Letters: Blame for Brexit problem sits squarely with Westminster's lies

I understand where he is coming from and to be fair to him he was always for remaining in the European Union. I recall him saying that “this [Brexit] is a very British sort of self-harm”. How true, and I certainly do respect his overall view.

This week’s article, though, seemed skewed towards blaming Europe for the position in Northern Ireland. My fear is that this is another example of people in the UK blaming Brussels when they should be blaming Westminster. My feeling in 2016 was just that, and blaming Brussels rather than Westminster was mainly why there was a majority for leaving.

It is the UK who left the club, not the other way round. The rules were and are clear and if I left my golf club, for example, I wouldn’t expect the same terms if I wanted to play as a non-member.

The Europeans have many faults I am sure, but the blame for our Brexit problems sits squarely with Westminster and the lies they told to the British public during the referendum campaign in 2016. Simple as that.

I was told in the 2014 Scottish independence referendum that to be sure of remaining in Europe I must vote to remain in the UK. I now see that I was duped.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Which is why I now agree wholeheartedly with what Leah Gunn Barrett wrote in her excellent letter (July 25) where she said that it is a lack of control that is holding us back, and why we have not “levelled up” and are not likely to either.

George Archibald, Lasswade.

TACKLING THE IRISH QUESTION

ONE thing Iain Macwhirter does get right is that “Brexit isn’t going to go away”. However, many other aspects of his argument are anything but right.

He suggests, for instance, that Britain should “remain in the European single market if only to avoid being subjected to the bureaucratic red tape for which the EU is notorious”. However, Brexiters would consider this would ensnare the UK economy to the maximum extent. How do we avoid the “bureaucratic red tape” of the single market by remaining in the single market?

He asserts Nicola Sturgeon “was more interested in leading an undemocratic campaign to reverse the 2016 referendum”, but in February 2018 the Scottish Government published “Scotland’s Place in Europe: People, Jobs and Investment”. This concluded by calling on the Westminster Government to “re-visit [their] “red lines” and re-open the case for staying in the single market and customs union, but this was rejected by Theresa May because, she said, the UK as a whole had voted to Leave even if Scotland did not.

At the same time, let’s not forget that the role of the First Minister is to represent Scotland and the opinion of its electorate, and a 62 per cent vote to Remain in the EU is some justification to act as she did.

He is also grossly misleading when he writes that “it isn’t the [Northern Ireland] protocol itself that is the main problem, but the way it is implemented”, for the fact is that the protocol has been inserted into what had been an increasingly integrated Irish market. He refers to Marks and Spencer lorries being held up at the Irish border and food going to waste, but Brexit interfered with the production and distribution networks set up over several years. An aim of the Belfast Agreement was normalisation of on an all-island-of-Ireland basis.

Instead, he argues, goods should cross between the two parts of Ireland, as they do between Scotland and England, but in doing so he forgets that both of these are part of a single sovereign state, but that the Republic is a sovereign state and part of the EU, but Northern Ireland is neither.

Mr Macwhirter is, though, correct when he writes: “The casualties will be ordinary people on both sides of the Irish border”. It is a pity he fails to consider the consequences of this.

Alasdair Galloway, Dumbarton.

SNP IS TAKING VOTES FOR GRANTED

THE SNP believes it has the Highlands and Islands vote in its pocket, come what may; recent election results may suggest its confidence is justified. Therefore, it considers it safe virtually to ignore the myriad transport problems with which those on the Scottish islands are plagued at present. Thus the ferries disaster is decided by central belt wallahs in the SNP who do not have a clue about the misery being undergone by the islanders and are only focused on how to break up the UK. The thinking appears to be: they will vote SNP anyway, why bother. This of course was the identical complacency that destroyed Labour.

The islanders will get a reaction to their problems when they realise that stopping voting for the party that treats them in this way does have an effect.

Alexander McKay, Edinburgh.

LET THE TRAIN TAKE THE STRAIN

YOU report on fibromyalgia sufferer Alison Skillin’s difficulties in getting to London by air with her assistance dog (“Fibromyalgia sufferer’s fury at airlines that don’t allow owner-trained guide dogs on board”, July 27), and quote her saying: “It would take an hour to fly down. It’s six or seven hours by train.” That isn’t the case.

Both Glasgow and Edinburgh airports are some distance out of

town, so it will take most people an extra half hour to get there rather than the city centre station. Check-in for flights closes 45 minutes before departure, and it makes sense to get to the airport an hour before to be on the safe side.

The flight time may be only an hour, as Ms Skillin states, but there’s also aircraft taxi time at both ends, so airlines schedule an hour and a half for the journey. Then you arrive at Heathrow and spend half an hour getting to the Heathrow Express or Tube station, followed by an hour to get to central London. The Underground isn’t exactly a pleasant experience when it’s hot and busy.

So that’s four and a half hours by plane, which is about the same as the train. In normal times, when the skies are busy, Heathrow is notorious for delays and you’d be well advised to allow at least an extra hour, and ideally two or three, if you have to be in London at a specific time. The train is also generally more comfortable: the seats are bigger, there’s more space around you, you can move about at will and you can work or watch the world go by.

I’m sure Ms Skillin’s dog would find the whole experience much less stressful than a journey by air.

Doug Maughan, Dunblane.

DESPOILING THE FINAL FRONTIER

IT was depressing to read your View from the States feature (“Those taking the high moral ground to criticise Jeff Bezos’ space flight are ridiculous”, July 25). The message that came across to me was that, having junked our planet through our predatory approach to pillaging it for its mineral deposits, we now need to look further afield by extending that approach to the objects closest to us in space.

We, as a species, have shown ourselves to be the wrecking ball of the one home we have, and now, apparently, we should move into another dimension to carry on with the same disregard for the health of the environment in places that were once beyond our ken but are now coming within reach.

Your article did not see the “space trips” of the three junketeers as ego trips but rather as entrepreneurial ventures likely to bring benefits down to Earth. It is surely a sign of madness to continue with the conduct elsewhere which has brought our planet close to collapse with the climate emergency now upon us. Where do we go from here when our planet reaches the stage of being inhospitable and virtually uninhabitable?

To praise Richard Branson, Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk for fulfilling their adolescent fantasies and to dress them up as the future suggests a total lack of understanding of what our planet needs and is buying into the mindset which has brought us to the parlous state of affairs we are witnessing.

Denis Bruce, Bishopbriggs.

ASTRO-NOTS

THOUGH I agree with criticism of Messrs Bezos’ and Branson’s recent exploits on environmental and other grounds, what I find comically absurd is the use of the term “astronaut”.

Since by going at about the speed of the fastest spaceship yet constructed, rather than that of toys for fleeting excursions, it would take about 400 million years to reach the nearest star, calling someone who has gone fewer than 70 miles above our planet’s surface an astronaut is rather like calling someone whose great-grandmother’s cleaning lady once met a man who was said to have seriously considered dipping a toe into the water at Saltcoats “a seafarer”.

To think that people ridicule McGonagall for having called himself a poet.

Robin Dow, Rothesay.

FAREWELL TO CHARMS

IN Ron McKay’s comprehensive and entertaining review of Ernest Hemingway’s life and works (“Guilt, drink and pain: Hemingway’s living hell”, July 25) he refers to Catherine Barkley, the nurse in A Farewell to Arms, as English. Although that is

her given nationality in the narrative, in a rather fraught exchange with the hero, Hemingway has her say “I am Scotch and crazy”(like the two go together?).

There is also a Scottish perspective on the untimely death of the author in the apocryphal tale of the Scotland international rugby team, after a Six Nations match in Paris, relaxing in Harry’s Bar. Although at the peak of fitness required for the tournament, a leading member of the team was left gasping at the prices in the legendary venue. He was scarcely mollified when a teammate told him: “Well, Hemingway often drank here.” “No wonder he shot himself!” he said.

Ian Hutcheson, Glasgow.