GRASSROOTS government is not about big issues – such as lockdown, new hospitals, or motorways etc – it’s more about local issues such a cycle lanes, libraries, community centres, fixing potholes, nursery provision and more – all issues that could or should concern people greatly. The problem at the moment is with Scotland’s councils being so big and not raising their own funds.
Scotland is the least “local” in Europe – with 32 councils with an average size of 2,500 square metres – which compares to the EU average of 38 square metres! Norway has 422 councils and 11 regions.
READ MORE: Brexit-backing Yes party relaunches for council election race
People feel disconnected and disengaged over local decision-making. In fact councils are not really local at all. I feel certain people from all political persuasions support greater local representation. The point is that shifts in opinions, petitions or marching for change or reform should and do begin at the grassroots – with stalls, pamphlets, meetings etc.
The turnout for local council elections is very low because many feel disenfranchised and ignored.
My view is that if we can improve local government and make it feel more “local” – we may make people feel more empowered and more likely to feel independent and vote for independence! And make it really local!
P Keightley
Glasgow
WE now know for certain there will be a fair few new councillors after the May elections. I wonder how many of them have been vocal on issues of real local concern in the recent past? I also ponder on how few of us are really aware that there are more constraints on what councillors can say in support of their constituents than on MPs and MSPs?
This is particularly so in matters that become planning issues. I don’t know when these restraints first became the norm. However, it is my understanding that opinions/comments by councillors or by individuals who become councillors about potential projects in advance of any planning application have been deemed to pre-judge a subsequent planning application and resulted in them being excluded from voting and defending their constituents’ interests.
READ MORE: 'No independence referendum bill in Holyrood before local elections'
Surely this is an afront to democracy and the ability of councillors to represent their communities?
Something else I have just been made aware of, since first voting 50-odd years ago. A non-party candidate can only describe themselves as “independent” or leave the description blank. This applies to local, Scottish and Westminster elections. I know that mainly in the past, but still persisting in some places, “independents” were generally Tories who don’t take the whip. However, there can arise situations that call for highlighting specific issues that the main parties persistently ignore. Does that mean having to go through the rigmarole of forming a “political party” just to highlight an issue, and differentiate that candidate from another “independent” who is a closet Tory?
Being able to add a few words that qualify “how” independent that person is could make a difference. What if last year a former MSP could have been labelled as “independent – land reformer”. Just a thought.
Willie Oswald
Blanefield
GORDON MacIntyre-Kemp’s article in Saturday’s paper raises some interesting questions for the independence movement as a whole and the SNP in particular (Only one issue with dominate Scottish council elections – independence, Apr 2).
I don’t think the SNP will campaign for the councils on independence, as in recent years they’ve campaigned on just about everything BUT independence. The focus on independence will come from Unionists, NOT the SNP, who in all likelihood will try to stay clear of the subject.
I believe the 2017 scenario is likely to happen in the council elections this year and that, although unsaid, this is favoured by the high heidyins of the SNP. It gives them another excuse to do nothing to bring about the much promised referendum (next year, next decade, next millennium?)
READ MORE: Scottish Green councillor calls for better deal for local representatives
No doubt the Ukraine crisis and refugees will give rise to a further kick into the long grass of any work on independence.
It’s time that grass was cut.
I accept that the SNP in parliament are a necessary vehicle for the independence movement, but their reluctance to move on independence becomes more frustrating as time passes with little action taking place.
Is this deliberate, to dishearten the movement for independence so that it withers through inaction and repeats 2017? It’s beginning to seem so.
Drew Reid
Falkirk
IN The Sunday National report on the AUOB march in Arbroath, following the words of Michael Russell, it brought a distinct air of hope to read: “Other speakers included Eva Comrie, of the Alba Party, who also issued a plea for unity...”
In all our decades of search to secure Scotland’s independence from London rule, the greatest error to my mind was Nicola Sturgeon’s casual rejection of Alex Salmond’s proposal in late March 2021. The icing on the cake to set us on the road toward a successful campaign will be when Ms Sturgeon concedes to an error of judgement and makes a similar call for unity to that of Ms Comrie.
Tom Gray
Braco
GREAT to read an article by Neal Ascherson in The National (A time when Britain welcomed those fleeing for their lives, Apr 4). He is a formidable thinker, journalist and writer. Although he is approaching 90, it would be good to see more articles from him if he is willing.
As someone who has appreciated his writing over many years, I wish him well whatever he decides to do.
Richard Walthew
Duns
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