HAVING read in the May 22 edition of the Sunday National the articles by First Minister Nicola Sturgeon and the author of the “Sustainable Growth Commission” Andrew Wilson, I decided to put into words a letter with a dual purpose.
My first objective was to commend both writers for their stated intent to move forward more actively towards indyref2. Although for me, and I would hazard a guess also for many other supporters of independence, the one thing we wanted them to say was left out.
In the second case, I hoped to inform both print and digital readers of the two papers I regularly read, The Herald and The National, my suggestion for maximising the total of committed Yes voters.
Most definitely I want to see a speedy response from Nicola and her long-time friend and colleague Andrew Wilson as they move towards the desirable outcomes stated in their Sunday National articles.
If this letter has the good fortune to be published, in both papers, my aforementioned suggestion is that, as near as is possible, the complete total of independence supporters who have the capability, in all their huge variety of affiliations, beliefs (secular and religious), who are members, or otherwise, of any political party, communicate in their preferred way a brief word to Bute House stating their desire that a numerically united challenge be made to Westminster to expedite indyref2.
I refer next to a letter written by me to Nicola Sturgeon and Andrew Wilson at Bute House in April 2019. It is too long to quote in full here. Let me repeat just one sentence written in 2019.
“Right now voters in Scotland are at peak resentment of Westminster’s Brexit tactics and want a less cautious approach than seems to be being advocated.”
Of course, I accept that subsequently there followed the unanticipated arrival of a pandemic and the war in Ukraine – as well as the responsibility of hosting COP26 with its hugely important future significance for the whole planet.
Nonetheless, so many opportunities were missed to call out the then malpractices by Boris Johnson and the majority of his Westminster Cabinet. At the same time, and with the connivance of the BBC and the wider press, Yes supporters were frequently not informed how Scotland’s governance choices were being ignored, their favourable developments overlooked and bad happenings highlighted to our considerable disadvantage – both then and also at the present time.
A letter well written by Glenda Burns – whom I have never met – was printed in The National last month precisely and succinctly outlining her and my response on reading the two articles in the Sunday National of May 22. Neither of us had confidence that things will get better soon unless SNP decisions and tactics alter.
The many already convinced Yes voters realise we have to capture the energy and vitality of our uncommitted young voters. If we even managed to convince a fraction of the passionate followers of football of the wisdom of independence then our total of indyref2 voters will be richly enhanced. There will be a need to prove to every Yes voter that Scotland’s future will be better served when taking her own decisions.
So I conclude this note to a much-admired First Minister and to the readership of the two papers to which I subscribe with this message: It is now urgently the time to be willingly visible and openly vocal about drawing attention– with reasoned, informed accuracy – to your determination to loudly refute untrue and unjust Westminster statements.
Scots are capable and will hopefully become a united force, a force that will be organised and well prepared to manage their own independent country.
Just see the variety of talent and excellence from the journalists in our press which is so often excluded from BBC reporting, not to mention the erudition of so many of the contributors to letters pages to be confident Scotland’s independence is right and is our RIGHT.
On purpose I have withheld detailed means of contacting Bute House believing making their own effort to do so will demonstrate true commitment. The First Minister will already have received my letter, courtesy of the postal service.
Although ready for press submission earlier I delayed offering this for print with the intent of enabling readers to draw their own conclusions post Sue Gray’s Report.
Margaret Little
Rhu, by Helensburgh
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