SCOTLAND’S freedom does not, and will not, come from Westminster.

I have suggested, in your paper and elsewhere, that our MPs return to Scotland, and call a conference to debate seceding from this accursed Union. Our MPs could do this but don’t. Why? Who controls their reticence?

They should call on respected invitees as advisers from

countries that have lit the path and succeeded in escaping from Westminster’s claws.

They must also invite senior representatives from the UN, the EU and the EC, all to be engaged in this debate, which should have as its voting body all Scottish elected governmental representatives, MPs and MSPs.

Such a debate WILL get world press coverage.

Right now, 99% of all news in the UK is under the influence of the English establishment. It is that news that reaches the world, most of whom are unaware of our situation and what we are trying to achieve.

The English are sick to the back teeth with hearing “Scotland this” and “Scotland that”, but don’t have the wit to realise that our Scotland HAS NO VOICE IN ENGLAND!

Every thing they hear, see and read is written, prepared, edited, and produced by enemies of Scottish independence. They truly believe they are supporting our lifestyle, of which they disapprove, as all we seem to do is complain!

But the truth is that they don’t hear us at all, do they?

They have The Sun and the BBC and other low-level lying mechanisms like that to spread the words their Tory masters want spread and only those.

Scotland’s independence would spell the end for the Tory Party, for their lies over centuries would be exposed once and for all. They truly fear that.

So, a clearly defined conference, in Scotland, conducted by the SNP MPs, chaired by a neutral EC or UN member, would be world news.

As all our MPs and MSPs would be invited, the world will see the clear majority we have for the party of Scottish independence

When will it happen, do you think?

Christopher Bruce


WITH reference to the letter on Mar 18 where Mr Follon took exception to my letter of Mar 16 that the UK Westminster Parliament is sovereign over Scotland and we should be taking the fight to Westminster. Firstly, I don’t want to get into a war of words with Mr Follon, there is enough of that already in the independence ranks, I just want to clarify my reasoning.

The fact that the Scottish people vote for MPs to turn up to Westminster after every UK election and represent them, including those MPs from the SNP and Alba, means we have consented whether in an indirect or direct way that the Westminster Parliament administers the sovereign state of the UK. Also, the world currently accepts that the UK is the sovereign state, not the individual nations. I wish this was not the case.

I am not a constitutional lawyer

or historian but it appears Mr Follon makes the case to challenge this premise, although neither the SNP and/or the wider independence Yes movement have used this argument to assert Scottish sovereignty and to remove consent via Scottish MPs at Westminster.

The independence movement lacks a coherent strategy to extricate us from this unhealthy Union.

A Wilson


I AM not and never have been a member of the SNP, though I am a totally convinced independence supporter and SNP voter.

I am in agreement with some opinions that the whole exercise of SNP membership figures disclosure had as its basic intention an attempt to discredit that party.

To look back at the period of

the 2014 referendum and its aftermath, my opinion is that if

Alex Salmond had had the foresight

and estimation of what had been created by the campaign of the referendum and its result and what happened thereafter, he would never have resigned.

There are three things I refer to. 1. The massive increase in SNP membership. 2. The almost total annihilation of the Labour Party in Scotland in the 2015 General Election. 3. The establishment of a daily independence-supporting newspaper.

The referendum created a great political and cultural change in Scotland which will be permanent, and whether you were Yes or No, our citizens considered that the main motivators of that change were the SNP.

READ MORE: Ash Regan on her 'intense' leadership campaign experience

The beneficiaries were the SNP, though I suspect they were completely unprepared for it.

While many new members, if they weren’t already, would have become activists, others would become merely card-carrying members (as was one of my sons).

If we accept that was the period in membership terms that the SNP was at its peak, then it was inevitable that its size could only decline.

I am not suggesting that the loss of 30,000 is entirely due to what I list below, only that they could have been factors.

1. The loss of political interest, although still Yes.

2. Natural deaths as well as Covid ones.

3. The incessant attack and falsehoods of the Unionist media.

4. Disagreements with some policies of the SNP government.

5. Members leaving Scotland.

6. Impatient Yes members leaving to join Alba.

7. Cost of living affecting household budgets where the first thing to be halted would be political party due, whatever they were in the SNP.

One thing is possibly certain – it is unlikely anyone would leave to join a Union-supporting party.

The hope would be that those who left are still Yes, and if polls are correct, SNP membership size is not a major factor in support for independence.

Bobby Brennan