Letters: No matter what some might say, devo max just isn't going to happen

Westminster has acceded to Ireland’s right of self-determination with Labour neutral on Irish unification, while denying to Scotland the 700 year-old tradition of its sovereignty (of the people). Westminster would never accede to devo max, with all fiscal powers accruing to Scotland. What if Holyrood substantially decreased Corporation Tax or VAT? Balance that by imposing a “transition tax” on electricity and gas going from Scotland to England or Ireland?

The SNP as a pro-independence party has nothing to gain (and credibility to lose) by backing any Labour proposals, because it is highly unlikely Labour would a) be in a position to implement them; b) get them through both Houses intact or c) be able to entrench them, as Westminster cannot be “bound”.

Boris Johnson will be gone soon, decreasing Labour’s slim electoral chances; Sinn Fein leads in Stormont polling; a Welsh Constitutional Commission report is due soon and the SNP is electorally dominant, and over the next year, much more demanding. I suspect for the UK to survive, it would take serious leadership, firstly from the Tory Party, and a significant constitutional convention of all UK nations considering without prejudice all outcomes. That won’t happen.

GR Weir, Ochiltree.

* IAIN Macwhirter suggests that "everyone" is talking about devo max "and has been for some time". Well, devo max certainly wasn't included on the SNP manifesto last May, when the party of independence won what Mr Macwhirter admits was a "landslide victory". And I can honestly say, hand on heart, that whenever I've been out campaigning, I have never once met a voter who talked to me about devo max, and they are the people who really count.

However, I have met voters who are disillusioned, angry, and want to kick themselves for swallowing Gordon Brown's Vow and voting No in 2014, resulting in Scotland being hauled out of the EU against our wishes and being stuck with treacherous Boris Johnson and his terrible Tories whom we never voted for; and I detect a growing determination from the voters that they won't be taken for a ride again by politicians in thrall to Westminster, coupled with a growing realisation that only independence will deliver Scotland's future into Scotland's hands.

Ruth Marr, Stirling.

STURGEON NEEDS JOHNSON IN OFFICE

NICOLA Sturgeon calls for Boris Johnson's resignation after his Downing Street lockdown party last May. But really? Whatever she publicly states, she surely very much prefers him in situ?

Ms Sturgeon has long since struggled, using rational economic arguments, to persuade Scots that UK break-up would be beneficial. While many regard as risible the argument that disliking the Prime Minister du jour justifies ending a 300-plus-year-old Union, anti-Boris sentiment seems pretty much all Ms Sturgeon has right now – the last thing she wants is him replaced by a less controversial figure.

Martin Redfern, Melrose.

EDUCATION PROBLEMS GO WAY BACK

NEIL Mackay’s interview with Mr Neil McLennan made for a very interesting Big Read last Sunday (“Nationalism is now destroying education’ claims Scotland’s own ‘super-teacher’”, January 9).

I believe most teachers currently practising in Scottish schools would applaud the last few paragraphs. These offered a vivid picture of the burdens carried by classroom teachers – particularly meaningless paperwork, the slogans and “corporate speak” which are often used to impose and enforce ill-considered, centralised innovations while disguising their frequent failures and their destructive waste of precious teaching and learning time.

However, as a fairly modern commentator on Scottish education, Mr McLennan seems to have missed the point that it “was ever thus”. He made only a few selective references to past changes in Scottish education: the raising of the school leaving age in 1972, the end of corporal punishment and Curriculum for Excellence. If, however, he delved more thoroughly into the last 60 years of centrally imposed changes – not least the Primary Memorandum (imposed long before devolution) and the horrendous Millennium chaos of Higher Still – he would surely see that our current difficulties of low educational morale are profound precisely because they have developed over such a long time.

It will take very brave, honest, and determined collaboration from educationalists and politicians to define these problems, confront them and implement educational solutions. And, in my opinion, nobody has volunteered so far.

Most teachers have their own particular concerns and Mr McLennan is entitled to his – although his conflation of what he calls “nationalism”, history lessons and attainment was beyond my understanding. As far as I know, the story of the 51st Highland Division in 1940 at St Valery en Caux is presented by all historians as an example of ordinary soldiers’ nobility and courage in the midst of lethal chaos; in 2019 Glasgow University publicly apologised for its links to the slave trade and set up a reparative justice scheme with £20 million.

These examples certainly do not make the case for suggesting history teachers promote Scottish “exceptionalism” or for denying our children’s right to know all their nation’s history – good and bad. Providing an objective timeline of events would surely support understanding of time and place in other areas of the curriculum. However, whether Mr McLennan likes it or not, that timeline will include Wallace, Glencoe, Darien, Fletcher of Saltoun, Culloden and the aftermath, the Clearances and more modern events which might well arouse further anger. Editing such history, as I think he acknowledges in terms of Japan, won’t stop young people reacting to injustice and corruption or demanding change.

Indeed, as he acknowledges that there could indeed be more lessons on Scottish history, Mr McLennan will need to investigate other reasons for our young people’s enthusiasm for Scottish independence. It could be, for instance, quite simply, current, rather than past, events. This is the Greta Thunberg generation who will make their own dramatic history as they tackle climate change, massive human migrations, environmental destruction, pandemic emergencies and the collapse of biodiversity. Any review of educational policies and attainment needs to take account of what to offer them in terms of learning to cope with all of that.

As pupils of the 1950s and 60s my generation of teachers worked in Scottish schools from the 1970s and survived many stormy changes. I can understand many of Mr McLennan’s frustrations, which are probably shared by most current teachers. I just think it is a shame his argument was dominated and confused by his references to his version of “nationalism”. Unlike Mr McLennan, I support independence for Scotland, but  improving educational attainment for every child is a separate issue.

Frances McKie, Evanton.

LODGE IS DOING A BORIS

I REFER to last week’s report about my efforts to secure a fair settlement for my community from the Masonic Grand Lodge of Scotland (GLS) (“Town’s stushie with Freemasons over the sale of ‘social hub’ lodge”, January 9).

The quote from Mr Semple, the Grand Secretary, about having no objection in principle, but hands being tied by issues of governance, is risible. The “laws” of GLS have no statutory basis and are purely self-devised and applied. To maintain that there is no measure of discretion available is simply another example of disingenuousness. It is in effect saying that our rules, which we made up, are preventing us from doing the right and honourable thing. They might have as well used the classic excuse that “a big boy did it and ran away”.

They are in effect doing a “Boris”; just brass it out and maintain that there is nothing to see here, and rely on flimsy excuses, which can then be repeated ad nauseum. End result is that they get away with “daylight robbery”, but can still sleep easily.

Much has been said recently about the Masonic movement wanting to change its image, and here was a perfect opportunity to let actions speak louder than words. I genuinely have no hidden agenda. My concern was purely to attract inward investment to help prevent the recognised issue of rural depopulation. Instead GLS has walked off with the money, but is “sympathetic” to our plight.

I would confirm that as Mr Semple stated, I do not represent anyone from the former Lodge Blackadder. Indeed the support of those lodge members was withdrawn only recently, after they had each been contacted by GLS staff.

I can only hope that grass-root membership of GLS express their views about the disgraceful behaviour of their Grand leadership.

Gerry McCann, Greenlaw, Berwickshire.

WE NEED DEPENDABLE POWER STATIONS

THE UK Government needs to prioritise people’s needs for warm homes, affordable fuel and jobs over doubtful claims about the future of the planet (energy policy is reserved). In any event, our climate change policy is pointless while the Chinese, Indians and others massively increase their burning of fossil fuels.

Because we cannot store large amounts of electricity, we need real power stations, which are available whether the wind blows or not. In the short run, we will need to start building new gas-fired power stations. On a clear site, these can be built in as little as 28 months.

Longer term, we need a new generation of nuclear power stations that can provide carbon-free power for generations. The modular design championed by Rolls-Royce offers the chance to build these far quicker and at a far lower price than was previously possible.

For gas, we need strategic storage to protect us from foreign action and spikes in wholesale prices. We also need to start fracking to give us a secure domestic source of gas.

VAT holidays and other symptomatic relief for utility bills are just not enough.

Otto Inglis, Crossgates, Fife.