Readers' letters: BP's learned its net zero lesson – now its governments' turn

BP, in attempting to do what it thought was the right thing for the planet and for its shareholders, embarked on a strategy of increased investment in renewables at the same time reducing its expenditure on fossil fuel development.

Now, realising they had gone “too far, too fast”, with the share price falling relative to competitors, and under pressure from investors, the board have re-evaluated and changed the strategy to increase oil and gas production, slowing the transition to renewables while maintaining its net zero ambition (Scotsman, 27 February).

Our governments embarked on a similar course, putting us at a disadvantage to other countries in attracting investment, thereby stifling the growth they claim to promote. If they don’t accept this, admit their folly and change course, then the 2026 Scottish elections will be the next opportunity for us, as shareholders and investors in Scotland/UK plc, to sack at least some of the board of directors in the form of the SNP government.

Let’s hope it’s not too late!

Mark Openshaw, Cults, Aberdeen

Get off bandwagon

In business, the direction it takes is dictated by three things: its ability to make a profit, pay its employees and to invest in its future. Therefore, it is no surprise that BP have dialled back on their renewable energy investments.

Unlike a business, governments make decisions which have no such requirements, as can be seen with the zealot-like way in which they pursue net zero (or as it is known – one per cent of emissions in the global big picture making not a lot of difference to the world).

The similarities between the UK and SNP governments are stunning. They are fiscally illiterate and have an uncanny adherence to Vladimir Lenin’s 1922 economic system with two glaringly obvious omissions.

It was “a free market and capitalism, both subject to state control” while socialised state enterprises would operate on “a profit basis”. Neither of these two governments know how to generate a profit and their adherence to crippling policies curtails free markets and financial penalties restrict the ability of capitalism to grow prosperity – therefore state control is their sole strategy.

As history tells us state control never ever works, and we are living that experience in the here and now.

Hand over the accounts for both the UK and Scottish governments to people who understand basic accounting, and do not depend solely on never ending taxation and magic money tree handouts. Only that way will we get off the unachievable net zero bandwagon heading towards bankruptcy.

David Millar, Lauder, Scottish Borders

Waste of money

Regarding the proposed monument at the Gretna crossing (Scotsman, 22 February). Could we please stop wasting taxpayers’ money on such frivolous schemes which no one will pay any attention to and spend our the money where it is needed.

David Reid, Dunfermline, Fife

Safety first

In response to Alex Orr’s comments on foreign aid and defence (Letters, 27 February), I would like to remind him that if we do not have defence we risk being defeated by aggressive countries then no one will be in a position to offer any aid to anyone,

Also some of the money spent in foreign aid goes to countries that have much larger militaries than us, with nuclear arsenals and space programmes. Surely it is the responsibility of those governments to aid their own people, and some of the stuff we are paying for is outrageous, such as dancing lessons and advice to stop smoking. I’m all for helping with health, sanitation, water etc, but much of our money is wasted on non-essential things.

We need to provide our military with everything they need to keep us safe.

A Thorpe, Dunfermline, Fife

Glass houses

John Swinney has attacked Reform, a party with virtually no presence in Scotland, labelling its leader an apologist for Russia (Scotsman, 27 February).

Reform is not to my taste either, but his outspoken criticism suggests he regards Nigel Farage’s party as a threat in next year’s Holyrood election.

But has Swinney forgotten Russia’s enthusiasm for the crusade closest to his heart – Scottish independence? That it was widely attested that Russia, in the run-up to the 2014 referendum, had influenced social media in favour of separatism? Let’s not underestimate Russia’s delight if the SNP’s post-Scexit ambition to decommission our nuclear deterrent at Faslane were ever to be realised. Is his memory so short that he’s forgotten former SNP leader Alex Salmond was an employee of the Russian state broadcaster, Russia Today? Swinney is seemingly unfamiliar with the maxim: people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

Martin Redfern, Melrose, Scottish Borders

Two gems

There were two gems in yesterday’s Scotsman. Firstly, we had Labour’s Henry Mcleish stating that President Trump deceived the electorate by not spelling out the carnage he is now inflicting. Irony of all ironies.

Secondly, John Swinney rambling on about how our nuclear weapons don’t prevent conflicts without understanding the meaning of the word deterrent. I’m sure even he is aware of Russia’s nuclear arsenal.

Lewis Finnie, Edinburgh

Real ‘accomplice’

It’s entertaining to see ghastly, sanctimonious John Swinney running around in headless chicken mode as he squawks about “the rise of the far right in politics”.

His call for some farcical summit to counter Reform UK is nothing but a desperate Scottish separatist publicity stunt. Hopefully, unionist parties will have the sense to see this jamboree for what it is and keep well away.

The First Minister has some nerve to talk of an “active threat to our security from the aggression of Russia” and then accuse Nigel Farage of being “an accomplice to the Russian agenda.” This pious claptrap comes from the leader of a party which believes in unilateral nuclear disarmament and the dismantling of the only deterrent which stops Tsar Putin and his autocratic friends from steamrolling us and our allies. There can be no greater “accomplice to the Russian agenda” than Mr Swinney’s SNP.

Martin O’Gorman, Edinburgh

Running out of road

It could be said that the SNP merely trundles on as a minority administration. Its inclination to attract political faux pas has become its trade mark. The majority of Scots voters have become accustomed to the NATS slip-ups in just about every sector of the devolved administration. This somewhat gauche collection of politicians are well past their sell-by dates.

At the last general election members of the electorate made their point when they most emphatically voted them out of Westminster. Hopefully the Spring of 2026 will see their demise from Holyrood.

Robert I G Scott, Ceres, Fife

Will’s way

Paul Wilson’s column on literature in schools lights on the most diverse of all poet-playwrights (Scotsman, 27 February). Shakespeare coined hundreds of turns of phrase still used in common speech. This across four centuries. There is no other achievement like that. All objections to the universe of speech conjured by Shakespeare point straight back to the puny squalor of the objectors.

Non-Scots? Crivvens, but so were James Joyce and and Dylan Thomas.

Wrote some plays about monarchs? No wonder history is cancelled in schools. There’s a play set in the Serene Republic of Venice, though.

Too hard for children? Nothing is too hard for children to learn and understand.

Shakespeare might be too hard for some illiterate schoolteachers I’ve met. The Khmer Rouge didn’t like literacy either.

Tim Cox, Bern, Switzerland

National church

I fully support the next appointment of Lady Angiolini KC to be the next Lord High Commissioner of the Church of Scotland (of which I am a member), as outlined by the the Very Rev Kelvin Holdsworth (Scotsman, 25 February).

However, I must protest against the later sentiments expressed within the article regarding His Majesty’s faith. While, of course, should His Majesty be unhappy in his faith, he should be entitled to change it, I feel it is unacceptable to make this assumption. One only needs to look to his unwavering devotion to Crathie Kirk in Balmoral. I have shared in worship with His Majesty in the Kirk, which he chose to attend of his own volition, and It showed me the truly personal side of a man who relies deeply on his faith and needs only to be a member of the church like any of us and not need to hold a ceremonial role.

I believe the King is a proud member of the Church of Scotland and I kindly ask the Very Rev Holdsworth to worry about the affairs of his own church and leave the Church of Scotland and His Majesty alone. As he said himself, “symbols matter”, but they matter because they have not changed. The King should be proud of the church in which he holds membership, just as I am to belong to a church, the national church, whose very existence is upheld by our monarch.

Brody Kirkwood, Penicuik, Midlothian

Write to The Scotsman

We welcome your thoughts – NO letters submitted elsewhere, please. Write to [email protected] including name, address and phone number – we won't print full details. Keep letters under 300 words, with no attachments, and avoid 'Letters to the Editor/Readers’ Letters' or similar in your subject line – be specific. If referring to an article, include date, page number and heading.