Martin Redfern (Letters, September 16) thinks a more centralised EU would divert Scots from independence. I cannot see how any country within the EU could possibly have less sovereignty/autonomy than Scotland within the UK, as we have none. Nor could I see how any single EU country could dominate all aspects and institutions of EU life the way England with its disproportionate population does within the UK. My preference is for Scotland being part of the European Economic Area. I suspect that option will gain popularity as time goes on.
Allan Sutherland (Letters, September 16) wants Scotland to be ruled by the Conservatives. Scotland, at the end of the 19th century, was one of the most productive economies on earth. During the following century, with our economy and politics controlled from Westminster by Unionist parties, our economy became moribund and our population had, uniquely in Europe, stagnated to near-zero growth. A substantial part of that dismal experience was under Tory governments.
Peter A Russell (Letters, September 16) seems to have forgotten a certain James Keir Hardie, founder of the Labour party in Scotland. He was a Home Ruler who wanted Scotland to have dominion status within the Empire. It’s notable that Canada, New Zealand and Australia had dominion status also. The Empire is gone and these countries are happily self-governing. Hardie would surely look at the modern Labour party in Scotland, with its cringe mentality and lack of ambition, echoing Tory slogans, with utter dismay.
GR Weir,
17 Mill Street,
Ochiltree.
THE latest version of a European superstate from Jean-Claude Juncker will have confirmed the warnings of the Brexiters and, at the same time, shifted Eurosceptic Remainers (like myself) to support a free trade agreement, similar to the EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, outside the single market and the custom union.
However, it should be small EU countries like Ireland that should be most concerned about Mr. Juncker’s views on a federalist Europe, with his insistence on majority votes for taxation along with a passport-free Schengen zone and so on.
The problem for Ireland is that it has been rated the fourth worst tax-haven in the world behind Hong Kong, Belgium and Luxembourg. To make matters worse, the five international banks in Ireland recorded profits higher than turnover, suggesting they were artificially shifting profits to the country.
A recent report noted that 16 out of the top 20 European banks were paying an effective tax rate of just six per cent with some as low as two per cent. These findings come on the back of the European Commission decision to impose a £13 billion tax bill on Apple after it received “illegal state aid” from the Irish government.
There is the small matter of President Donald Trump’s determination to repatriate trillions of dollars back from the tax-havens, which would hurt Ireland.
Ireland is not in Schengen (like the UK) but enjoys the benefits of the Common Travel Area (CTA), which allows free movement of people between our two countries and will form the basis of any agreement on a border between the north and south once the UK leaves the EU. This would be threatened if Mr Juncker had his way.
Small countries (SNP beware) should be concerned about an ever strident France and Germany power grab as they alone will decide the direction of travel in the EU for ever closer fiscal and political union. Perhaps now is the time for Ireland to join the UK and leave the EU before it is too late.
Ian Lakin,
Pinelands,
Murtle Den Road,
Milltimber,
ON the SNP website, External Affairs Secretary Fiona Hyslop in essence tells us that her party is unceremoniously ditching its long held support for the Catalonian separatist movement. Nicola Sturgeon is trying to use Brexit to agitate for a second independence referendum. She needs Spain’s Madrid government on board if she has any hope of an independent Scotland joining the EU.
Ms Hyslop also reminds us of the important democratic process encapsulated in the Edinburgh Agreement in that it enabled the will of the people to be expressed regarding the SNP’s UK independence plans. It’s regrettable that Alex Salmond and Ms Sturgeon have seemingly overlooked the fact that, by signing the agreement, they agreed to accept the result.
Martin Redfern,
Woodcroft Road,
Edinburgh.
VINCE Cable, leader of the Liberal Democratss, has raised issues about the future regarding access to the European Investment Bank. He cites the case of the new Dumfries and Galloway Royal Infirmary, which had secured funding, but, such funding after Brexit would not be available for investment.
Related to that, we have witnessed a growth in naming public buildings, events and so on after the royals, in many cases where there has been no royal interest except to turn up and cut the ribbon. The Southern General in Glasgow is a case in point where costs were involved renaming it at the last minute with such a long-winded mouthful of a name after a Windsor.
Perhaps the new infirmary in Dumfries and Galloway should have been named the Dumfries and Galloway European Infirmary in view of the source of funding.
Just a thought ...
John Edgar,
4 Merrygreen Place,
Stewarton.
PETER A Russell suggests that, before there can be co-operation between the SNP and Labour, “one of the parties must concede its stance [on independence] if there is to be an accommodation”and it is Mr Russell’s proposal that the SNP should be the party to make that concession.
As the SNP has 40 more seats at Holyrood than Labour, more Scottish seats at Westminster than the Unionist parties put together and, as the SNP is forging ahead in the opinion polls, with Labour languishing far behind, Mr Russell can hardly be said to argue from a position of strength.
It would be churlish to argue that it is Labour that should drop its opposition to independence: “Then and only then can co-operation be considered.” The voters are entitled to expect that political parties that share at least some common ground should have the maturity to be able to work together for the good of the people they represent.
Ruth Marr,
99 Grampian Road,
Stirling.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel