Readers' Letters: MSP should show his faith in Reform by standing for re-election

As he is so confident that the one-issue Reform party is the way forward in Scotland and the far right have a future outside England, I’m sure he will be happy to resign his seat and stand for re-election. Having proved just how committed he is to “stopping the boats” in Broxburn, I look forward to him campaigning on the banks of the Forth to save us all from foreigners and other ne’er do wells. Well done Graham. Your bravery will be our salvation.

D Mitchell, Doune, Perthshire

Bandwagons slow

A Tory MSP goes over to the Reform party and, previously, a few councillors have made the same journey. However, the defectors have forgotten a great truth of current UK politics – it's volatility.

Yes, Reform is doing well in the polls just now, but this could quickly change. What goes up will eventually come down!

William Ballantine, Bo'ness, West Lothian

Unfit for office

As if we needed any further proof, Nigel Farage and his Reform UK cronies have shown themselves to be completely unfit for office (your report, 27 August). To suggest that 600,000 refugees would be deported to Afghanistan and Iran, among other places, in their first term of office is both heartless and ludicrous.

It's no accident Farage's language is Trumpian, as both are singing from the same fascist hymn sheet. Farage proposes to get rid of the ECHR and anything vaguely European. He breaks Britain, declares that Britain is broken, and offers no clue as to how to mend it.

While Kemi Badenoch's response to all this is childishly predictable, Keir Starmer misses the open goal of dismissing Farage's proposals out of hand. He lamely says “nothing will be taken off the table”. The time has come for an end to Labour's flirtation with the right, and an overdue assumption of leftist policies. Only then will they be fit for office.

Ian Petrie, Edinburgh

States in trouble

Apparently, some separatist diehards are suggesting that if the SNP wins a majority of Holyrood seats in 2026 they should immediately start negotiations with Westminster over independence. Mind, there would be no one to negotiate with, as neither leading unionist party would acknowledge an SNP majority as qualifying for such a discussion. I am sure many Scots will be as concerned as I am at the way in which small states are being nobbled by the big players these days.

We have already seen Georgia having land snatched from her by Russia. Now, they have a government in place which is pro-Russian. Vladimir Putin wants the same in the Ukraine, so that that nation never again has the freedom to look towards democratic Europe for a lead.

In recent days we have seen Denmark calling the US ambassador in for discussions about apparent attempts to subvert the Greenland government. This seems to be quite possible, as Trump has made it plain he wants the USA to own Denmark's huge, semi-autonomous, but barely populated territory and its enormous natural assets. Who knows, if Trump gets hold of Greenland, Iceland and the Faroes might be next? We should take this as a warning that an independent Scotland would be as unsafe as these other northern lands which are all but independent. An independent Scotland could find itself being grabbed by either Russia or the USA, despite what the SNP might say. It's deeply worrying and underlines why we need to remain in the UK.

Peter Hopkins, Edinburgh

Embrace trams

I suspect nobody in Edinburgh spat out their cornflakes in shock reading Transport Scotland’s negative response to plans to complete Edinburgh’s trams (your report, 26 August). This at a time when the city’s trams are increasingly seen as a triumph. Indeed, just this week they were declared a “success” by no less than Scottish Cabinet Secretary Angus Robertson.

Despite that, Transport Scotland wasted no time in running down the trams and even tried to play local councils off against one another by declaring that “It was not clear” that the trams were seen as a “regional priority shared by surrounding local authorities”. Rather than apply itself to improving the capital’s and Scotland’s infrastructure, Transport Scotland adopts “spin doctor” tactics of which Alastair Campbell himself would have been proud.

It is any wonder there’s been no decision on the Sheriffhall Roundabout project seven years after the funding was approved. The position contrasts completely with the consistent support given to the Borders Railway – another worthy project, I’d argue.

Scottish Ministers constantly claim credit for Scottish growth figures that since 2007 are higher than in the rest of the UK without accepting that the key driver of Scottish success is Edinburgh. On the back of the trams, Edinburgh’s GDP per capita has now overtaken London.

Edinburgh and Glasgow need modern transport systems to support growth and sustainable transport, but the SNP focus on gimmicks like abolishing peak fares rather than actual transport investment. Ironically, Scotland would get the money back from a new tramway in the form of increased taxes and growth. Scotland’s prosperity is increasingly at risk of falling behind English City Regions where successive Westminster Governments have seen the wisdom in investing in city regions.

Growth, it seems, is not a priority for Scotland.

Councillor Cammy Day, City Chambers, Edinburgh

Net zero debt

It would appear Stan Grodynski (Letters, 28 August) has never analysed the 2024 review by Professor Graeme Roy of the Office for Business Responsibility (OBR) on the cost of attaining Net Zero.

The conclusion from the OBR is that there would be a tripling of UK debt to meet the goals set by Holyrood and Westminster, which implies a debt of around £10 trillion when factoring in the costs of inflation.

A Scottish share of such a debt will be around £1tn as there are still no estimates available for the SNP plan to install 25GW of gas turbine plant to keep the lights on under dunkelflaute – that is, unproductive – weather conditions.

Note that such a debt would preclude Scotland joining the EU until the debt to GDP ratio was below 3 per cent – a goal that would only be reached by the 12th of Never!

It’s time, surely, for the SNP to review the Reform Party manifesto pledge in 2024 to revisit net zero goals to align the projects with the debt that Scots can afford.

Ian Moir, Castle Douglas, Dumfries & Galloway

Daft belief

It was with amazement that I found myself in agreement with Stan Grodynski s letter; until, that is, the second paragraph when he started banging the nationalist drum again.

I am amazed that some people still hang on to the myth that an independent Scotland is the answer to all our problems. I can only assume that they are unable to cope with reality and find solace in this daft belief.

Pauline Carruthers, Edinburgh

Off track

Like Bill McDonald (Letters, 28 August) I watched BBC Alba’s Eorpa programme on the A9. I hope that road safety campaigners and professionals, and politicians, will consider his practical suggestions on “V” (for “visitor”) plates and driver guidance stickers.

The website scottishroadsarchive.org gives a longer history of the A9 than does Eorpa. The A9 corridor has been in use, originally as drovers’ roads, for over 500 years. From 1725, when General George Wade oversaw the construction of a military road from Dunkeld to Inverness, through to 1999, the A9 was developed by UK governments, whose last major work took place in 1986. These late 20th-century governments failed to dual the whole of the A9. Why? As did Scottish Parliament governments run by the Labour and Liberal Democrat parties from 1999. Again, why?

E Campbell, Newton Mearns, East Renfrewshire

Toilet trouble

Robert Menzies (Letters, 25 and 27 August) questions the ramifications of the Supreme Court’s ruling on biological sex being the basis for what used, without demur, to be regarded as intimate facilities – toilets, changing rooms, etc.

His point about tradesmen, cleaners, fathers of newborns being excluded from them by this ruling is a reductio ad absurdum. His criticism of Scotsman columnists Susan Dalgety and Jenny Lindsay, both victims of the SNP’s pro-“gender” stance that has permeated our society, while brushing off the part played by “their opponents” in raising the temperature of discourse, demonstrates which side he takes – the one not based on scientific fact.

A few years ago the Queen’s Hall in Edinburgh changed its ladies’ loos (presumably also the gents’) into “gender neutral” facilities.

I cannot forget the look of embarrassment on the faces of the men who emerged from the cubicles in what had formerly been ladies’ loos. Thankfully, the status quo ante was quietly re-established by the venue.

As for asking “both sides to pause and reflect on their use of language”, perhaps he should reflect on the use of the most extreme language, when a pro-“trans” demonstration’ included hateful slogans such as “decapitate TERFS”.

Jill Stephenson, Edinburgh

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.