United Kingdom

What is the ‘nation’ that Labour leader Anas Sarwar is pledging to unite?

COMING through our door, among the current avalanche of political litter was, of course, the current exhortation from Labour’s Anas Sarwar, who is proving that you can promise to drain the Clyde and plant potatoes if you think it will win you votes!

He talks of “uniting our people and helping our nation recover” but, as a Unionist, what is the “nation” he’s talking about? It’s the same when he and his LibDem/Tory pals talk of “what unites us as a country”. What is the “country” they are referring to?

READ MORE: Those holding out for a Labour UK Government should not hold their breath

Should you cast your eye down Anas’s “fresh ideas” list – jobs recovery, NHS recovery, education recovery, climate recovery and community recovery – you’ll see there’s nothing that a Scottish representative of a London-based Labour party can have the slightest influence over while there’s a Tory government in Westminster which uses the term “nation” and “country” to mean Britain or England with Scotland given the status of “region”!

Mr Sarwar put on a good show during the BBC Leaders’ Debate. He is, though, a seasoned politician and has mastered the arts of innuendo, insinuation and double-speak, so during the next televised debate will someone ask him what he means when he says “nation” and, if he should answer “Scotland”, please ask how he squares that with his devotion to Unionism?

Let’s see if he’s still promising to drain the Clyde and plant potatoes!

Ned Larkin
Inverness

THIS week I received an election “communication” from the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party. It was a colourful A5 card mainly in shades of mauve, yellow and red. Only a single X in blue. It mentioned indyref2/independence ten times and the SNP seven times. It attacked the SNP and Scottish Labour vis-a-vis their stances on indyref2/independence but mentioned no other policies at all, neither their own nor those of their opponents.

It’s very difficult to engage with people if they won’t “communicate” their position on any bread-and-butter policies. I suppose that must be the rationale behind the election “communication”.

Rachel Martin
Musselburgh

ANDY Anderson of Saltcoats said on Saturday that if Alba got 20% of the SNP list vote, the seats that Alba win would be at the expense of the Unionists and not the SNP. That isn’t quite true. Re-calculating the 2016 list seats assuming that Alba get 25% of the SNP list votes, the result shows there is only a net increase of three “independence” MSPs. Alba win eight but at the expense of three Greens and two SNP MSPs.

It is hardly maxing the Yes. It shows that it can never be clever to split the independence list vote between three competing parties. It also threatens an SNP majority at Holyrood.

READ MORE: It’s nonsense to imply list-only parties are somehow cheating

The reality, of course, is that serious political parties do not fight the new election based on votes cast five years before. However it is worth showing that a “super-majority “ is a questionable claim and the damage is there for all to see.

Whether people like it or not, it is the fortunes of the SNP that will be seen as the litmus test of the progress towards independence. When we are so close we should not be gambling or taking unnecessary chances.

The message that cannot be ignored is an SNP majority, and more than 50% of the vote.

We can then unite to fight the referendum.

David Alexander
Kennoway

THE article on Saturday’s National by Greg Russell on postal voting is of extreme importance (Referendum research leads to new warning on postal vote integrity, April 3).

Scotland will lose forever if these votes are not scrutinised to the most minute of details: no matter how long it takes to do so.

Andy Anderson’s analysis of the Argyll postal votes in the 2014 referendum showed not flaws, but interference in a democratic process by the British.

READ MORE: Referendum research leads to new warning on Holyrood postal vote integrity

The official return of the Argyll postal vote was 96% , which he proved was impossible. Allowing for movement and deaths of persons, the 96% is simply unobtainable, unless you cheat.

Yet this went unchallenged. Aye, we accept the British “won” the referendum but we should have challenged the Argyll postal vote to ensure it does not happen again.

We will have a massive postal vote for May’s election, unchallenged and so far unquestioned by the SNP.

Please, SNP, ask these questions of a complete fair and independent analysis of all postal votes for May. Verification to the last detail.

This should be done by an authority outside of the UK, if not an analysis by Scottish and Brit representatives.

The British will do everything and anything to maintain their Scotch Goldmine. We must do everything and anything to allow democratic fairness and no cheating by those hellbent on maintaining the Scotch subsidy to their UK.

It is called democracy.

Bryan Clark
Maybole, Ayrshire



File source

Tags
Show More

Related Articles

Back to top button
Close