Today’s letters to The Courier.
Sir, It is not the case that Joan McAlpine MSP said that all who do not support independence are anti-Scottish, as stated by Jenny Hjul (amongst others) in her column. What she said was, the Unionist parties were anti-Scottish for ”coming together to defy the will of the Scottish people and the democratic mandate that they gave us to hold a referendum at a time of our choosing.”
Jenny Hjul says she wants to have the same welfare benefits we currently have in the UK. By the time the Tories leave office, it is quite possible there will barely be a welfare state left in the UK as the Tories and even Labour seem so keen on American systems.
She also wants to be defended by British Armed Forces. However, without independence the Trident nuclear missiles will remain in Scotland. The cold war is long over, and the threat of attack by other countries has diminished considerably.
If independence should happen, it would make sense to negotiate treaties for the mutual defence of Scotland and what would remain of the UK.
The SNP have stated they would plan to have armed forces comparable to those of Norway and Denmark.
It may have escaped Jenny Hjul, but Scotland already controls its own NHS which is run differently in many ways to that in England, and it has resisted going down the privatisation path England has taken.
Jenny Hjul’s claim that Scotland would be financially unstable as Greece is just her opinion. Many others would disagree. She claims the SNP are ignoring dire warnings about independence, from economic experts and business leaders, however there are many of them who support independence.
Regarding her statement an independent Scotland would have the trappings of a banana republic, it shows what Jenny Hjul and her ilk really think of Scotland.
Do Norway, Denmark, Finland etc, have the trappings of a banana republic? In many ways, such as quality of life and GDP per capita, they are superior to the UK.
Thomas Murray.127 Cairns Crescent,Perth.
SNP simply sticking to date
Sir, Jenny Hjul’s article in The Courier (January 18) was an ill-tempered, one-sided rant.
I suspect that most people usually despair when a political party makes pre-election manifesto pledges then promptly abandons them on gaining power. As far as I know, the SNP have simply stuck, to date, to a manifesto pledge.
I cannot help but wonder had the SNP immediately, after their landslide victory, decided to bring forward their referendum when the feelgood factor was running high what the response from the opposition might have been?
Ms Hjul makes much of adverse anti-Scottish sentiment then gives the game away when she sees an affinity between an independent Scotland and the financial instability of Greece, going as far as suggesting we might adopt the Drachma as our currency.
It might be informative for Ms Hjul to take a look at the latest Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland figures indicating that Scotland is in fact providing a greater financial contribution than she currently receives.
This situation, I would imagine, would continue regardless of how voters exercise their plebiscite when the time comes.
Scotland never has been a selfish, narrow nationalist country. Countless war memorials bear silent testimony to that truth.
Frank Kenneth.6 Lawside Avenue,Dundee.
If they want a royal yacht…
Sir, I was surprised to learn that in these austere times it is being proposed that a replacement royal yacht should be built. It is proposed that the capital costs for this venture would come from private funds.
As a sweetener, no doubt, it has been stated that the ship would also be used for trade events and hosting disadvantaged people. The plan is being privately ”supported”, whatever that means, by Prince Charles and Princess Anne who, of course, would benefit enormously by having such a vessel at their disposal.
When the previous Royal Yacht Britannia was being constructed we were told that in time of war it would double as a hospital ship. The war in the Falkland Islands came and Britannia was conspicuous by its absence. It has never been used as a hospital ship.
If the royal family want a royal yacht I say let them pay for it themselves!
One final point. Supposing private funds did pay for this extravagant vessel being built I wonder who would provide and pay for the crew and running costs? You can bet your bottom dollar or pound, rather, that it would be the British taxpayer.
Robert Finlay.6 Greenmount Drive,Burntisland.
Looks good on paper, no doubt
Sir, It is always interesting to hear the politicians boasting the crime rate is down. How do they account for the amount of murders and violent crimes committed almost every weekend in the West of Scotland? And what about the crime which goes unreported?
However, it looks good on paper and a fine boost for the single police force.
John McDonald.14 Rosebery Court,Kirkcaldy.
Get involved: to have your say on these or any other topics, email your letter to letters@thecourier.co.uk or send to Letters Editor, The Courier, 80 Kingsway East, Dundee DD4 8SL.