Latest news with #JaneLax
The Herald Scotland
5 days ago
- Politics
- The Herald Scotland
Want to talk about waste, Mr Swinney? Have you got a mirror?
Given the awfulness of the ongoing ferry saga, the state of the Scottish NHS, the cancer waiting times, the demise of the Scottish education system, giving criminals home detention curfew at 15% of their sentence, the disastrous Gender Recognition Reform Bill bill and the failed Named Person Scheme to name but a few, is it not reasonable for John Swinney and his Cabinet to step down and call an election so we can get a government of whatever persuasion that actually wants to improve our services and make Scotland a better place to live? They've been in power for 18 years and they have nothing to be proud of. Jane Lax, Aberlour. • Without wishing to diminish the responsibility of former Dundee University principal Professor Iain Gillespie and his colleagues for the financial failure of Dundee University it was richly ironic to see SNP MSPs on the Education Committee vent their outrage on this individual when the Scottish Government's record on economic rectitude has been abysmal. Pot, kettle comes to mind. Alan Ramage, Edinburgh. Where the focus really is Watching First Minister's Questions on Thursday (June 26) I lost count of the number of times John Swinney said that he and the SNP were "focused" on dealing with the many problems facing their handling of the NHS. He was responding to the latest data on cancer treatment, delayed discharges and the absence of Health Secretary Neil Gray on a trip to Japan. These had prompted multi-party attacks on their abysmal record. His use of that word would be credible only if those hearing it did not know that the SNP only exists to focus on separatism on behalf of those who think it is the solution to all our woes. Mark Openshaw, Aberdeen. Read more letters The Iranian connection The UK Defence Journal reports that dozens of social media accounts pushing for the break-up of the UK disappeared simultaneously on the day Israel bombed Iran's cyber infrastructure ("'Dozens of pro-Indy accounts went offline when Israel bombed Iran'", heraldscotland, June 25). Few will be surprised there. But, even so, it should open a few eyes in the nationalist movement. Perhaps some deep thinking needs to be done by the Scottish nationalists on having Iran as an ally, whether wanted or not. Alexander McKay, Edinburgh. Slim down the civil service Anyone who heard the evasions and prevarications practised by Joe Griffin, the new head of the Scottish civil service, in front of a Holyrood committee this week ("Top civil servant told to 'get on it' after Supreme Court ruling on gender", heraldscotland, June 24) will not be surprised that nothing much of value seems to be achieved by government in Scotland. It is over two months since the Supreme Court ruled that biological sex is the determining factor in definitions of "woman", "man" and "sex". Yet the SNP administration is still unable to implement policy that reflects that judgment because first, according to Mr Griffin, the Justice Department needs to establish a working group to talk about what they should do. Yes, Minister was far ahead of its time in describing this: "when the time is ripe", "in the fullness of time", as Jim Hacker said about implementing a particular policy not to his taste. We know that the SNP regime is dragging its heels on fulfilling the requirements of the Supreme Court decision because its leaders still believe that they were right to impose the Gender Recognition Reform Bill, which was mercifully halted by Westminster. It is not at all reassuring that the already grossly bloated Scottish civil service seeks to obstruct the law by procrastinating. Scotland now has a huge financial black hole. It is time for Holyrood to administer Ozempic to the bureaucracy, to slim it down to its essential functions, and also to bring civil servants back into offices they have avoided for all but one day a week. Jill Stephenson, Edinburgh. The high cost of nuclear waste Your front page headline today ("Nuclear industry says ministers' green energy plans are 'fraud' and will see Scots miss out", The Herald, June 27) does bring to mind the old aphorism that 'it takes one to recognise one'. Those with long memories will recall the promises from the nuclear industry of 'electricity too cheap to meter', of safe disposal of nuclear waste, safety of the entire process and so many more. All of these have failed to come to pass as Windscale, Chernobyl and many smaller events bear witness. The continued costs for future generations of the safe storage of nuclear waste are conveniently forgotten. It hardly behoves an industry with this track record to accuse others of fraud. Dr RM Morris, Ellon. • Today's front page shows the argument about the use of nuclear energy: do we believe the safety assurances made by the Nuclear Industry Association or the warnings that Torness (like Hunterston) is cracked beyond repair and potentially dangerous? The day that the British Government agrees to build a reactor beside the House of Commons is the day I'll accept it is safe. Allan McDougall, Neilston. We need proof of safety Having been raised on the west coast of Cumberland, I remember going to the local farm with our tin can to collect the day's milk. I was surprised to see Archie Rose, the village bobby, supervising the pouring of the day's milk into the farm's drains. Calder Hall, as it was then called [now Sellafield], had had an "incident". My father was not exactly pleased with my story. When I worked in Barrow later in life I became aware of three men of the same age as myself who went to the same school as each other and all had tumours on the brain. Unfortunately two died, one of whom was the former England football captain, Emlyn Hughes. They say there are no hotspots, but I recognise that as a raging inferno. For years it was recognised that pollution from fossil fuel burning was injuring the health of a number of people. Action was not taken until the implications of climate change were realised. I am not prepared to sit back and smile at expansion of nuclear power until a proven secure way is found for disposal of nuclear waste. Andy McAdam, Ayr. Shuffling the problem A simple question for those in charge of Scottish energy policy, and let us assume that the electricity grid will continue to be "national" in the sense that electricity will flow in both directions over the Border. If coal as a source of energy is gone, the opposition to new wind installations is growing in effectiveness, there is no sign of usable tidal power and the Scottish Government has set its face against nuclear generation, has that government invented a clever way of interrogating each electron making its way north to ensure that it was not produced by nuclear means so that it can be sent home? If not, in times of power deficiency in Scotland will we not simply be shuffling the problem off on to our neighbours, and that could never happen. Oh wait, though: was that a truck full of landfill I just saw heading south? Brian Chrystal, Edinburgh. Nuclear is for weapons SO Ed Miliband's 'golden age' of nuclear power awaits us. Well, Keir Starmer is warning us to be ready for war, and we know from Ukraine that nukes are potential war targets. A strike on Torness could, depending on its severity, render much if not most of the Central Belt uninhabitable for many decades. Let's face it; nukes are built to produce plutonium for weapons, with the electricity merely an expensive by-product. In a country with our tidal potential, going down the road preferred by Ed Miliband and the GMB union would be dangerous lunacy. George Morton, Rosyth. Will Scotland be using electricity generated by nuclear power? (Image: PA) Change tack on prostate cancer I note Lauren Del Fabbro's article ("Olympic star Hoy calls for change over NHS prostate cancer tests", The Herald, June 21) regarding an interview with one of the bravest and most noble sporting legends of all time who has been dealt the most devastating hand imaginable, but who being a person with such moral fortitude has again risen to the challenge and has now singlehandedly done more for highlighting the failures of the NHS in the way that they deal with prostate cancer than all of the charities and pressure groups. The NHS tells us that most men who have prostate cancer will have no symptoms. The NHS says that if prostate cancer is caught early 90% of men will have an effective treatment. It does seem to be an absolutely staggering situation the NHS has created in the way it attempts to deal with prostate cancer. The NHS only tells GPs about the NICE referral route for men who have symptoms. The NHS refuses to tell GPs about the referral route for men who have no systems (bearing in mind that most cases of prostate cancer will have no symptoms at first). This route for men without symptoms is called the Prostate Cancer Risk Management Programme (PCRMP). Because of the fact that the NHS fails to provide advice and guidance on the PCRMP referral route, GPs are generally not aware of this mechanism and because of this men are routinely not referred when they should be. This results in men being diagnosed much later on when they come back with symptoms, often leaving men without any curative pathway. It is only following Sir Chris Hoy's harrowing position and because of his legend status that the NHS was forced into doing something. So on December 12, 2024 there was a change put in place to the PCRMP in that the minimum age limit of 50 before men could obtain a PSA test was removed. Hence in 2025 a man of any age who does not have symptoms can ask his GP for a PSA test. So many thanks to Sir Chris Hoy for his incredible courage and his ability to start to make change happen within a body that resists change. The NHS would never have moved without his influence. The next change that needs to happen is that the NHS tells its GPs that there is not just the NICE referral route but the PCRMP referral route for men without symptoms as well and in so doing many prostate cancer will be caught early and men's lives will be saved. Duncan Carins, Ewhurst, Surrey. Trump to a T Today's verse from Scripture in your Family Announcements section (June 27) was from St John chapter 15: 'You are my friends if you do what I command.' I immediately thought of Donald Trump; it seems to sum up his philosophy perfectly. Doug Maughan, Dunblane.
The Herald Scotland
18-06-2025
- Politics
- The Herald Scotland
What a waste this SNP Government has proved itself to be
Here we are less than six months away from the start of the ban and yet again we are seeing the SNP modus operandi. Make a big announcement of some grand idea, claim to be virtuous by saving the planet, yet don't put the effort in to actually put all the systems in place. It's just like the ferries all over again, although this time it's not the islanders who will be impacted but the English. As Scotland will not have enough incinerators for the next two years according to Ms Martin, 80-100 lorries every day will be heading south to England to go into their landfill. Imagine the impact on the roads, the environment and the cost at doing this, all because the SNP did not make sure that the structures were in place. I can't picture 600,000 tonnes of waste which is how much this will be annually. What I do know is that suddenly our neighbour is of use to the divisive SNP. The minister actually said in the interview that the 'landfill ban is a good thing in terms of reducing emissions, particularly potent methane emissions'. Does she believe that having a landfill ban in Scotland, sending our waste to England to their landfills reduces emissions? Is she really expecting us to believe that? Apparently she also believes the 'positive environmental impact of stopping landfill far outweighs any impact of temporary measures' (ie sending lorries to England). Her spin doctors were working hard when they came up with that line. We will have heavy lorries on the roads, Scottish waste going to landfill in England polluting the environment and the cost of this to the Scottish taxpayer, which she does not mention, all because the SNP has not done the hard graft to get enough capacity to deal with our waste. It's had 14 years to get this right and failed. Jane Lax, Aberlour. • Plans to send waste to England for disposal remind me of the old car sticker that said: 'Keep Scotland tidy, dump your rubbish in England'. This is an area in which we have some considerable skill, in offshoring manufacturing industry to exclude the emissions from our own statistics. Scott Simpson, Bearsden. Read more letters Another problem is looming Despite the fact it has taken the BBC some time to appreciate and understand the effects of the Scottish Parliament's (already-postponed) ban on the landfill of untreated municipal waste at the end of this year, the Disclosure programme on Monday (June 16) highlighted the nub of the problem: in January 2026, Scotland will be generating 600,000-700,000 tonnes of waste that will have to be trucked to England (or further) for disposal. We won't have enough Energy from Waste (EFW) plants to cope, and the prospects of increasing our recycling rates (that have stagnated since 2012) are pretty poor. It was disappointing that the programme makers didn't do some further research into the reasons for this inertia. The options are either to thole umpteen trucks taking Scottish waste to England (or the ports), or postpone the implementation date for the ban (again). If the latter, is that fair on the companies who are currently investing (or have already have invested) heavily in EFW technology in anticipation of the ban? It's yet another example of policy being made up on the hoof with either the waste industry not being consulted or (if it was) its advice being ignored. But there's another problem looming. The Westminster Government is presently consulting on a proposal to unify landfill tax by 2030 by removing the lower rate for inert wastes (soil, rubble etc) that's currently less than 4% of the higher rate (£126.15/tonne). If that happens and Scotland doesn't follow suit, it would create a situation where it could be economically viable to establish new landfills just north of the border for English waste being trucked up here. Cynics might welcome the idea on the grounds that the trucks hauling Scottish municipal waste to England for disposal would then have the opportunity to backload inert waste for the return journey. John Crawford, Preston. Priorities are all mixed up You report that a Treasury Minister, Emma Reynolds, was unable to give either the precise location or the total cost of yet another project in the south-east of England, a dual tunnel under the Thames linking Essex and Kent ("Minister struggles when questioned over new Thames crossing as costs mount", The Herald, June 17). The cost, it seems, will be between £9.2 billion and £10.2bn. This is a cost being borne by all of us, on top of HS2 (now stopping at Birmingham, not Edinburgh), the incredibly expensive nuclear power stations being built in the south, the aircraft carriers and more. Yet, as a nation, we struggle to keep people warm, people housed and children born into families on benefits fed and clothed. We have certainly gone wrong somewhere. Patricia Fort, Glasgow. This pledge is not believable Back in 2007 one of the first things new First Minister Alex Salmond promised was a focus on more efficient government and reform of nine departments of the "executive", 27 executive agencies and the 152 quangos. He added: "I'm not sure we need that complexity for a nation of five million. If you're going to have joined-up government you need less bits to join up." Eighteen years later and one of the relics, or should I say ruins, of that hopeful regime, John Swinney appeared on stage in a gaslit fug of smoke and mirrors to swear he's going to finish the job ("Ministers in plan to save £1bn a year by cutbacks on 'waste'", The Herald, June 17). Where's he getting his inspiration from? The spirit of Alex Salmond or the spectre of Trump, Farage, Reform and DOGE? One thing we can be sure of: it ain't gonna happen on John Swinney's watch. Allan Sutherland, Stonehaven. • I was almost amused to read that, after 18 years in power, the SNP has decided to save £1 billion a year by cutbacks on "waste". A picture of John Swinney with a newly-grown centre parting would have been even more believable. Duncan Graham, Stirling. Sir Lindsay Hoyle (Image: PA) It's time for Hoyle to go I read with incredulity the letter (June 16) from Jackie Storer, Press Secretary to Sir Lindsay Hoyle, the Speaker of the House of Commons. Only a lackey on the Speaker's payroll could write such drivel. Your readers would have to be 'soft in the head" to believe that Sir Lindsay Hoyle has any 'soft power' as an international peace-keeper. He cannot even keep order in the House of Commons and is an international embarrassment. During over a quarter of a century's membership of the House of Commons, I experienced five Speakers: Selwyn Lloyd, George Thomas, Bernard Weatherill, Betty Boothroyd and Michael Martin. The best by far was the only woman to have held that high office, the formidable Betty Boothroyd, who managed to keep order and chair debates with an admirable combination of professionalism, firmness and humour, while ensuring that even the most humble backbencher got a fair kick of the ball. The current Speaker has none of these attributes. I have never met Sir Lindsay Hoyle but I literally kent his faither, Douglas, who began his Westminster career as an extreme left-wing MP but later transmogrified into an Establishment Member of the House of Lords, where his son will no doubt follow him. Since my retirement, I have more than occasionally watched Parliamentary debates on TV and read reports of the current Speaker's conduct at home and abroad. I have come to the conclusion that Sir Lindsay Hoyle is not only incompetent. He is pretentious and profligate: a perfect example of someone who has been promoted above his abilities. In short, he is not fit to lace Betty Boothroyd's boots and it is time for him to go. Dennis Canavan, Bannockburn.
The Herald Scotland
12-06-2025
- Politics
- The Herald Scotland
SNP failures will discourage anyone who wants to move to Scotland
Why would anyone come here when they will be paying higher taxes if they earn over £30,318? We may need people who will be paid a lower salary but they may be married to a higher earner. Why would anyone come north of the central belt when our infrastructure doesn't lend itself to easy travel to the rest of the country? Imagine how much safer and quicker a dualled A9 and A96 would make it to get to the capital. Why would anyone come here when there is a housing shortage, long NHS waits, falling education standards and a party in power that is more interested in seeking grievance than improving our lives? The best way to make people want to come here is to offer them a great incentive to work and live here. That means doing the hard work to improve our NHS, provide drug rehabilitation facilities, restore our first class education system and stop taxing people more than those in England. Of course the SNP have had 18 years to do that, and failed at every turn. Jane Lax, Aberlour. Read more letters: Hospitality for Hamas Stephen Flynn has promoted hatred of Israel to the core of his programme for Scotland ('Stephen Flynn: Independent Scotland would cut ties with Israel', June 10). Perhaps he would like to invite Hamas leaders for state visits including the finest of whisky and golf hospitality. Tim Cox, Bern 6, Switzerland. More left-wing nonsense Anne Wimberley (letters, June 9) sadly displays the usual failings of the left – and indeed in numerous ways. First, she brands all those with views contrary to her own as 'far right', echoing the hysterical nonsense of much of today's liberal press. She then makes the usual liberal-left generalisation of grouping all migration as one, totally failing to make any distinction between out-of-control illegal immigration and those valued workers arriving through valid, approved and documented routes. Finally, she blindly declares invalid statistics as facts with no regard for the true figures, her exaggerated claim of the NHS being kept running by 40% immigrant staff being utter nonsense. The true figure is around 19% in England, and less than 10% in Scotland. None of those have arrived the UK in large groups of undocumented young men via rubber boats across the English Channel, mobile phones in hand and eager to claim their financial benefits, free accommodation, free education, and free healthcare from a system already under strain and made worse every day by the demands of their illegal presence. Steph Johnson, Glasgow The wealthy won't have to worry Good to see that Westminster's man in Scotland, Ian Murray, does not want public money to be spent on 'millionaire pensioners' ('Scottish Government refuses to rule out changes to pensioners' winter payment', June 10). I trust that no rich MP, peer or peeress of pensioner age will be able to claim heating, travel or other allowances from the public purse in future under Mr Murray's strictures. This Labour Party, however, always favours the rich over the poor, so the wealthy won't have to worry. GR Weir, Ochiltree. How did Reeves justify her sums? There is an obvious question for John Swinney et al to consider in case they are minded to follow Rachel Reeves' Damascene conversion and pay Scottish pensioners a greater winter fuel payment than presently planned, but means-tested on the basis of their annual income ('Chancellor confirms a major U- turn on winter fuel payment', June 10). As I understand it, Ms Reeves has set the qualifying income in England and Wales at £35,000 or below, although she has yet to explain how that means-testing will be achieved, and at what cost. Certainly, qualifying pensioners in Scotland, where it is colder in winter, should receive a payment at least equal to that considered necessary in England and Wales. My difficulty is that I don't know how Ms Reeves justifies the means-testing figure of £35,000. At first sight it appears reasonable but as it is a gross figure, would a net figure not be a more appropriate yardstick as being what a pensioner has left to pay for fuel and everything else? If a net income figure would be too difficult and costly to establish, simply increase the gross figure a little. Alan Fitzpatrick, Dunlop, Ayrshire. * I NOTE that the age at which people can start to receive state pension is rising again. Presumably this is because it is the older age group which is working and paying tax. Perhaps the government should raise the age at which unemployment benefit starts – eg, 16 to 18, or 16 to 21 – to encourage the parents of younger people to get a job. Elizabeth Hands, Armadale. EU membership for Scotland? Not so fast So John Swinney claims that EU membership could bring an independent Scotland 'security, stability and opportunity.' I, too, regret Brexit, but let us never forget that all those voting for independence in 2014, by voting for Scexit also voted for Brexit – Brussels made this very clear before the referendum. Plus, perhaps unsurprisingly, Swinney ignores that Scotland's excessively high deficit levels – over three times higher than the 3% tolerated by EU fiscal rules – means that, whatever narrative SNP politicians might spin, the EU would reject an application from Scotland, probably for many years, until Holyrood's overspending was brought under control by cutting public services and raising taxes. Martin Redfern, Melrose, Roxburghshire. Sarwar's TV interview Sir Tom Clarke states (letters, June 11) that'As a Labour voter I was very proud' of Anas Sarwar's interview with Martin Geissler. He was entitled to be, of course, but I saw the interview live, and I'm afraid I continue to think it was one of the most horrendous ones I have listened to, because of the arrogant Mr Sarwar treating the occasion as a dictatorial Party Political Broadcast and brooking no interference from the courteous Mr Geissler. I live in the Southside of the City (although the SNP now describes us as East End), and I have to say that my friends, neighbours and acquaintances – of all political persuasions – do not agree with Sir Tom. Oh, the wonder and pleasure to live in a free society – I think! Walter Paul, Glasgow. Destabilising South Africa Donald Trump's false charge of race discrimination by the South African government against white farmers and offering them refuge in the US is an act of hostility against South Africa. Since South Africa took Israel to the International Court of Justice charging it with genocide the US has ramped up its actions against South Africa. Trump's Presidential Order, 'Addressing the Egregious Actions of South Africa', promoted the re-settlement of Afrikaners in the US and stated that South Africa had taken aggressive positions towards the United States including 'accusing Israel of genocide.' It added: 'The United States cannot support the government of South Africa in its undermining United States foreign policy which poses national security threats to our Nation… and our interests.' It concluded 'the United States shall not provide aid or assistance to South Africa.' It could not be made clearer that if you disagree with US support for Israel's actions then you will be punished. In South Africa's colonial and apartheid past, land distribution was grossly unequal on the basis of race. This remains the case. Whites own 70% of the land while being only 7% of the population. South Africa in addressing this issue passed the Land Expropriation Act. Land can be expropriated without compensation only in strictly defined circumstances. The United States intervention, making false claims about the Act and what is happening to white farmers, whilst offering fast-tracked refuge to Afrikaners is a disruptive interference in the affairs of a sovereign country. The US actions seem designed to destabilise South Africa and stop its support for the Palestinians. South Africa should be applauded for its humanitarian stance in support of the Palestinians and should also be assisted in its journey to overcome 300 years of colonialism and apartheid. Brian Filling, Chair, Action for Southern Africa (ACTSA) Scotland, Glasgow.
The Herald Scotland
11-06-2025
- Politics
- The Herald Scotland
Why on earth would anyone want to come to Scotland?
Why would anyone come here when they will be paying higher taxes if they earn over £30,318? We may need people who will be paid a lower salary but they may be married to a higher earner. Why would anyone come north of the central belt when our infrastructure doesn't lend itself to easy travel to the rest of the country? Imagine how much safer and quicker a dualled A9 and A96 would make it to get to the capital. Why would anyone come here when there is a housing shortage, long NHS waits, falling education standards and a party in power that is more interested in seeking grievance than improving our lives? The best way to make people want to come here is to offer them a great incentive to work and live here. That means doing the hard work to improve our NHS, provide drug rehabilitation facilities, restore our first class education system and stop taxing people more than those in England. Of course the SNP have had 18 years to do that, and failed at every turn. Jane Lax, Aberlour. Hospitality for Hamas STEPHEN Flynn has promoted hatred of Israel to the core of his programme for Scotland ('Stephen Flynn: Independent Scotland would cut ties with Israel', June 10). Perhaps he would like to invite Hamas leaders for state visits including the finest of whisky and golf hospitality. Tim Cox, Bern 6, Switzerland. More left-wing nonsense ANNE Wimberley (letters, June 9) sadly displays the usual failings of the left – and indeed in numerous ways. First, she brands all those with views contrary to her own as 'far right', echoing the hysterical nonsense of much of today's liberal press. She then makes the usual liberal-left generalisation of grouping all migration as one, totally failing to make any distinction between out-of-control illegal immigration and those valued workers arriving through valid, approved and documented routes. Finally, she blindly declares invalid statistics as facts with no regard for the true figures, her exaggerated claim of the NHS being kept running by 40% immigrant staff being utter nonsense. The true figure is around 19% in England, and less than 10% in Scotland. None of those have arrived the UK in large groups of undocumented young men via rubber boats across the English Channel, mobile phones in hand and eager to claim their financial benefits, free accommodation, free education, and free healthcare from a system already under strain and made worse every day by the demands of their illegal presence. Steph Johnson, Glasgow. The wealthy won't have to worry GOOD to see that Westminster's man in Scotland, Ian Murray, does not want public money to be spent on 'millionaire pensioners' ('Scottish Government refuses to rule out changes to pensioners' winter payment', June 10). I trust that no rich MP, peer or peeress of pensioner age will be able to claim heating, travel or other allowances from the public purse in future under Mr Murray's strictures. This Labour Party, however, always favours the rich over the poor, so the wealthy won't have to worry. GR Weir, Ochiltree. How did Reeves justify her sums? THERE is an obvious question for John Swinney et al to consider in case they are minded to follow Rachel Reeves' Damascene conversion and pay Scottish pensioners a greater winter fuel payment than presently planned, but means-tested on the basis of their annual income ('Chancellor confirms a major U- turn on winter fuel payment', June 10). As I understand it, Ms Reeves has set the qualifying income in England and Wales at £35,000 or below, although she has yet to explain how that means-testing will be achieved, and at what cost. Certainly, qualifying pensioners in Scotland, where it is colder in winter, should receive a payment at least equal to that considered necessary in England and Wales. My difficulty is that I don't know how Ms Reeves justifies the means-testing figure of £35,000. At first sight it appears reasonable but as it is a gross figure, would a net figure not be a more appropriate yardstick as being what a pensioner has left to pay for fuel and everything else? If a net income figure would be too difficult and costly to establish, simply increase the gross figure a little. Alan Fitzpatrick, Dunlop, Ayrshire. I NOTE that the age at which people can start to receive state pension is rising again. Presumably this is because it is the older age group which is working and paying tax. Perhaps the government should raise the age at which unemployment benefit starts – eg, 16 to 18, or 16 to 21 – to encourage the parents of younger people to get a job. Elizabeth Hands, Armadale. EU membership for Scotland SO John Swinney claims that EU membership could bring an independent Scotland 'security, stability and opportunity.' I, too, regret Brexit, but let us never forget that all those voting for independence in 2014, by voting for Scexit also voted for Brexit – Brussels made this very clear before the referendum. Plus, perhaps unsurprisingly, Swinney ignores that Scotland's excessively high deficit levels – over three times higher than the 3% tolerated by EU fiscal rules – means that, whatever narrative SNP politicians might spin, the EU would reject an application from Scotland, probably for many years, until Holyrood's overspending was brought under control by cutting public services and raising taxes. Martin Redfern, Melrose, Roxburghshire. Sarwar's TV interview SIR Tom Clarke states (letters, J une 11) that'As a Labour voter I was very proud' of Anas Sarwar's interview with Martin Geissler. He was entitled to be, of course, but I saw the interview live, and I'm afraid I continue to think it was one of the most horrendous ones I have listened to, because of the arrogant Mr Sarwar treating the occasion as a dictatorial Party Political Broadcast and brooking no interference from the courteous Mr Geissler. I live in the Southside of the City (although the SNP now describes us as East End), and I have to say that my friends, neighbours and acquaintances – of all political persuasions – do not agree with Sir Tom. Oh, the wonder and pleasure to live in a free society – I think! Walter Paul, Glasgow. Destabilising South Africa DONALD Trump's false charge of race discrimination by the South African government against white farmers and offering them refuge in the US is an act of hostility against South Africa. Since South Africa took Israel to the International Court of Justice charging it with genocide the US has ramped up its actions against South Africa. Trump's Presidential Order, 'Addressing the Egregious Actions of South Africa', promoted the re-settlement of Afrikaners in the US and stated that South Africa had taken aggressive positions towards the United States including 'accusing Israel of genocide.' It added: 'The United States cannot support the government of South Africa in its undermining United States foreign policy which poses national security threats to our Nation… and our interests.' It concluded 'the United States shall not provide aid or assistance to South Africa.' It could not be made clearer that if you disagree with US support for Israel's actions then you will be punished. In South Africa's colonial and apartheid past, land distribution was grossly unequal on the basis of race. This remains the case. Whites own 70% of the land while being only 7% of the population. South Africa in addressing this issue passed the Land Expropriation Act. Land can be expropriated without compensation only in strictly defined circumstances. The United States intervention, making false claims about the Act and what is happening to white farmers, whilst offering fast-tracked refuge to Afrikaners is a disruptive interference in the affairs of a sovereign country. The US actions seem designed to destabilise South Africa and stop its support for the Palestinians. South Africa should be applauded for its humanitarian stance in support of the Palestinians and should also be assisted in its journey to overcome 300 years of colonialism and apartheid. Brian Filling. Chair, Action for Southern Africa (ACTSA) Scotland, Glasgow.
The Herald Scotland
07-06-2025
- Politics
- The Herald Scotland
So now you know, SNP: indy is not what people care about
There may have been little talk of independence in the campaign but Katy Loudon, the SNP candidate, put out a Facebook video on the morning of the by-election which made clear it's all about separating us from the rest of the UK. The unionist parties' share of the vote at the by-election was just short of 66%. If that doesn't send a clear message to the SNP and the Greens that independence is not what is important at the moment, I don't know what will. Maybe if the SNP improved our NHS, our education system, housing, our infrastructure, managed to build ferries and dual our roads on time and improve our economy, it might get more support. That would be novel, would it not? Jane Lax, Aberlour. Nothing short of humiliation It wasn't only the kitchen sink that the SNP flung at the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election. It threw the washing machine, tumble drier and dishwasher as well. Anyone who saw on social media the gangs of SNP enthusiasts roaming the constituency, saturating it with MSPs including ministers, as well as foot soldiers, with a massive intensity, for weeks and especially in the last two weeks, must have imagined that it was a seat they could not lose. I wondered, in the last days, whether the SNP was not engaging in overkill, that the good folk of the constituency might be saturated with SNP propaganda to the point of apathy. The turnout, at 44 per cent, suggested that as a partial possibility. In this by-election, it was possible to utilise all the party's resources, and it did. That would not be remotely a possibility in any one constituency in a General Election. The result was nothing short of humiliation for the SNP. It is also a personal humiliation for John Swinney, who spent much time in the last week campaigning in the constituency rather than attending to First Minister's business. Nothing much will change at Holyrood, of course, but Mr Swinney's insistence that Scotland does not welcome Reform UK looks a bit hollow after it scooped up 26 per cent of the vote. Perhaps we can have a break from his preaching about Scotland being allegedly more moral than England. Ah well, one can but hope. Jill Stephenson, Edinburgh. Read more letters For many, politics is not working It is alarming that, in Thursday's by-election, Reform UK came third with 7,088 votes, a mere 1,471 behind Labour. The victorious Labour candidate, Davy Russell, is quoted as saying that 'this community has [also] sent a message to Farage and his mob tonight. The poison of Reform isn't us – it isn't Scotland and we don't want your division here.' I suspect Mr Russell was speaking from within the excitement of winning and did not realise the significance of Reform UK winning so many votes. The party of Nigel Farage, that enthusiastic Trump supporter, was understood to hold little attraction for the Scottish voter compared with his standing with the English electorate. The Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse voters have demonstrated otherwise. The UK political establishment, Labour in particular, has one important lesson to learn, that being that politics in our country is not working for a significant element of our population. The vote for a disastrous Brexit was the first warning sign of a significant discontent with the inequalities and injustices in our society and economy. Uncontrolled neoliberalism has done untold damage to our social contract with our politicians accepting unquestionably the words of Mrs Thatcher, 'there is no alternative'. John Milne, Uddingston. Reform will be a Holyrood force The most interesting thing about the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election for Holyrood is not who won, Labour, nor the fact that the voting was a three-way split between it, the SNP and Reform UK, but where Reform's votes came from. Compared to its vote share in the constituency in the last Holyrood election four years ago, the SNP vote dropped by almost 17% of the votes cast and the Tory vote by 11.5%. Labour's vote share actually went down by 2% as well. This means that Reform UK's 26% of the vote came more from parties of the left than the Tories. Clearly Reform is not just a threat to the Conservatives. In the climate of dissatisfaction with the established parties, Reform is on track to be a force at Holyrood next year. Otto Inglis, Crossgates, Fife. • After all the ballyhoo, the result is in and the real winner is Reform UK. John Swinney talked Reform up too effectively. Labour's candidate was nearly invisible. The result speaks volumes. The SNP lost. Labour just limped home despite being helped a huge amount by the SNP's travails. Reform UK came from a near-zero base to gain over 7,000 votes and run both other parties close. This by-election was a real test of public opinion for the shape of Holyrood in 2026. Reform could still founder given frequent party in-fighting. Equally the Tories could re-assert their desired position as defenders of the Union. John Swinney has made another major SNP blunder and released the genie from the bottle. Is he going to be the architect of the SNP's downfall? Dr Gerald Edwards, Glasgow. Labour far from home and hosed While Labour's victory in the Hamilton by-election seemingly points to the party winning the Scottish Parliament elections next year, if I were Anas Sarwar, I wouldn't be sizing up the curtains of Bute House just yet. The seat was won comfortably by the SNP in the last Scottish Parliament election in 2021 and is just the sort of seat that Labour needs to win if Anas Sarwar is to become Scotland's next First Minister. The SNP has made little progress in restoring its fortunes following its heavy defeat in last summer's Westminster election, with polls suggesting that the party's support across Scotland is still 15 points down on its tally in 2021. In the event, the fall in the party's support in Hamilton was, at 17 points, just a little higher than that. However, Labour's own tally was also down by two points on its vote in 2021, when overall the party came a disappointing third. That drop was very much in line with recent polling, which puts the party at just 19 per cent across Scotland as a whole, while the SNP has around a third of the vote. In addition, Labour is losing somewhere between one in six and one in five of its voters to Reform since last year's election. After nearly two decades in the political wilderness, there is little sign that Labour, as it currently stands, is set to regain the reins of power at Holyrood. Alex Orr, Edinburgh. Now flesh out the policies All the pundits initially claimed the Hamilton by-election would go to Labour, given local circumstances. Now a Labour win is described as a 'shock' after even some in Labour were describing their own candidate as not up to the job. But Labour needs to up its game for the next election. Criticism is easy, but Labour needs more fleshed-out policies for government, beyond centralising health in Scotland. The SNP needs to drop all the 'student politics' stuff; it was embarrassing to see a squabble over £2 million when it should be asking why Scotland does so poorly on defence procurement and jobs. Formulate a proper industrial policy for Scotland, and back any project that would enhance jobs and prosperity for Scotland. Refuse nothing and put the onus on unionists to explain their plans in detail. Trident: are the unionist plans for keeping Trident in Scotland similar to those for Diego Garcia? Nuclear power: why do they think Scotland should have it, given its high-cost electricity and the extensive lags on construction? What of waste disposal and site security? The SNP should be in favour of local pricing for electricity as a draw to attract jobs, and for North Sea oil/gas production (until Scots are empowered to decide its future). A Labour/SNP coalition? It looks like the only feasible outcome. GR Weir, Ochiltree. • For all the fuss about the Hamilton by-election, it should be noted that almost 56% of the electorate really don't care who represents them in the Scottish Parliament. Malcolm Parkin, Kinross. Russia claim is baseless Brian Wilson ("Yes, we should stand firm over Putin, but let's not make Russia our implacable foe", The Herald, June 5) tells us today that the rights of the former Soviet republics to seek security (membership of Nato) should have been balanced against Russian fears of encirclement. This raises two issues. Firstly, the Soviet Union consisted of 15 republics: the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (Russia itself) and 14 others. Of these, only three (the Baltic states,which were independent between the wars) have joined Nato. I am unclear as to how this constitutes encirclement. Does Mr Wilson envisage the Central Asian former republics (Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan etc) expressing a wish to join the alliance at some point, thus making encirclement a reality rather than a baseless claim? Secondly, does Mr Wilson not wonder why these small countries wished to be under the umbrella of the Nato alliance? To avoid the current fate of Ukraine perhaps? Alan Jenkins, Glasgow. • Brian Wilson expresses the hope that we should not categorise the Russian people as being inevitably in the enemy camp. He concluded his article by observing that narratives about Russia should have "due regard to past history and also future potential for peaceful co-existence". Such narratives should certainly not fail to take account of the contribution made by Russian armed forces and the civilian population during the Second World War, which is estimated to have resulted in some 25 million Soviet deaths. It is clear that the Russian effort during that war was profoundly influential in assisting toward the eventual defeat of Germany. The Russian people at the time called upon impressive levels of love of country and perseverance in the fight toward victory over a formidable enemy. Once we were allies. While Russia remains in the firm grip of the dictatorial, ambitious and ruthless Vladimir Putin, it is difficult to see to what extent meaningful steps can be taken to pursue the "potential for peaceful co-existence". Ian W Thomson, Lenzie. A Pride rally in Glasgow (Image: PA) Pride needed now as much as ever Gregor McKenzie (Letters, June 6) suggests that LGBT Pride has had its day. In fact, since the end of the pandemic restrictions, more people have been going to more Pride events across Scotland than ever before. Why? I think it's in part because people see how, after several positive changes in the law for LGBT people in the past 25 years, things are now starting to get worse again. Mr McKenzie asks why we can't all just let people be, and I wish we could. But the increased restrictions being introduced on trans people in the UK are quite the opposite of that. Trans people just want to get on with their lives, but the new rules make that much more difficult. And trans people are constantly maligned currently by some parts of the media. So Pride events are needed as much now as ever. They are a celebration of how far we have come in the 30 years since the first Pride Scotland, and they are a protest against the regression we're seeing now. One day perhaps Pride will be solely a celebration, but that day still seems some way off. Meanwhile people join together in the streets to say "Not going back". Tim Hopkins, Edinburgh.
