I TOTALLY agree with Sir Keir Starmer that the SNP will have an Indyref2 mandate should it win the 2021 poll (" Starmer: SNP will have Indyref2 mandate if it wins 2021 poll", The Herald, January 29). After all, any votes it receives will surely be on that particular issue alone, and not a reflection of its performance regarding health, education, policing (the list goes on).
Brian Johnston, Torrance.
I WONDER how those who are waiting for operations in our failing hospitals, parents of pupils in our failing schools, police in crumbling offices, drivers on roads that are full of potholes, islanders needing new ferries and those who are queuing at food banks feel about time spent debating whether the flag of a community, of which we will no longer be a member, should be flown ("EU flag row threatens to eclipse Sturgeon’s showcase on Indyref2", The Herald, January 29)?
Isobel Hunter, Lenzie.
THE SNP has now proved beyond all doubt that it’s a "fur coat and nae knickers" Government.
The latest attempt to curry favour with the EU by having a wasteful debate about flying its flag before yet another debate on another independence referendum is a clear demonstration that it cares more about appearances than substance.
This may go done well with its diehard supporters but demonstrating competence in the day job would pay it greater dividends with the wider Scottish electorate.
W MacIntyre, East Kilbride.
WHILST Nicola Sturgeon fiddles, Rome burns. Local authorities are underfunded whilst the civil service and scarce Government funds are diverted to virtue signalling and matters such as immigration which are beyond the legal remit of the Scottish Parliament. In any other walk of life this would be known as acting “ultra vires”. So why is she allowed to get away with it? Time and time again.
The Scottish Government is not the Scottish Nationalist Party. Ms Sturgeon must remember that party politics take second place to public duty conducted within the law.
John Dunlop, Ayr.
IT is now the stonewall defence of the Tories that Scotland had its referendum in 2014 and the “people decided”. Yet the ink on the EU referendum was hardly dry when the LibDems, with many in Labour and the Tory Party were agitating for a second EU referendum. The Tory Prime Minister, Theresa May, implored her own party in May of last year, to consider a “serious offer” that by supporting her deal, she would give a vote on a second referendum on the EU. This to try and entice Labour. Now even Nigel Farage has stated that a second EU referendum would not be unreasonable, once it was clear how Brexit had worked out.
It seems only the colony of Scotland will not be allowed to determine its own future: a breach of the Smith Commission. A plebiscite on Scotland is essential if Scotland is not to remain a polarised nation for ever. Brexit has left a bitter taste for many in the UK, and that taste will become prevalent in Scotland, if we are continually vetoed from resolving this constitutional issue.
GR Weir, Ochiltree.
MALCOLM Parkin, in ridiculing the spending of £14 billion on foreign aid (Letters, January 27), clearly does not recognise the concept of investment and the return on the money spent. He claims that the UK does not have £14bn to spend and that foreign aid should be cancelled. If his argument is accepted then we must also cancel the Trident programme, to name but one of many government funded projects which do not produce any return on the money spent.
Sandy Gemmill, Edinburgh EH3.
IT is mind-boggling to think the SNP Government could have adopted an approach that leaves us still to pay £1 billion pounds annually for the next 27 years ("Schemes to cost public sector £1bn annually for 27 years", The Herald, January 28). What a millstone round our grandchildren's necks.
What is absolutely mind-blowing, however, is the revelation that the SNP is continuing to use private finance schemes creating unsustainable levels of debt.
What new crushing weights for our necks will it manage to introduce if it ever gets full independence? Even an increase in its powers seems quite frightening.
James Watson, Dunbar.
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