Readers' Letters: Keeping media away from politicians looks bad for SNP

There can only be one reason: to stop awkward questions being asked of SNP ministers. Holyrood is now becoming a rubber stamp parliament where no alternative view is allowed. Surely the good people of Scotland did not vote for this – just what is the actual advantage to the SNP of this move unless it has something to hide?

Gerald Edwards, Glasgow

Voting template?

In his acceptance speech following his Westminster by election win for Aberdeen South, Douglas Lumsden acknowledged the help of people who would not normally vote Conservative. This was echoed later by the Scottish Conservative Leader Russell Findlay, as well as UK leader Kemi Badenoch.

This resounding win – with 50 per cent of the vote versus the SNP’s 29 per cent – came about because the campaign highlighted the SNP’s deceitful stance on oil and gas, in which they claimed to be supportive despite a history of opposition. The voters of South Aberdeen were savvy enough to see that this was only because of the election and, coupled with the fallout from the Peter Murrell scandal, was enough for them to realise that they had been duped at the Scottish elections and decide that the worst result of all would be another SNP win.

Could this be a template for future elections in Scotland where those opposed to the SNPs divisive separatism look at previous election results, prevailing voting intention polls, prominent local issues and then unite in support of the pro-UK party most likely to beat the SNP? This would require that party to field a sensible candidate with a proven track record, good local knowledge and an understanding of the main issues of concern to the constituents. Where there is a clear favourite, as was the case in Aberdeen South, the other Unionist parties would then need to decide if they wished to seriously contest the seat.

Once the SNP’s damaging stranglehold is broken we can all get back to voting for what we want rather than against what we don’t want.

Mark Openshaw, Aberdeen

Still no answers

In the Aberdeen South UK Parliament by-election the SNP's vote fell by 45 per cent, from 15,213 in 2024 to 8,258; and by 37 per cent, from 15,501 to 9,802 in Broughty Ferry.

While some of this collapse can be attributed to John Swinney's CU Jimmy paparazzi-chasing in Boston, the obvious main culprit was the public's disgust at the revelations of the Murrell crimes.

All this surely adds weight to accusations that the Murrell court hearing was delayed until after the May 7 election, and the priority of identifying what actually happened between the SNP and the Crown Prosecution Service, because a 40 per cent-ish decline in the SNP vote would have wiped them – and the independence movement – out in last month's Holyrood election.

Allan Sutherland, Stonehaven, Aberdeenshire

Wrong song

As the drama of the World Cup unfolds in North America, once again we are treated to the sight of the English team being greeted by "God save the King". King Charles III is king of Great Britain, not of England alone, so the National Anthem belongs to all four countries within Great Britain.

Music more appropriate for an English team could be “Jerusalem” (reference “England's green and pleasant land”), or better still, “The Roast Beef of old England”.

Sandy Macpherson, Edinburgh

Unsafe world

I agree with Henry McLeish that the US is living the fears of its founding fathers (Perspective, 18 June). In 2021 there was relative peace in the world but since then major wars have sprung up in Ukraine, Sudan, Gaza, Lebanon and Iran. The last three have been at the behest of Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu, two warmongers who have been joined at the hip until recently. They are now finding that force does not yield results, only destruction, displacement and the deaths of tens of thousands of civilians.

Trump went into the war with Iran, having rejected a peace deal, with three objectives: regime change, elimination of Iran’s nuclear programme and destruction of its military. The tacit agreement with Iran achieves none of these but rewards Iran with a $350 million reparations fund. The Strait of Hormuz is opening, but it was open before the war and now Iran seeks a toll for safe passage.

Meanwhile, in Lebanon and Gaza thousands of civilians have died this year as Israel continues to level vast territory with little gain. In a rare outburst of sanity, Trump declared that Israel does not need to destroy an apartment block every time it goes after Hezbollah.

Meanwhile Putin has hit a stalemate in his war with Ukraine despite Trump refusing to fund arms and back Ukraine at the negotiating table. Putin is mirroring Netanyahu’s tactic of flattening civilian infrastructure with little strategic gain.

It’s not just the US people who are fearful, Keir Starmer has defended current defence spending despite warnings from the former Defence Secretary and military chiefs, while money continues to be squandered. This is insanity given escalating threats from China and Russia. “We The People” are vulnerable yet our leaders fail to act to keep us safe.

Neil Anderson, Edinburgh

Get fracking

Britain does not need another symbolic energy policy. It needs cheaper, more reliable power for households, workers and industry.

The recent House of Commons Library briefing on the proposed full ban on fracking shows the direction of travel under Labour: not careful regulation, local consent and evidence-led exploration, but the legal closing down of future options. That may please campaigners, but it will not cut a single bill in Dunblane, Dundee or Dumfries.

Energy policy is not abstract. It is the direct debit leaving a family bank account. It is the pensioner worrying about winter. It is the manufacturer deciding whether to invest in Scotland or shift work abroad. Wealthy millionaires like Sir Keir Starmer may be able to absorb expensive electricity, higher green costs and an EU reset. Millions of ordinary Britons cannot.

Britain will continue to need gas for years, including for heating, industry and back-up generation. Refusing even to assess domestic resources does not reduce demand. It increases dependence on imports, foreign disruption and volatile prices.

That is why Sir Keir’s EU reset is the wrong instinct. Brexit gave Britain the chance to build a more competitive, sovereign energy policy. That should mean cheaper power, stronger domestic resilience, faster infrastructure and policy made for British citizens first. It should not mean drifting back towards arrangements that leave British consumers paying more while others benefit.

Of course fracking carries risks. But risk should be managed through strict regulation, geological evidence, transparent monitoring and local accountability.

Permanent bans are not proof of seriousness. They are often proof that government has stopped trusting science, enterprise and common sense.

Britain needs confidence, not managed decline. Affordable energy should be treated as a national priority.

Alastair Majury, Dunblane, Stirling

No ideas

In fairness to Jill Stephenson (Letters, 19 June) she was probably not aware of the just-published academic report indicating that Brexit is costing Scotland around £30 billion per year (close to the amount of tax returned to Scotland via Barnett consequentials) when she embarked on her latest attempt to denigrate Scottish independence while offering no ideas as to how to fix broken Britain.

For clarity, the day following a successful vote for Scottish independence, via a referendum, or if necessary via a general election de facto referendum, Scotland will still not legally be independent of Westminster rule. It is estimated that “good faith” negotiations between the respective parliaments will last for a period of up to two years before the necessary parliamentary legislation can be passed to officially dissolve the political union on a negotiated date. That day will become Scotland’s “Independence Day” and my personal hope is that it will prove practicable to introduce the “Scottish pound” on that highly momentous day.

It is, however, a valid argument that in a rapidly changing world it might appear prudent to retain the pound sterling as the “Scottish currency” until the economic environment is more favourable. That said, it should be noted that despite the bluster of “Better Together”, realpolitik indicates that it would be in England’s best interests for the Bank of England to treat Scotland favourably in such circumstance, given Scotland’s oil, gas, water, electricity and food/drinks provision. As Donald Trump has discovered to America’s great cost, attempting to bully another country while that country has control of essential resources is either totally naïve or grossly irresponsible.

Perhaps now Jill Stephenson can reveal how maintaining “the fundamentals of the status quo” will reverse Britain’s decline?

Stan Grodynski, Longniddry, East Lothian

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, and in the body of the email – no attachments – and avoid 'Letters to the Editor/Readers’ Letters' or similar in your subject line. If referring to an article, include date, page number and heading. No poems.