WHEN Alister Jack said that Boris Johnson’s decisions as PM would "serve Scotland for decades to come", he surely missed out a word – it should be "serve Scotland right for decades to come".
Strangely missing from Mr Johnson’s resignation honours list, Mr Jack might like to highlight his benefits to Scotland. Perhaps Brexit, that tore the stomach out of the Scottish economy? Perhaps a cost of living crisis that sees customers without the cash to buy what’s left on the supermarket shelves? Perhaps, and most degradingly, a Tory party in Holyrood that pulls every debate, and every FM’s Questions into disrepute?
Scotland certainly didn't deserve Boris Johnson.
I look back on the few times that Boris Johnson braved a visit north of the Border. Carefully-chosen photo ops have seen him raise a glass in a whisky distillery, enjoy the finest seafood in Orkney, and be received at Bute House by Nicola Sturgeon. She had to let him out the back because of the crowds baying for his blood on Charlotte Square. She is a person of are humanity.
Crucially, he visited the Valneva factory in Livingston to celebrate a Covid vaccine deal with the French firm. Eight months later the Tories axed the contract, alleging a breach of the agreement by Valneva. Since then, amounts paid in compensation by the UK Government remain "commercially confidential". Kate Bingham, the vaccine tsar, accused the Government of "acting in bad faith". That opinion seems to sum up the way that Westminster has operated since Boris Johnson took charge. Scotland did not vote for him or his playground party. In the words of the Chancellor, Jeremy Hunt, "independence is always better than dependence".
Frances Scott, Edinburgh.
• THE Conservatives at Holyrood moved a "no confidence" vote on Lorna Slater ("SNP and Greens save Slater in DRS row", The Herald, June 21) on the very day that MPs in Westminster were discussing the report from the Committee of Privileges on the behaviour of Boris Johnson. Absent from the Chamber during this unprecedented debate was none other than Prime Minister Rishi Sunak.
Were the Scottish Tories trying to take the country's focus off the goings-on at Westminster? The voters will deliver their verdict at the next election.
Catriona C Clark, Falkirk.
Letters: We don't need yet more documents, we need proper action
The people need protection
JAMES Quinn (Letters, June 20) claims I would be better “engaging in debate with St Thomas Aquinas about the number of angels able to dance on the head of a pin” than obsessing about “sovereignty and symbols”.
Certainly when there is a State Opening of Parliament the pointlessness of symbols is on full parade. Yet, at the same time even Black Rod having the door of the House Commons slammed in his face reminds us of two things.
First that the Commons asserts its independence of the Crown (by slamming the door) but secondly that they will co-operate with the Monarch (by agreeing to go through to the Lords, to stand in the entrance to hear their King).
Utterly symbolic of course and of little practical consequence (imagine if the Commons refused to move), but still playing out the history of the Westminster Parliament.
Symbols, as in this case, have an importance beyond the exaggerated Disney cartoon of its surface appearance.
Likewise sovereignty. At Westminster this nominally lies with the Crown, but, as the Supreme Court has pointed out, control of UK sovereignty lies with the House of Commons.
Boris Johnson’s claim, while seeking to get Brexit done, was that the “Executive” (ie the Cabinet) controlled UK sovereignty. The Supreme Court’s contrary view was that control lay with the whole House of Commons. Thus to take the powers he wanted, Mr Johnson had to secure the support of the whole House and not just of his supporters in his Cabinet.
I am sorry if Mr Quinn does not share my concern that a party can take on the powers of “the Crown in Parliament” by securing a majority and voting accordingly.
In contrast the paper published by the SNP this week ("SNP reveals new independence white paper", The Herald, June 20) promises a written constitution with certain rights specified (for example healthcare free at the point of use). If any government proposed to change these, it would have to pass much higher constitutional protections.
The significance for me is that a written constitution supported by the people seems to offer much greater protection than the Sovereignty of the Crown in Parliament, and, given Partygate, certainly more than a Boris Johnson Cabinet.
Alasdair Galloway, Dumbarton.
Let's hear the good news
SEVERAL of your regular independence-supporting correspondents have tried over the past few weeks to establish from your Unionist letter writers just what are the benefits for Scotland of remaining in the UK. All that we seem to have had in response are references to the glories of the past history of the UK and what has been styled "muscular unionism" where there are regular criticisms made of both the policies of the Scottish government and of individual members of that government.
We also have had a re-run of "Project Fear" which predicts all sorts of misfortunes and disasters lying ahead for an independent Scotland. Such assertions of course completely ignore the experience of countries of similar size which are managing their independence very well indeed. With its well-educated population, rich natural resources, long-established reputation for innovation and a destination for growing numbers of tourists, Scotland, with its global goodwill, is well placed to succeed as an independent country.
Compare the negativity concerning Scotland’s dream of self-government with the actual UK balance sheet, which makes really dreadful reading. A floundering economy, high inflation, a cost of living crisis, food banks, strikes, failing public services and also the woes of those utilities that have been privatised. Add in Brexit, Boris Johnson, government cronyism and incompetence, huge overspends on major government procurement projects, and now, even at the start of the UK National Covid Inquiry, clear evidence of ill-preparedness and delay in responding to the threat of the pandemic. The charge sheet just continues to grow. Last week saw problems with water supplies for thousands of people in England as well as the prospect for many home-owners of having an additional £3000 added to their annual mortgage repayments.
Amidst all this gloom there were two real "good news" stories about Scotland last week: Scotland is now second only to London in the UK for overseas inward investment and there was a heartening report on the positive outcomes for Scottish school leavers that noted that a record 93.9% of the 2020/21 school leavers had moved into positive destinations; the highest number yet recorded. Of these 31.8% had moved directly into employment – another record. Given the constant accusations of failure in narrowing the attainment gap, the report found that the gap between the most deprived and the least deprived Scottish school leavers had shrunk to just 7%.
Perhaps not surprisingly given the hostility of the bulk of the media, neither of these positive stories was reported on any of the national television news channels.
Eric Melvin, Edinburgh.
Read more: It's time to stop our history being airbrushed out
Double standards from Holyrood
FERGUSON Marine gets supported to the tune of around £300 million with the Scottish Government proudly stating that this astounding figure is protecting jobs. Let us not be cynical in thinking that this action was simply to prevent Inverclyde reverting to Labour at future elections as none of that farcical situation could, even by the widest stretch of imagination, be laid at the door of Westminster.
Fast forward to now and Circularity Scotland goes under ("Firm overseeing trouble-hit Deposit Return Scheme calls in administrators", The Herald, June 21) and not a hint of Scottish Government support to save jobs. What is the difference? Lorna Slater and the SNP/Green coalition are vainly trying to gain political capital by blaming this on Westminster rather than admit to their own incompetence. Double standards again and tough luck on the out of work employees who have not even been paid in full.
Duncan Sooman, Milngavie.
A sunny outlook
WHY do you insist on calling Jim McColl "one of Scotland's wealthiest men" ("Tycoon McColl’s cover-up claim over ferries contract", The Herald, June 21)? He's officially a resident of Monaco. Can't think why. The weather maybe?
Steve Brennan, Coatbridge.
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