Sir, – In reply to Michael Foreman’s “reassuring” me, as he is a “committed unionist” (Letters, December 17), that he evidently would prefer proportional representation.
He never mentioned the mandate for the SNP/Scottish Government, achieved through the unionist-designed, AMS amended D’Hondt system for the Scottish Parliament – designed by them to never have a majority result.
Furthermore, the 2011 referendum was concerned whether or not to replace the “first past the post” system with the “alternative vote” (AV) method, and was the first national referendum in the UK in the 21st Century.
The proposal to introduce AV was rejected by 67.9% of voters on a national turnout of only 42%.
It is to date the only UK-wide referendum to be held on an issue not related to the European Communities or the European Union, and is also the first to have been not merely consultative, it committed the government to give effect to its decision, which is why the Conservative and Unionist Party campaigned against it.
The alternative vote and the single transferable vote (STV) for the House of Commons were debated in parliament several times between 1917 and 1931, and came close to being adopted.
Both the Liberals and Labour at various times supported a change from non-transferable voting. In 1950, all constituencies became single-member and all votes non-transferable and, until 2010, Labour and Conservative parties always voted down proposals for moving away from this uniform FPTP voting system for the Commons.
Other voting systems were introduced for various other British elections. The House of Lords, the second largest unelected chamber in the world, after the Chinese National Assembly, has been promised to be reformed, or abolished, by various parties for over 100 years.
It may be worth noting that, along with Oxford and Cambridge and a good few London boroughs, Edinburgh Central and Glasgow Kelvin, all voted Yes. Education, IQ and pro/anti Europe do seem to be linked.
Perhaps, as a “committed unionist” Mr Foreman may consider that for 100 years, the unionist parties have either promised reform, or hindered it, or chosen to be silent on it.
Nicola Sturgeon, as first minister, has a mandate, through the amended D’Hondt system, so contrived by those parties of power as to purportedly never to so achieve.
That is democracy, despite the designed deficiencies, and no unionist can hide behind rhetoric, let alone wishful thinking.
Calum Duncan.
16 Burn Street,
Dundee.
Sold on the altar of Indyref2
Sir, – It didn’t have to be like this.
With a third reading of the Withdrawal Bill now but a formality, the UK, Scotland included, are on their way out of the EU. Against Scotland’s will.
Why on Earth did the SNP vote with Boris Johnson and the Tories for an early election?
Is Indyref2 so important to the SNP that they are willing to sacrifice the UK’s membership? Jeremy Corbyn knew his Labour party was not prepared for an election. He whipped his party into voting against giving Boris an election so many times, he was called chicken.
But at least Corbyn had stopped Brexit.
But then, like 1979, the SNP took leave of their senses and joined with the equally crazy Lib Dems, and Corbyn had nowhere to go. So unimportant is the EU to the SNP that they spent less on the EU referendum campaign than they did on the recent Shetland by-election.
From the moment they included in their 2016 election manifesto that Scotland being dragged out of the EU was a material change of circumstances such that it would give grounds for another referendum, the SNP seem to have done everything they could to push Brexit on.
Goodbye to the EU, sold out by the SNP on the altar of Indyref2.
Phil Tate.
Craiglockhart Road,
Edinburgh.
Is banking to get more costly?
Sir, – Is Brexit going to change much more than we thought?
I have received a statement from my bank, RBS, which sets out over five pages many issues totally irrelevant to my circumstances.
It does however unexpectedly surprise me that for maintaining the account there was a unit fee of £2, which was charged 12 times, with a total cost of £23.66.
Mark Webster.
Plashburn Cottage,
Craigend,
Perth.
Bank service less than ideal
Sir, – I have just returned from a visit to our replacement RBS branch, which is a 12-mile return journey.
When I arrived two of three cash pods were in action.
I was fourth in the queue and waited for half an hour while a customer occupied one of the active pods.
On arrival at the other active pod I learned the teller was not authorised to pay out the sum of money I required.
The busy teller had the authority and if I cared to wait she could provide the money.
I was on the point of leaving the branch when busy teller became available.
Unfortunately she could only deal with one of my requests.
I was not in a good humour when I walked out of the RBS bank.
A A Bullions.
6 Glencairn Crescent,
Leven.
Farmers’ loyalty is puzzling
Sir, – For many years I have puzzled as to why so many of Scotland’s farmers have such a love affair with the Tory Party.
I do understand why the really wealthy and big businesses in our society support the Tories. They always get looked after by them.
But for as long as I have lived farmers have always complained they are so hard up and cannot make ends meet, or make a decent living without the many huge taxpayer-funded subsidies – in other words, money to grow stuff, money not to grow stuff, money for just having land. And on it goes.
Now all governments of whichever persuasion have continued this policy over the last 40 years, with ever-increasing amounts of money from the EU due to CAP.
Yet they are now on the Tory bandwagon to come out of the EU.
Are they just going to trust the Tories to make sure these handouts continue to land in their bank accounts?
I do wonder if this time next year they will be out on the streets scratching their heads wondering what has just happened.
Dave Stewart.
5 Main Street,
Luthermuir.
Seizing defeat from victory
Sir, – It’s always entertaining to read the latest nonsense from Dr Cameron et al on why the remarkable victory which the SNP achieved in the recent election is, in fact, a defeat.
It is true the SNP achieved 45% of the vote; which gave them 81% of the seats in Scotland. Apparently this means they were beaten.
By Dr Cameron’s logic, as the Conservatives achieved only 43.6% of the vote (56% of seats), 56.4% voted against them and they have suffered an even bigger defeat; therefore Mr Johnson’s government should stand down.
I look forward to an explanation from our Conservative apologists why this is not the case.
John Craig.
West Cottage,
Guthrie,
Forfar.
