Bring it on: the SNP could benefit from an early election

Who benefits from an early election? Labour may want to go quickly but will be impacted by Keir Starmer's “bad news”; the Tories, north and south, are in a civil war and under fire from the Faragists. The outcome is predicted to be a unionist coalition, which without any ideological coherence seems set to fail fairly quickly under the weight of its own economic and social contradictions.

But this would give the SNP badly-needed breathing space to reflect, reform and renew its party on leadership and direction of travel, while the unionists dismantle much of the SNP programme, a lot of which is beneficial to many people. The Branchform farrago surely cannot be dragged out much longer, as people are starting to doubt its purpose. After a decline, the SNP tide has always washed higher up the beach. How will an election in, say, 2028/9 go?

GR Weir, Ochiltree.

When will they get the message?

TEN years ago Scotland experienced the independence referendum campaign. It looks as if, a decade later, Scotland is still better together.

Even with the extra devolved powers gained the SNP has been quite incapable of running Scotland. Indeed the failures are legion, the successes, such as they are, measured on one's fingers.

Independence supporters still hold out hope of some sort of miraculous revival but the world has moved on very significantly since 2014. The obstacles then, like currency and pensions, have been joined by more like leaving the EU and world upheavals.

Stirring up the independence issue is not relevant any more as some are still doing. Scotland requires a long period of calm, not more divisiveness. When are some politicians finally going to get that message?

Dr Gerald Edwards, Glasgow.

Read more letters

• Where's the morality in attacking the old instead of the rich?
• Things might've been very different if we knew more in 2014

Labour heading for one term

IF we are not OAPs, we know plenty of OAPs either as grandparents, relatives, friends or neighbours.

The withdrawal of the winter fuel payment so close to the onset of winter makes it a highly emotive issue, since the cut-off point for receipt of that benefit is so sharp.

You have to wonder whether those with the balance sheet mentality just looked at areas where a quick saving could be made instead of considering the knock-on effects of such a decision. It reeks of a case of not seeing the woods for the trees.

Electorally it has been poorly thought-out as we can all see from the furore it has created amongst Labour's elected representatives.

The reaction of the Tory opposition was predictable with the ammunition such a decision presented it with.

What defies belief is that you would have expected that account would have been taken of the effects upon the NHS of that decision. The NHS could well do without having large numbers of unwell pensioners landing in their wards; so much for getting waiting lists down. The failure to join those particular dots is inexcusable because they can so obviously be foreseen.

Wes Streeting was making a big play of his hopes during the election campaign to reduce the waiting lists by having an already-overworked medical staff working overtime to see many more patients. Whatever chance there was of that happening is now little more than a fat chance.

If Labour does not get all its ducks in a row to get out of this avoidable mess, the foundations it is laying are those of a one-term government, which could condemn the party to the political wilderness for the foreseeable future. That could be heavily underlined if there is a sharp increase in the mortality rates of OAPs this winter.

Denis Bruce, Bishopbriggs.

Minimum pricing is not working

IT is very clear that the SNP policy of setting a minimum price for alcohol is not working as the deaths have now increased to a seven-year high and the policy has had no effect on people with serious alcohol problems.

The extra revenue from minimum pricing goes straight into the pockets of the supermarkets and off-licences. This is a another failed policy which only hurts those who enjoy a sensible drink and does nothing to tackle the many problems of heavy drinkers in Scotland.

Dennis Forbes Grattan, Aberdeen.

Take education out of politics

WITH due respect to Joe Kerr (Letters, September 1): it’s not that I lack the inclination nor green ink to be involved in discussions regarding education but they can seem filled with misdirection and needless point-scoring and be less focused on meaningful discussion. I did not write a “hagiography” of anyone, merely reporting my own personal experience and points supported by facts. As to avoiding answering a question about Scottish education, that was not my purpose in writing; this was to state that an academic should be allowed to express an opinion in his own field of study.

However, in the spirit of productive dialogue, I will offer a personal opinion regarding how to improve some elements of the school experience in Scotland.

I would suggest that more funding for staff and materials would have a significant positive influence on education in Scotland’s schools. More money being made available to ensure schools have adequate IT provision would also make it easier to make the next improvement.

To paraphrase James Carville, “it’s the phones, stupid”. There are many arguments for and against phones in school but I suggest that a state-backed outright ban, instead of a recommendation, would have a significant influence in the communities and cultures in Scottish schools. There could be a default opt-in with individual schools making the case should they wish to allow pupils to have some sort of access during and in school. The evidence of the invasive and pernicious effects of mobile phones and social media on children is substantial and convincing.

Most importantly, I would suggest that lack of coherent educational policy has had a detrimental affect on Scottish education for a number of years, changes driven by political factors rather than educational ones in response to the needs of children, families and teachers. Consequently, I propose that education be effectively removed from the sphere of politics. Similar to, but not the same as, the Office for Budget Responsibility, a non-departmental government body should be set up with the ambit of Scottish Education. This would include children, parents, teachers, academics and other relevant professionals and would formulate and implement educational policy which is based on facts and research. It could also replace a number of current bodies, saving money which could be spent in schools.

I write in a personal capacity.

Chris Collins, East Kilbride.

Is minimum unit pricing of alcohol working? (Image: PA)

Jesus the subversive

I REFER to Neil Mackay’s splendid Big Read of September 8 (“Angry? I’m raging”) in which SallyAnn Kelly of the Aberlour Children’s Charity maintained that “poverty is a political choice”.

I draw your readers’ attention to the fact that Jesus was crucified because he was politically subversive, a threat to the interests of the imperial and of the religious establishments. According to the Bible poverty was without doubt the primary concern of Jesus. He is quoted as saying on differing occasions “He has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor … when you give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, and the blind … go, sell what you own, and give the money to the poor”.

Whether these were Jesus’s actual words or not there is little doubt that the early church was reporting faithfully the spirit which pervaded his life and teaching and which prevailed so powerfully among his followers it resulted in a change in consciousness after his death, giving rise to stories of an actual physical resurrection.

There is also what is known as “Mary’s Magnificat” (Luke’s gospel 1:46-55), “… God has brought down the powerful from their thrones, and lifted up the lowly; God has filled the hungry with good things, and sent the rich away empty …”. So the Church of Scotland justifiably insists on its website “Supporting the poorest in society is the ‘gospel imperative’”: I would add “and the political imperative for Christians”.

The Magnificat is described by the Kairos Center for Religions, Rights & Social Justice as a “revolutionary song of salvation whose political, economic and social dimensions cannot be blunted” and the theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer described it as being “passionate, wild and revolutionary”.

In the 20th century at least three countries banned the public recitation of Mary’s Magnificat. These governments considered the song’s message to be dangerously subversive, which is not an assertion that could be attributed to the gospel preached from many pulpits today.

John Milne, Uddingston.