarely, however, are they ever subjected to the same intense level of questioning as that experienced by Nicola Sturgeon, and one can only admire the expertise and fortitude exhibited by her in the face of this prolonged and detailed scrutiny by her peers.
Whatever the merits or otherwise of the case, she is to be applauded for her response in this regard.
Margaret Eckley
Gwynedd
IT was sad to see the disgraceful behaviour of fans tarnishing the reputation of not only Rangers but also by association that of Scottish football fans internationally. The club could at least offer to compensate Glasgow City by offering to pay for and restore the destruction they have caused to the city’s property.
John Johnstone
Moffat
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