I READ Stan Grodynski’s letter (June 10) and so very typical of Stan’s correspondence he is on the money. Brian Lawson’s reply (June 11) merely represents more groaning and carping from a disgruntled “previous” SNP member and councillor.

What is it with certain folks in Scotland who look for any negative and then present a tsunami of self-loathing about Scotland?

We can have differing views about issues but it only helps the opposition when we throw everything and the kitchen sink at a party that represents us.

The SNP have governed our country well for 17 years. During that period, they have had to deal with Brexit, Covid and the war in Europe and they stood tall.

Don’t underestimate the might and lengths that the Establishment will go to when trying to undermine and wreck anything coming from Scotland/the Scottish Government! The mantra is divide and rule.

I know not everything is perfect but not everything is sh*** and governing with one hand tied firmly behind your back ensures we will always be cap in hand to Westminster. There is the problem – so why join them in running down our country? Why not talk about all the good initiatives that happen in Scotland? Our “glory book”!

Everyday our NHS performs miracles; everyday our schools, colleges and universities teach and encourage our future generations to shine; everyday our police and all our emergency services keep us safe and our carers do just that when we are at our most vulnerable; our fishermen and farmers feed us; our football team are out there doing their best at this very moment. Scotland has an amazing “glory book” and by using it we can get a more positive view of our country – warts and all.

Stop the diatribe about wanting the SNP to “get a bloody nose” from a Unionist party taking orders from Westminster. Work with and for Scotland – we are all on the same page – with the same aim: a future for all in an Independent Scotland.

Jan Ferrie


JUDGING from what I’ve read in print and seen on TV, I must agree with Jonathon Shafi’s weighting in Tuesday’s paper. The avoidance of independence by the so-called party for that sticks out like a sore thumb.

It seems that the heidyins in the SNP have ignored discussions of the challenges of independence in work done by bodies such as Common Weal, Business for Scotland and others.

It appears that they have adopted the attitude towards independence similar to that of Labour’s attitude towards devolution/home rule prior to the rise of the SNP. That was to ignore if possible, make promises if pushed, then claim higher priorities for subsequent inaction.

In the short-term it worked for Labour but in the end they had to concede to public pressure, before being eclipsed by the SNP.

Are the SNP on a similar trajectory? Independence support in the polls seems to be firming up while support for the SNP is on the wane. The refusal to confront the challenges of currency, land use and other subjects over the years is coming home to roost.

After all, what’s the point of independence if there’s no change? Why break away for things to stay the same? Tinkering round the edges of social problems may induce self-satisfaction but doesn’t face up to the questions needing answered.

Maybe to do so would take them out of their comfort zone but that seems to be necessary to progress independence.

Drew Reid


A LANDSIDE in Papua New Guinea caused the deaths of 2000, another one in the Philippines caused the deaths of 68. India had suffered the loss of 20 and many others buried.

We can all agree landslides as geological events can be devastating. It would be my assertion that landslides as political and social events are also devastating.

The Conservative landslides in 1983 and 1987 allowed the continuation of their agenda which caused the forced demise of the mining and steel industries without a serious plan to support the unemployed workforce, leaving the northern powerhouse damaged and wounded. This was followed by the Labour landslide of 1997, where the Blair/Brown continuum allowed the acceleration of privatisation, but not the simple sell-off of the Conservative Party, but the toxic Private Finance Initiative.

In the practical arena of shopping, how we engage in the retail economy has been detrimental to our high streets, the rate of change exacerbated by the Covid pandemic – another landslide to deal with.

The message we should all take from these events is that landslides are not good for us humans, be they geological, political or sociological.

In Scotland, a landslide Labour government will be just as bad as a landslide Conservative government.

Alistair Ballantyne


THE Prime Minister and Tory election candidates never tire of promising to cut taxes if they are elected. What they studiously omit is that tax cuts – as surely as night follows day – mean cuts in services. Less tax collected automatically means less money available for public services. So be in no doubt that it is not a case of either/or – a vote for cuts in taxes is a vote for cuts in services.

Peter Swain


WHAT are two basic key differences between the Tories and the SNP?

The Tories are actively planning to attack benefits which will undoubtedly increase child poverty and food banks. The SNP would eradicate child poverty and food banks but are prevented from doing this by Tory and Labour governments dictating Scotland’s budget allocation.

Watson Crawford