ONE does not need to be another Einstein to figure out that the majority of the people of Scotland support self-determination and it is only a generally independence-hostile media that is keeping the polls almost equally split (and preventing that support from climbing above 60% in spite of perceived SNP turmoil).
When our purported impartial public broadcaster follows the Unionist directive of avoiding discussion on the consequences of Brexit and frames the independence debate as a separate matter from discussion of all other political topics, it is clear that BBC Scotland is not governed by professional objectivity.
READ MORE: Humza Yousaf and Mark Drakeford urge Westminster to respect devolution
When news stories generally lack balance in criticising actions of the Scottish Government, as has been evident in the one-sided presentation of the arguments around the Gender Recognition Reform Bill and Deposit Return Scheme (both with majority cross-party support in Holyrood), but are generally scrupulous in attempts not to appear partial in any criticisms of the UK Government, it is obvious that the BBC does not represent a level political playing field.
When correspondents writing to national newspapers can still, seemingly shamelessly, make disparaging remarks about the competence of the Scottish Government apparently oblivious of the much greater scale of failings of the UK Government (at even higher cost to taxpayers in Scotland) it is clear that the BBC in Scotland has failed as a public broadcaster in both lacking impartiality and in reflecting political opinion on the fundamental issue of independence which is pivotal to the vision we have for our country.
Next year it will be ten years of tumultuous events since the first independence referendum, and every sincere democrat should support the right of the people of Scotland to hold a second referendum then or accept that the next General Election will be a legitimate expression of the people’s will on self-determination.
Stan Grodynski
Longniddry, East Lothian
Why is Scotland not independent as a country? Are there many reasons, or is there only one absolutely fundamental reason?
I asked Scotland that question on Saturday in an Indy/Live video, I also asked the very same question at the rally in Kilmarnock.
Why is Scotland not independent as a country? Answer – the Treaty of Union. When it no longer exists, Scotland will be an independent country.
When the Treaty was compiled and ratified, it – and it alone – ended hundreds of years of Scotland being an independent country.
READ MORE: Gordon Brown calls for move from 'nationalism to patriotism'
That is the reason for my answer, and on Saturday at that rally, and at every rally held in Scotland for over two years, I have heard the very same answer from fellow Scots, as they signed their individual Declaration of a Sovereign Scot.
That is why the Declaration of a Sovereign Scot starts with these words: “Exercising my Claim Of Right as a Sovereign Scot, I declare: I do not consent to the terms of, nor the continuation of, the Treaty of Union established through the Acts of Union in 1707.”
The originals are lodged at the HQ of the United Nations, but copies of each signed Declaration are kept to be our present-day version of the Declaration of Arbroath.
Will your signature be among them?
If you want to join all those who have already signed their Declaration, I will be at the Stirling All Under One Banner march/rally. You will find me at the rally point at Bannockburn where the march ends.
Mike Fenwick
via email
I AGREE wholeheartedly with Peter Swain that an independent Scotland must have its own currency and banking system.
It would appear, however, that he is unaware that this is exactly the detailed proposal submitted to the Scottish Government and party leadership in February 2022 by the Scottish Currency Group, led by Dr Tim Rideout, under the title of “The Road to the Scottish Currency”. Moreover, these proposals were presented for discussion at a subsequent SNP National Conference and were agreed virtually unanimously by the members.
READ MORE: Richard Walker: Very few countries have achieved independence through referendums
The Growth Report proposing the retention of sterling had been proposed at a National Conference a few years earlier, but was passed by majority only after much debate and a number of amendments. At that time no other proposals were on the table.
Although Nicola Sturgeon continued to favour the Growth Report, the later, much more widely approved Currency Group report supersedes that, and if the new leadership team are indeed returning to the principle of policy being made by the membership, that is likely now to be the accepted party policy.
These proposals allow for the necessary mechanisms to be planned in advance so that they can be put set up during negotiations, to be ready for our independence day.
Perhaps Mr Swain would be interested in looking up the Scottish Currency Group proposals, and might possibly also like to read and even contribute his views to constitutionforscotland.scot.
L McGregor
Falkirk
READ MORE: Mark Drakeford: England is the 'outlier' in excluding glass from DRS
BEFORE the FM loses his bottle, can I just say that eight years ago while visiting my son in Berlin we took our (extensive) collection of empty beer bottles to a local supermarket, I think it was called Kaisers.
We went in and there was a machine like a coffee machine with holes in the top. We put our bottles in and cash was dispensed at the bottom – nothing simpler. Why do we have to wait for England to get up to speed before we do anything?
As I said, this was eight years ago. Come on somebody, there is a way.
Richard Easson
Dornoch
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