Reforming zeal

Those wealthy people are hardly what anyone might call philanthropists. They are hard-nosed businessmen and women who did not become rich by giving it away. So what is so attractive about Reform to these people? It does not take a genius to work out that these tycoons are looking for something in return. Something that will boost, preserve and cement their wealth over the next few years because it’s all they really care about.

And Reform, with its collection of ultra-ambitious failed Tories, private school graduates, dubious aristocracy and tax exiles, will be only too happy to oblige. Reform may claim to be the “voice of the people” but they are merely using the race card to create a UK plutocracy. Ordinary decent, intelligent people must recognise this is a back door conspiracy to benefit the super rich. The “common man” could not be more different or further from the thoughts of Reform’s high-rolling benefactors and hierarchy.

D Mitchell, Doune, Perthshire

Hypocrite

To all the criticisms levelled at Sir Jim Ratcliffe, there should surely be added rank hypocrisy. As part owner of his beloved Manchester United, he must be aware that most of his team are foreigners.

On top of that, most English Premiere League managers have only a very limited grasp of English.

Torquil MacLeod, Drumnadrochit, Inverness

Prove sincerity

Jim Ratcliffe’s incredible ignorance and grossly misleading arguments in a recent interview demonstrate that those who would consider voting for Reform UK should be wary of voting for a party financially backed by many of the same individuals who backed Brexit.

While most people are suffering the economic consequences of Brexit, Ineos owner Ratcliffe, like other Brexit sponsors, did not stay to pay UK taxes and to help build a UK supposedly “freed” from Europe, but moved abroad. Most on these islands have not accumulated the wealth that would allow them to move residence overseas when times are “tough”, but will pay a heavy price should public services and the welfare system collapse while the super-rich become richer and more bankers also make the move to Monaco.

Trump and Farage, Musk and Ratcliffe, are clearly not averse to exploiting fake news and have enriched themselves while many who trusted them have lost their jobs or are struggling with the increasing cost of living. The UK, in spite of its rapaciously colonising past, takes much fewer asylum seekers than many other countries and the period quoted by Ratcliffe for a population growth was out by a huge factor, seven (35, not five years).

Of course, such fear could be dissipated if Ratcliffe, also co-owner of Manchester United, were to back his own words by terminating the contracts of all non-British players, estimated at 75 per cent of the current first-team squad. If that decisive action were taken, while we would still have reason to doubt his maths skills, we would at least have some justification for not doubting Ratcliffe’s sincerity.

Stan Grodynski, Longniddry, East Lothian

Bad planning

Two recent Scotsman reports show the SNP Government in a poor light. The first is from the UK nuclear industry, saying that had the SNP not avoided nuclear power, an estimated 5,000 jobs would have been created.

The second is from the Institute for Fiscal Studies, saying that the SNP has not budgeted for next year's doctors’ pay award, ie, they don't know where the cash will come from. Not good government!

William Ballantine, Bo'ness, West Lothian

Rail fail

Rhetoric is in the air following John Swinney’s trumpeting of both the abolition of peak fares on ScotRail and a freeze on ticket prices (your report 12 February). But are these boons costless?

The first experiment on peak fares abolition in 23/24 was a failure, or in Natspeak, a “limited success”.

Passenger numbers hardly rose so in effect it was a subsidy from taxpayers to middle-class commuters – 50 per cent of UK citizens, many relatively poor, have been surveyed as using trains only once a year or not at all.

Now we are told that despite massive cost increases on rail – subsidy now exceeds two thirds of running costs – fares cannot rise. So the £1.6 billion Scottish taxpayer bill goes up .

Social benefit compared to buses is poor, as has been pointed out by the Institute of Economic Affairs in a recent report. And the taxpayer largesse perpetuates a system in which inefficient working practices are rife. But the policies will buy the votes of the gullible!

Peter Smaill, Borthwick, Midlothian

Too poor

Can Scotland actually afford five more years of the SNP (“Reverse ban on new oil and gas, says Blair's think tank”, 13 February)?

Dogma over this and net zero itself, plus nuclear power, women's rights and all the rest has left Scotland in a poor state.

The current budget is unsustainable as Scotland does not have the money for all the pay rises in the public sector. Increasingly we are witnessing council tax rising at an alarming rate due to the same central government lack of money problem.

Scotland is too poor in reality and this is thanks to the SNP, with “admirable” help from the Greens. Constantly blaming Westminster is like flogging a dead parrot. Scotland stands at a watershed. We genuinely cannot afford five more years of the SNP's blinkered vision – but will Scots heed the message?

Gerald Edwards, Glasgow

Happy holidays

While Ian Petrie (Letters, 11 February) raises a number of valid points about the teaching profession, I would encourage him to consider one vital point when raising the annual salary of teachers.

When looking at their pay we have to factor in the extraordinarily high number of holidays teachers receive compared to other jobs. All told, teachers will get around 14 weeks of holiday a year versus five or six for most other professionals. That means they receive the best part of an extra two months of paid holidays compared to other workers.

Perhaps the well-above national average annual salary they receive isn't too bad after all, given that?

J Lewis, Edinburgh

Saving lives

In reply to to Brian Barbour's response (Letters,13 February) to my letter of 12 February, perhaps I could clarify my thinking.

I do not suggest that more money be given to the medical side of things, but to social care. There are probably enough nurses and doctors to look after patients but they need somewhere appropriate to treat them.

To reduce this to economics, if money was invested in social care this would increase employment and increase taxes, which the government could then invest in roads, hip replacements or anything else. It costs more to keep someone in a hospital bed than to care for them in the community or a care home. This frees up NHS resources to spend elsewhere, and by ending bed blocking and corridor care, saves lives, improves patient care and relieves some of the stress on doctors and nurses. I am not a healthcare economist but this seems like a win win situation. There would be fewer deaths, more employment, more tax revenue, better care for patients and staff and possibly more money for hip replacements.

I do not disagree that there may be some economic benefits to dualling the A9, perhaps more speculative, but my arguments were more about saving lives than economics.

(Dr) Gordon Scott, Edinburgh

Peace plea

A “special operation” that was meant to last for three days is still ongoing after 1,452 days, without any sign of resolution. Next week, the war in Ukraine will enter its fifth year. It appears that only one side seeks peace, namely Ukraine.

President Vlodomyr Zelensky has promised that a ceasefire and a settled peace will lead to an early election. Of course, Vladimir Putin can offer nothing to the Russian people, other than yet more of his ruthless dictatorship.

It would be interesting to learn what the Russian people themselves think of this war. Plainly, it's an ongoing disaster for Putin himself, for whom there should be no sympathy, and more so, for the far too many families who have lost a son – perhaps more than one – in the conflict.

The toll on young Russian lives is horrendous and continues to be so.

Very cruelly, for those in the Kremlin, young life is cheap and expendable. We must hope President Donald Trump, who is inevitably involved, can put intensive pressure on Putin, instead of kowtowing to him, as a “good friend”.

A pipe dream would be for the Russian people to look at the proposed Ukrainian elections, and say, “what about us?”

Beyond Trump, and beyond Europe, the embattled Russian people themselves, have a vital part to play.

Ian Petrie, Edinburgh

Write to The Scotsman

We welcome your thoughts – NO letters submitted elsewhere, please. Write to l[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. And please do ensure any names mentioned are correct.