AS a resident of a remote rural community, I was saddened, although not surprised, to read your summary of the Scottish Human Rights Commission findings that governments and public agencies have failed to meet minimum international obligations on the right to health care, housing and food in the Highlands and Islands ("Struggles facing ‘unheard’ citizens", The Herald, November 27). These findings are the result of the Scottish Government’s deliberate long-term mismanagement of the Highlands and Islands.

The first aspect of this is the Scottish Government’s failure to ensure that public sector agencies, such as NHS Highland, respect their statutory duty to recognise the social costs imposed on communities due to changes in service provision. In Caithness, for example, withdrawal of maternity facilities, as your article notes, imposes unnecessary social costs and patient safety issues on pregnant women, as part of a brutal cost cutting exercise which is at variance with public sector economics.

In north Skye, the most populous part of Skye, health and social care provision has been slashed in an unprecedented, centralised cost-cutting model that completely ignores the island’s socio-demographic. Hundreds of thousands of pounds of social costs per annum are already severely impacting a fragile economy and imposing concerns about public safety, especially in one of the world’s leading tourist destinations. If this were a private sector initiative, I daresay there would be a phoney outcry from the Scottish Government.

The second aspect relates to the extra funding Scotland gets through the Barnett formula which is designed to address the numerous areas of deprivation that exist in Scotland, both urban and rural, along with providing equitable access to public services, such as health and social care, in sparsely populated rural areas. Unfortunately, areas such as Skye and Caithness have seen public spending moving in an opposite direction to that signalled in Barnett. Additionally, neither Highland Council nor NHS Highland gets the remote rural dividend that other remote areas receive. The concept of equitable provision of public services is alien to the majority of Highlands and Island residents.

The third aspect relates to the concept of societal trust. In post neoliberal societies this has been shattered in rural and non-rural areas and, specifically, trust in government and in private and public sector monopolies. Adam Smith in his key written works argued that societal trust, what social scientists today call social capital, is central to the wellbeing and smooth running of a capitalist economy. Critically, he also argued that such trust starts with the political class and without this, along with addressing the misuse of monopolistic power, there would be societal breakdown. Déjà vu?

One key way in which social capital could start to be rebuilt in Scotland is by the decentralisation of resources away from Holyrood to local authorities and beyond and ensuring that Highlands and Islands Enterprise has the funding it needs to aid in the rebuilding of social, human and physical capital in the Highlands. The resignation of senior politicians and urgent reforms of the management of public sector organisations would also be a welcome start to the process.

Prof Ronald MacDonald, Portree.

Read more letters

Lessons for Labour

DESPITE its relatively low significance, the recent Labour win at the Maryhill council by-election broadly mirrored its General Election victory in July. Instead of seeing any notable surge in popularity with the electorate its win was due, in large part, to other parties simply cancelling each other out. Labour only won around 35% of the vote, with the SNP and Alba winning a combined 34% and the Tories and Reform winning around 15% ("Russell Findlay: Reform vote in Scotland 'too high for my liking'", heraldscotland, November 25).

Labour’s electoral success therefore, has papered over large cracks in its support among lower-income voters in Scotland and the rest of the UK. This was particularly evident in Northern English constituencies, where Labour votes were often outweighed by combined Reform and Tory votes.

The lack of solid popularity in areas like Maryhill will alarm Scottish Labour, which, as a progressive party, must represent hope for people in areas like Maryhill that they will be better off in the future. Instead, hope for change through ideologies remains concentrated in nationalism and right-wing populism, as has been the case in Scotland and Britain, since I can remember being politically aware. In my view, both these ideologies are the result of persistent hopelessness among the British working class, which leads to reactionary, blame-based politics centring around national identity. It is an all-too common theme throughout history that poverty breeds extreme, idealistic politics, and this is still very much the case in many parts of Britain.

Despite this, Labour still has the chance, for at least another five years, to create actual material change in people’s lives, which could start to dampen reactionary sentiment. This, in my view, can only be done through significant investment in healthcare and education, and commitments to preserving job creation and security as well as affordable housing and energy. Labour’s long-term priority must be to diminish anger and resentment towards institutions and among communities and this can only be done through state action to reduce inequality.

Joe Ryalls, Peebles.

Promises betrayed

RACHEL Reeves’s Budget, which removes universal winter fuel payments from millions of pensioners, represents a stark betrayal of her earlier promises. As a candidate, Ms Reeves built her campaign on pledges to “protect the winter fuel allowance” and provide “more help for pensioner”. This U-turn will leave many elderly Scots vulnerable to fuel poverty this winter.

The claim of inheriting a £22 billion “black hole” in public finances from the Conservatives has been cast into doubt by the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), which cited only £9.5bn in undisclosed spending pressures. Labour’s reliance on questionable figures only adds to public mistrust.

In Scotland, where the SNP also faces mounting criticism, voters are turning to alternatives. Reform UK is gaining traction as a party that prioritises integrity and practical solutions. Adam Smith’s words ring true: “No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable.” The electorate deserves leaders who keep their promises and deliver meaningful change.

Alastair Majury, Dunblane.

Constitutional guddle

I NORMALLY agree with large parts of Andy Maciver’s thinking, but absolutely not this time ("Think smart, Mr Murray: time for a bigger, bolder operation", The Herald, November 29). To propose that the Scottish Secretary of State “forms a political rival” to any elected Scottish government, and set up as a proxy Scottish government would be a disaster for this small country, as we become mired in competing mandate wars.

Imagine Anas Sarwar does indeed become First Minister in 2026 (with the backing of other parties), but then the Tories (with Reform?) get elected to Westminster as polling suggests. They would use the “Maciver” mechanism set up under Ian Murray to subvert and undermine the elected Labour regime at Holyrood. Think again Mr Maciver, as we can have devolved government with defined responsibilities, but your proposed constitutional guddle would leave Scotland as an incoherent political zombie.

GR Weir, Ochiltree.

MPs gather to hear the result of the vote on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill in the Commons on FridayMPs gather to hear the result of the vote on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill in the Commons on Friday (Image: PA)

Sadness at Commons vote

IT is with a profound sadness that I see our MPs passed the assisted dying bill. I believe this is an immense mistake, and am ashamed that our UK parliamentary process rushed this through, and only allowed four hours' debate on such a life-changing bill.

This decision is like the crossing of the Rubicon, for there will be no turning back. Human life is being devalued, and the weak, the vulnerable, the sick, and the disabled have every right to fear; for a door has been opened where they are exposed as never before by the choice to continue living, or to die.

Implicitly this question will be on every weak person's mind: "'I am obviously a burden to a society that is not willing to fund palliative care, so I should consider taking my life with help from a doctor. If I don't take this route, I am being selfish." How awful.

And our relationship with the medical profession is to be altered, from the preserver of life to the agent of death. The possibility will lurk in the background, even if not explicitly voiced.

Then there's the slippery slope, which proponents have denied, but is 100% certain. The safeguards will either be loosened, or challenged, or liberally interpreted, just as with abortion. There are already groups of people pushing for broadening of the indications for inclusion towards assisted suicide, so intentional mission-creep is on its way.

So, I am so deeply sad. The Rubicon is crossed, and our politicians have the consequences of a diminished value to our lives on their shoulders."

Alasdair HB Fyfe, Glasgow.