THE publication of the latest GERS (Government Expenditure and Revenue for Scotland) figures has triggered the now-traditional annual feeding frenzy.
A black hole in Scotland’s finances is heralded by Unionist politicians as validating the continuation of the Union. In fact, it supports the case for precisely the opposite.
The killer phrase for me from the GERS report is: “The report is designed to allow users to understand and analyse Scotland’s fiscal position under different scenarios within the current constitutional framework.”
READ MORE: Kate Forbes calls out 'mistruths' from pro-UK think tank boss in GERS row
GERS is therefore a measure of the public finances under the current Union – hardly the greatest endorsement for how the economy has been managed on the UK’s watch. Major economic levers required to stimulate economic growth are still currently reserved to Westminster.
It is indeed a bizarre scenario when politicians from Unionist parties actively gloat and support a Union that has mismanaged the economy so appallingly.
GERS is a set of figures based on a measure of guesswork that indicates very little, except highlighting the negatives of the current Union. It has little bearing on the finances of an independent Scotland.
The point of independence is not to do everything in the same way but to move away from this one-size-fits-all fiscal straitjacket to a tailored approach that prioritises stimulating economic growth.
Alex Orr
Edinburgh
SNP parliamentarians John Swinney MSP and Pete Wishart MP are entirely right to question the US-based Discovery Land Company (DLC) about their plans to build a gated development for the ultra-rich in Tayside. But their probing as local diligent representatives raises issues about land ownership in Scotland which extend far beyond Tayside, and indeed which impact on the current Holyrood consultation on a new Land Reform Bill for Scotland.
In no other European country would a foreign-based commercial entity be allowed to grab up large amounts of land such as DLC appear to want to do. What is disgraceful is that after decades of devolved control by both the SNP and the Labour Party, the break-up of large landed estates in the public interest, underpinned by the need to both combat climate change and create economic development and jobs, has not happened. I believe that the First Minister Humza Yousaf is a decent and genuine person. To make his own mark on the job, and take the fightback into the Tory Unionist camp, the SNP/Green government has to introduce a land cap into the new Land Reform Bill, as well as a legally enforceable public interest test, with powers of compulsory purchase as well.
READ MORE: US firm responds to SNP concerns over 'playground' plans for Taymouth Castle
This is the 50th anniversary of the John McGrath play The Cheviot, The Stag, And The Black Black Oil, which toured the community centres and village halls of Scotland and did so much to energise the SNP upsurge of the mid-1970s. The national movement as a whole has to put its weight behind radical land reform and the SNP government has to rediscover the spirit of the Highland Land League and demand land justice.
In politics attack is often the best form of defence, and I urge Mr Yousaf to strike a blow at the heart of the Tory landed establishment in Scotland. The people will respond with strong support for that objective, as they did half a century ago.
Cllr Andy Doig (Independent)
Renfrewshire Council
IN many ways I have to agree with Andy Anderson (Letters, Aug 16) but would be cautious in thinking that Believe in Scotland, or any other independence group, has all the answers when it comes to advocating independence.
As Andy points out, Westminster/the UK Government – effectively the English MPs, don’t forget – will do all in their power to avert Scottish independence. I’ve said the same many times before.
Yes, as Andy said, we have a rich legacy of constitutional law behind us but if we are unable to take the case to the appropriate court, or for that matter if nobody is willing to do so, then how do we assert our case and rights?
READ MORE: Five things we learned from the YouGov poll showing an increase in support for Yes
At the end of the day, I was in broad agreement with the Scottish Government taking the case to the English Supreme Court. The reason being that before you can normally access a higher court, you have to exhaust all lower and domestic courts. We have now done this so can now take matters to The Hague and the European Court of Human Rights and I believe that this should be our next step in preparation for the forthcoming Westminster General Election, which is at most just over a year away.
Unfortunately, you don’t have the scope here to narrate every point in a readers’ letters section. However, everybody that I have spoken to at length on the subject of a de-facto referendum and Westminster powers – their unwritten constitution – reaches the conclusion that the most likely scenario is a case being taken at some stage to The Hague, and probably all the way to the United Nations before Westminster relents and we can move forward with independence.
Alexander Potts
Kilmarnock
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 here