An Independence Tsar could be what our movement needs

WITH even avid pro-Unionists now seemingly arguing, perhaps unrealistically, that the Scottish Government could have adopted a different strategy to that of the UK Government at the start of the coronavirus pandemic, it would appear that now is the time to begin seriously moving towards a resolution of Scotland’s constitutional predicament, particularly as the harsh economic reality of Brexit is fast approaching!

Over the last decade the UK Government has steered a path towards more totalitarian government, only paying lip service through the mainstream media to any pretence of progressing democracy, and the chief advocate of bluff and bluster has now abandoned any sense of moral responsibility in supporting his errant political adviser. The competence of the Prime Minister and his chosen stooges would be critically questioned if they were selected to govern a local nursery school yet many in the media are apparently content to allow these arrogant, soundbite-repeating puppets to “govern” four nations without comprehensive scrutiny.

READ MORE: Political activists understand that Question Time is a parody

With all the pro-Union parties apparently now keen to engage in “politics”, if by the end of June the UK Government has not agreed to extend Brexit trade negotiations then it is perhaps time for our First Minister, whose focus currently needs to remain on fighting the coronavirus, to appoint an “Independence Tsar”. The primary responsibility of the “Tsar” would be to very publicly lead and orchestrate campaigning for independence across all strands of the Yes movement with the aim of winning the next Scottish Parliament election on the fundamental democratic platform of the right of the Scottish Government to withdraw Scotland from this long-dysfunctional “Union”.

In only seven months’ time the dire economic consequences of Brexit could be about to bite into an already fragile UK economy, so the people of Scotland must be given the opportunity now to commence determining an independent destiny for our country.

Stan GrodynskiLongniddry, East Lothian

DOESN’T Ian Murray asking on BBC’s Question Time “Why can’t we get a UK-wide approach and everybody work together?” show just how little he understands the very nature of the UK Union he supports?

Will he ever understand the reason is that the UK Union is not a real partnership and doesn’t acknowledge, far less address, the disparate needs of Scotland?

Doesn’t he understand the bitterness of Scots towards a UK that treats it like a political policy experimentation ground and has imposed 10 years of austerity, attacking the most vulnerable in our society while bolstering the already wealthy?

Doesn’t he understand the anger of a “Better Together” campaign that lied to us, treated us disgracefully and punished us by casting aside any Scottish political dimension on the biggest issues of the day, like Brexit?

READ MORE: Question Time: Ian Murray ‘desperate’ for a UK-wide virus approach​

Doesn’t he understand the disdain many Scots have for Tory government, which we haven’t ever voted for but is imposed on us time and again, aided and abetted by his Labour party who, when in power, behaved equally despicably like red Tories rather than reflecting the Scottish ethos?

Co-ordinating response to Covid-19 thankfully has not happened. And the blustering buffoonery of Boris Johnson, aided and abetted by his politically unpalatable and arrogant chief adviser, Dominic Cummings (the rules don’t apply to him), is resulting in casualties that take it to the top of the world league of shame.

It’s no surprise Scots have more faith in Nicola Sturgeon and her administration’s handling of the pandemic, which because of our subordinate position in the UK “Union” she is having to do with one hand tied behind her back.

Pandemic potential was identified in 2016 and plans laid to combat it. Tory austerity, with the UK’s Westminster parliament’s approval, left it unfunded and useless, much more importance placed on giving tax hand-outs to the wealthy.

Doesn’t this, Mr Murray, serve to explain, if only partly, why there is no “co-ordinated” UK response?

Perhaps Mr Murray would prefer us all to have suffered as badly as the English have?

Jim TaylorEdinburgh

“THE Yes movement must avoid these two errors at all costs” is a clear warning from Cllr Andy Doig’s letter (May 29). These mistakes are informal referendums and insipid constitutionalism with the answer being more of the same along the Section 30 route and linking the SNP with independence!

However, there is much to be gained from both informal or formal referendums. The referendum on the EU is a very good example. As far as Scotland was concerned this was informal because the English result completely wiped out the positive Scottish reaction which was 62% Remain and was also Remain in every voting region. This was invaluable information to the SNP and enabled them to underline the unfair outcome with the knowledge that Scottish opinion was clear.

Also it would be very useful if those with doubts about independence knew what it meant. If the SNP backed the principle of referendums being held on such issues as nuclear weapons, currency, royalty: ie will Scotland be a Lesley Riddoch nordic haven, a Michael Fry meritocracy or a George Kerevan intellectual construct? If we had informal referendums on such matters we could know where we were going.

The most important referendum is that of independence itself. The fear of losing the vote goes away if it is under our control and the date of the next one is also our own decision. This is the beauty of democracy – though you may lose, you get another go. If Scotland eventually votes to be free, it will be undeniable whatever the format.

Iain WD FordeScotlandwell

Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *