RISHI Sunak has hinted that the General Election will be in the later part of this year. However, the main issue for Scotland is how our political parties approach these elections, whenever they are.

Will they act with conditioned reflexes like Pavlov’s dogs and repeat all the mistakes they learnt from the UK system? Sadly it appears like they intend to behave like Pavlov’s dogs again.

You would think that Scottish politicians, particularly those who insist that their first priority is to achieve Scottish independence, would have studied the electoral systems and worked out the best way to use them in order to achieve their objectives, but I fear they have not done this.

READ MORE: Humza Yousaf urges pro-independence voters to reject Labour

It is clear that we will soon be faced with a UK General Election followed later by a Scottish election. These two elections are run in entirely different ways, so we need to apply our intelligence to the issues before us. How we act in the first election will be observed by the electorate and will likely influence their votes in the second election.

That should tell politicians that making an effort to win a seat at the UK election, particularly if they stand against the party with the best chance of getting the most votes and thereby split the indy vote, could be very bad for their image in the indy movement. This will strongly affect the support they will get at the following Scottish election.

The Greens have learned nothing from this in the past, so when the election bell rings they will respond with conditioned reflexes and put candidates up in a number of seats against the SNP. As usual, they will not win any seat, and may well help the Unionists to win one or two, but they will be pleased with their efforts and wag their tails like Pavlov’s dogs. Most indy supporters will be watching this with dismay/ The Greens will then ask for our vote in the Scottish election to reward them for their stupidity.

READ MORE: SNP confirm support for continued use of fossil fuels

The Greens, at least, can claim that Scottish independence is not their first objective, and this is obvious by such conduct. However, what about Alba? They are now announcing that they also want to play this silly game. So I ask them why? What do they stand to gain? They might, if they are very lucky, retain two seats in the UK parliament, but at what cost?

They will alienate a large number of independence supporters in Scotland, including myself, who was a founder member of Alba. They may enable one or more Unionists to get a seat, and they will undermine their own chance of getting significant votes from many indy supporters, including SNP voters, in the regional vote at the Scottish elections. Electoral success for them in the Scottish election would be much greater if they put independence before party at the UK election. So for a party which claims to put indy first, is this wise behaviour?

Andy Anderson
Ardrossan

THE PM on BBC TV on Sunday said everything one needed to know about the Conservatives with a Westminster election looming in 2024. “Cut welfare to fund tax cuts” – those words are alarming and of great concern for the vulnerable, the sick and the ageing population that we are. Unfortunately, for many the threat of welfare cuts is not a hollow one from the Conservatives, as their record in government speaks for itself.

READ MORE: Rishi Sunak pledges to cut welfare to fund tax cuts

Under the Conservatives’ watch we have seen the largest cut in welfare since the Second World War and a temporary freeze on the triple lock for pensioners, actions that have had devastating consequences for thousands. The Prime Minister raised concerns about the number of people being signed off as not fit for work – a stressful scenario for anyone, as no-one wants to be registered long-term sick, but perhaps this could be a consequence of 14 years of Conservative government, when tackling poverty was not on the agenda, never mind at the top of the agenda.

Amidst Mr Sunak’s concerns about getting people into work, the PM may want to dwell on the fact that the majority of people on welfare are currently in work, earning very low incomes, a clear case for the national minimum wage to be abolish with immediate effect and everyone moved onto the “living wage”, a living wage that one can actually live on. Actions like this could reduce the need for visits to food banks and could ultimately result in health benefits, reducing the pressure on our NHS. This must be on the agenda for the General Election.

Catriona C Clark
Falkirk

WELL done for adding Owen Jones to your list of regular contributors. It can be a two-way process, helping him to understand Scottish politics better as well as for us to benefit from a different perspective. His interview with Andrew Feinstein on the parallels between the struggle against apartheid and that for Palestinian self-determination is an example of his really illuminating journalism. Opening up the pages of The National to broader discussion has to be an excellent move.

Cathie Lloyd
Edinburgh

FOR many years I have found the input of Owen Jones into the national political debate to be stimulating and thought-provoking. From his first book, Chavs, which discussed how the media puts down the working class (“demonises” is the word he uses), his newspaper articles in The Guardian, his TV debate appearances and his YouTube pieces – all excellent stuff.

I was therefore delighted to hear that The National has managed to procure his services as a (hopefully) regular columnist. His article on Keir Starmer this weekend was no disappointment (This one sentence summed up appeal of Starmer to his tiny fringe of true fans, Jan 6)!

This newspaper has many excellent regular columnist contributors. Well now we have another one! My congratulations.

Alex Leggatt
Edinburgh