A Scottish constitution needs the right leadership

The SNP leadership has a dreadful record of demonstrably ignoring the voices of those who do not agree with them in countless consultation exercises over the past 15 years. Why would a proposed Constitutional Convention fare any better? On everything from the named person scheme to gender recognition reform, from hate crime laws to the deposit return scheme, SNP ministers have chosen not to hear the reasonable concerns of significant minorities, or at times, the clear majority. This renders them inherently unsuited to the task of formulating a constitution for all the people of Scotland.

Reading the SNP proposals for what might be included in an independent Scotland’s constitution, the overall impression is of a dominating political bias rather than the fundamentals of good governance and fundamental values that would typically be expected of a constitution. Indeed, this latest in a series of papers supposedly setting out the case for independence simply demonstrates the SNP’s determination to try to inflict its dogma on us in perpetuity.

Keith Howell, West Linton

Flawed strategy on voting

I'm no advocate for tactical voting and I don't know if the First Minister Humza Yousaf is either. But his declaration at the SNP special conference that “if the SNP does win this election then the people will have spoken, we will seek negotiations with the UK Government on how we give democratic effect to Scotland becoming an independent nation“ seems likely to encourage just such an outcome. (“Humza Yousaf claims SNP general election win would be mandate for Indy,” The Herald, 24 June).

If I may paraphrase the First Minister's message to the electorate: “If you want independence then vote SNP to ensure they get the maximum number of seats. If you don't want independence then vote for the party most likely to defeat the SNP to ensure they get the minimum number of seats”. Put like that, is the First Minister sure he's thought this through properly?

Alex Gallagher, Largs

Scotland’s rightful place on the world stage

Christopher Ruane asks how Scotland can benefit from the UK's “significant role in global affairs”. I had to read that sentence twice and would have laughed heartily were it not so sad. It is a view of course widely shared by those who will not accept that Brexit has been a complete and utter disaster, in the media as well as in the extreme dregs of the Tory party. Who knows what people in Keir Starmer's Blairites tribute band believe, as they never met a principle they couldn't jettison.

As one of the most brutal colonial powers the world has ever seen, the UK's power and influence has steadily been declining. The European Union was undoubtedly one of the last places we were able to exert some influence. Contrast Rishi Sunak's reception in Washington with that of Narendra Modi.

Having asset-stripped the colonies in our heyday and continuing to asset-strip Scotland (we already took everything we wanted from Wales) there is nowhere left to turn other than England itself. And the City firm co-founded by Jacob Rees-Mogg setting up funds in Dublin has pretty much confirmed there's not much left to take.

The so-called UK will be a playground for the very rich and our absurdly Ruritanian monarchy. Eventually I am sure, call centres for thriving businesses in other countries will be based here too.

Being the loyal and obedient servant we already are to US adventurism is a dead end. Scots must have the courage of their convictions and, as Winnie Ewing famously said, take our rightful place at the UN between Saudi Arabia and Senegal.

Marjorie Ellis Thompson, Edinburgh

Woefully light on tactics

At his special conference, Humza Yousaf claimed that merely an SNP Scottish seats majority at the next General Election means he'd press the UK government for powers to stage a second independence referendum. This tweaks Nicola Sturgeon's notion that a target of 50% separatist votes secured should trigger independence negotiations.

His approach is as likely to fail as hers. Why should the next (likely Labour) UK government say, "Let's forget that 2014 'once in a generation or even a lifetime vote' Humza old chap, how about you toddle off and have another bash at UK break-up?"

Instead, Labour will likely respond by reiterating that a General Election is self-evidently not about a single issue but multiple issues since the UK government is elected to manage a broad range of responsibilities. Mr Yousaf's approach seems particularly nonsensical if most or all other parties fight, as they will, the election on multiple issues. Plus, anyway, the SNP may not secure a majority of Scottish seats.

If I were a nationalist, I'd feel let down by the SNP. Mr Yousaf, like his predecessor, appears strong on rhetoric yet woefully light on innovative, implementable tactics.

Martin Redfern, Melrose

So what is the real priority?

Brian Taylor declares that “Humza Yousaf will put independence front and centre of the SNP election campaign “ (The Herald, June 24). At First Minister's Questions of 22 June, Mr Yousaf is quoted by Tom Gordon as stating to Douglas Ross that “the number one issue facing not only Scotland but the entire planet is the climate emergency”.

It's now important for The Herald to ascertain from the First Minister which statement is correct so readers can be informed as to whether the SNP accept that “independence is now irrelevant until we fix the climate” or whether they will ignore the followers of Greta and remain focused on IndyRef2.

Ian Moir, Castle Douglas

Labour is not a good option

I read Mark Smith in The Herald (June 24) with dismay. He says “I will be voting Labour because the alternatives are horrendous”. Well, the main alternatives would be a Tory Government or independence. A Tory Government would be horrendous, and independence would be terrific.

Labour under Sir Keir Starmer is simply Tory-lite. Just look at their policies and proposals and words. A proper Labour party could do hugely well in an independent Scotland, but voting UK Labour back into Westminster would be voting for pretty much more of what we have endured these past ten years plus.

Mark mentions Aberdeen, and it’s telling that Starmer in his recent extended speech on ending all North Sea oil and gas exploration did not mention Aberdeen once.

We need much more ambition than Labour have if we are to see Scotland flourish, and the only way to see such flourishing is to vote for independence. Absolutely no doubt about that. Unless of course Mark can offer some sensible reasons why we should not be independent?

George Archibald, West Linton

A great life well lived

Although greatly saddened at the passing of the incomparable Winnie Ewing and in conveying heartfelt condolences to all her family, Scotland also celebrates a great life well lived.

During her time in triple parliamentary cauldrons, with her personality, actions and achievements, Madame Ecosse galvanised the movement for Scottish independence. To her lasting memory and legacy, unity of purpose must now be Scotland’s first aim, as we remember her rallying call, “stop the world Scotland wants to get on”.

Grant Frazer, Newtonmore

A personal thanks to Winnie

There was another string to Winnie Ewing’s bow. Around the late 1950s I attended an extramural course at Glasgow University entitled Scottish History through Famous Trials. It started with the 16th century Witchcraft Act and finished with Manuel’s recent conviction.

Our lecturer was erudite, enthusiastic, witty, with an infectious passion for Scottish life through the centuries. The series was brilliant and memorable. Thank you Winnie.

Isobel McEwan, Skelmorlie

Rishi repeats on the BBC

Could the BBC perhaps save us a bit on our licence fee if they simply played a recording of Rishi Sunak being interviewed by the likes of Laura Kuenssberg today, and saved it in their archives for later interviews too?

P Davidson, Falkirk