WHAT an excellent column by Joanna Cherry (Why I won’t be standing for the SNP leadership, The National, Feb 17). Joanna is right back to her punchy, hyper-critical, “get my point across” style that we were used to before the political upheavals she went through.
READ MORE: Joanna Cherry: Why I won't be standing to become SNP leader this time
While unable to stand due to being an MP rather than an MSP, she is correct in stating that the leadership contest should be free of interference from the present chief executive and the NEC. I see many apparent faults in the SNP HQ management and they reflect right across the party and the membership.
For instance, I believe there was a membership request to discuss independence and the ways to achieve it at an annual conferences a couple of years back. The NEC rejected it. Surely, in any democracy, it should be the membership telling the leaders what they want done and then the leaders doing it, rather than the leaders telling the membership: “This is what you’re getting!”
Michael Russell stated in a story in the same issue of the paper that the SNP must move the Yes debate “from process to substance”.
Yes, they must. To do this they must engage fully with ALL independence-supporting groups. It is time for the SNP to reach out and invite the Greens, Alba, Scottish Socialists, Common Weal and others, plus every Yes group in the country, to a policy conference.
They need to invite them to each send two members to discuss a common strategy and then return to their branches or associations to put the suggestions to their members. They should also set up a cross-party committee to organise the returns from the various groups or branches.
Once that is done a final strategy might be decided upon and adopted. As part of that strategy, we must also be able to tell people what an independent Scotland will be like.
Some big issues, like rejoining the EU, can be decided by a referendum after independence but people would rightly want to know about currency, pensions etc now. We need a cross-party “leadership committee”, and we need to re-ignite the flame that burned throughout the Yes Movement back in 2014.
But we still need political leaders, such as Stephen Flynn (below), Patrick Harvie, Alex Salmond and the new SNP leader, to hold public meetings around the country to show that they are all united in following the same policy.
Westminster is not going to allow a referendum to happen. But it can’t stop us sending petitions to Holyrood demanding that the Scottish Government withdraws from the Treaty of Union under international law and declares Scotland to be independent.
If they get sufficient petitions with enough signatures, then surely they can take that to the United Nations?
So, set up petitions in every Yes Hub throughout the country. They could even have street stalls where the petition is out and available to be signed on the same day.
If the event was well publicised with a date, or dates, set up, and was mentioned by speakers at various public meetings it could be successful. Really, it’s a “back to front” referendum! Independence can still be achieved. We just have to change the way of getting it.
Charlie Kerr
Glentothes
IT is 18 months since I last wrote to your paper. During that time, I have observed with growing alarm the takeover of the independence agenda by the Scottish Greens. Indeed, it is my observation that Lorna Slater and Patrick Harvie are now running the Scottish Government agenda and are hell-bent on driving the independence cause off the edge of a cliff!
Edinburgh to be the first “plant-based” city in Europe. Ridiculous restrictions on roads in our city centres. In rural locations, the imposition of a licensing system involving a great deal of unnecessary and expensive work for bed and breakfast hosts. The bottle return scheme being imposed on our world-class drinks industry.
Gender recognition legislation, which is an excellent initiative but has been incompetently communicated to the general public. Allowing councils to impose a tourist tax, affecting another of our most successful industries. Who needs Unionist opposition when you have the Greens on your side?
John Drummond.
Edinburgh
I WAS saddened to read the letter from Alan Hinnrichs (Feb 16) and certainly did not recognise the Nicola Sturgeon he made reference to. The overwhelming sentiment for me in this letter was frustration – frustration as we await our independence.
But the legal situation we are in regarding a future referendum calls for Westminster’s approval, whether we like it or not and regardless of our frustration. The Scottish Government did what it could in going to the Supreme Court and Nicola Sturgeon has kept her cool and rightly challenged the UK Government at every opportunity regarding any infringement or intrusion by the UK Government into Scotland’s democracy.
I took also offence to Mr Hinnrichs’s remarks regarding appointments to Cabinet. These have included my MSP, who has served the country, his constituents and the SNP with distinction.
Catriona C Clark
Banknock, Falkirk
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