Scotland Matters Letters

To the relief of many of us, the UK government is to investigate the extent to which UK taxpayers’ money is being used to support civil servants at Holyrood whose remit from the SNP/Greens administration is to work for the breakup of the UK. Not before time. This has, of course, angered the SNP, with its Westminster leader, Stephen Flynn, claiming any inhibition on this activity would prevent “the Scottish Government from fulfilling its democratic mandate to Explain the case for independence to the people of Scotland”. For “explain”, read “insult the UK, especially the English, and tell shameless lies about Scot-land’s position in the UK”. Mr Flynn, the SNP’s democratic mandate is to discharge its duties in the devolved areas of government listed in the Scotland Act of1998. It has no remit to intervene in reserved issues, including the Constitution. Is the UK the only country in the world that is expected to stand by impotently while insurgent politicians in a part of its territory agitate for its own break-up, using state rather than party funding? And this is after the SNP’s single policy was decisively rejected in the biggest democratic exercise Scotland has ever had, the 2014 referendum in which the turnout was a stonking 85 per cent. It is beyond time that the SNP’s encroachment on reserved issues and its ultra vires expenditure were reined in. Jill Stephenson, Edinburgh.

The appalling death rate from drugs in Scotland continues. Why is the drug death rate here about 3.7 times worse than in England? Perhaps it is due to the SNP removing or cutting budgets for residential treatment and rehabilitation. Residential places have been reduced by 8o per cent. At the same time, the death rate per year has risen by over 300 per cent. Only recently Unison asked Michael Matheson to reinstate the 62 jobs cut from care and addiction services in Glasgow. These are fully within the powers of the Scottish government. Maybe the ineffective minimum pricing of alcohol has driven addicts to cheaper alternatives? Scotland’s Drug and Alcohol Minster now wants to decriminalise drug possession and use. Some of the drugs in use are extremely addictive and as known can be lethal. Decriminalising supply, possession or consumption will likely make drugs more readily available and acceptable, which can only result in more people suffering with more deaths? This latest policy asking for change seems to be a way to pick an unnecessary constitutional fight with the UK Government to deflect how badly Scotland is doing. SNP should be able to find solutions and work within the powers of devolution. They need to do better. Alastair Murray, Ethnburgh.

Once again we have Grant Frazer living in cloud cuckoo land (Letters, July 18) blaming Brexit for our high inflation whilst conveniently ignoring the main reason by far was the £400 billion spent on protecting us from the worst ravages of Covid and the impact of energy prices due to the war in Ukraine. But there again, why let the facts spoil a good story Not content with blaming Brexit for inflation he then claimed it has been an “utter disaster” overall, but for us not to worry as the Yes Independence campaign will ride over the hill to the rescue (amusingly, he has clearly given up on his beloved SNP) by laying out the “obvious” and clear economic argument how Scotland would be better outside the UK. Well, that would be a fast, as all before him have failed miserably including Alex Salmond, Nicola Sturgeon and the economists tasked to produce a new credible blueprint for Indy. To enlighten us perhaps, he could let us into his secret and explain to the readers that if Scexit would be three to four times more challenging than his hated Brexit (according to all credited institutions) how will this be possible? To help him in his dream world he should take into account for starters how we would deal with our twin deficits (Gavin McCrone), what currency we would use, deal with a hard border and fund our State pensions out of current taxation and much more. Given Mr Frazer’s track record of obfuscation and make-believe, we should not expect coherent answers any time soon but more of the same nonsense which has now become his unfortunate trademark. Ian Lakin, Aberdeen.

Keir Starmer is right to keep the two-child benefit cap. When it was introduced, it did not affect existing children, only future offspring, so people can take this into account when they decide whether to have more than two children. Cost of housing and child care are a major big factor for couples deciding only to have two kids (if any). And if the government doesn’t think we can afford this benefit compared to other more pressing requirements, they are right to say so. It’s about time reality set in with the Labour Party and Starmer’s U-turns on £28billion Green investment and – hopefully – new oil and gas developments will give him more credibility with the sensible wing of the electorate. A Sutherland, Aberdeenshire.

Share this entry