IN her column last week (Covid inquiry is damning for Boris Johnson so where is the fury, October 15), the excellent Lesley Riddoch discussed the apparent lack of raw emotion and real anger among the population in general when presented with information such as the damning evidence released by parliamentary committees of the UK Government’s mishandling of the pandemic.

There is little doubt that thousands of preventable deaths were caused due to financial self-interest and a cavalier approach to the virus that bordered on criminal incompetence. Yet, due to a combination of media collaboration, an evident popular immunity to Tory corruption and lies and a supine political opposition, there is little or no public outcry, no apology from the party in power and only piecemeal and token efforts made by individual reporters at questioning accountability.

Boris Johnson addressed world leaders with his usual empty rhetoric on the importance of the Glasgow COP26 climate conference while privately issuing advice that climate commitments should never get in the way of securing post-Brexit trade deals with sceptical countries such as Australia or climate criminals such as Brazil.

The hypocrisy is staggering and the mendacity brash and mind-boggling, but like a Trumpian America, the UK collectively shrugs its shoulders and prepares for the Prime Minister’s next charade and the international ignominy it will inevitably bring.

And now, as if to reinforce the shameless levels of hypocrisy we have to suffer as part of the Union, the Queen decides to give the Prime Minister a run for his money by urging world leaders to take action over climate change while having lobbied the Scottish Government for an exception from environmental protection laws for her Scottish estates.

She and her parasitical family members regularly and needlessly increase carbon emissions, often through short journeys by private jets and helicopters, while advising anyone who will listen to save the environment. I share Ms Riddoch’s exasperation that such blatant dishonesty practised by members of the UK Government and the royal family does not give rise to widespread condemnation and outrage.

It must be called out whenever and wherever it is perpetrated and in the strongest possible terms. In the 21st century, the UK has undoubtedly become the sick man of Europe, economically, socially and morally. For the people of Scotland there can only be one choice for future generations.
Owen Kelly
Stirling

DAVID Roche (Letters, October 14) mentions Scots Wha Hae as a Scottish anthem. Indeed it is given as our national song in the Scottish Students’ Song Book of 1897 and I have long regarded it as our national anthem.

While variations have been used as a dance tune and as a lament, as an anthem it is probably best in quick march time.

The French military still use the tune (in slow march time) on ceremonial occasions as the March of the Soldiers of Robert Bruce [Marche des Soldats de Robert Bruce], recalling its use on May 8, 1429, for the entry of Joan of Arc to Orleans after Scots had helped her to end the siege of that city by English forces. The French name of the tune supports the belief that Scottish soldiers marched to it at Bannockburn in 1314. The present words are by Robert Burns, recalling what Bruce is believed to have said to the Scottish army before Bannockburn.
David Stevenson
Edinburgh

ROBERT Walker (Letters, October 16) is right when he says we need a new, forward-looking anthem but it should not be 500 miles. It should be Caledonia, preferably the Frankie Miller version.

What an anthem it would be, Scotland would be alone in the world singing not of war and conflict but of love and friendship and belonging.

It would make a wonderful anthem.
R Bulloch
Glasgow

WHILE I agree we need a new national anthem, the adoption of Scots Wha Hae or Flower Of Scotland would be a poor choice. Both embody anti-English sentiments which should be anathema to our outward-looking and welcoming nature. I also agree that at least at present The Proclaimers could provide what we need and would respectfully suggest “Scotland’s Story” would more than adequately fit the bill.

Hopefully they would be willing to agree, and perhaps adapt this excellent song.
John Johnstone
Moffat

ON Friday, the House of Lords will debate a new assisted dying bill tabled by Molly Meacher. A similar bill from Liam McArthur will soon be discussed in Scotland.

Many who oppose the bill believe that only their god can give and take life. This is a perfectly defendable position for the religious believers themselves but we wish they would present it honestly as such and not distort the debate by exaggerating fears about abuse of the law.

This is too important an issue to give disproportionate weight to the calcified ideas of religious minorities.
Neil Barber
Edinburgh Secular Society