Sir, – Let me say from the start that I am no SNP supporter and voted No in the last separatist referendum.
So, leaving aside Ms Jenny Hjul’s usual anti-devolution/anti SNP attacks, her latest tirade (Covid division desperation, Courier, July 1) takes the biscuit.
Suppose for a minute that the first minister’s policy of measured, cautious and incremental release from lockdown is actually the more correct way forward, that is it will result in a far greater reduction in coronavirus cases than the more accelerated release favoured by the bold Boris (no fan of him either!) and some other countries which is driven not by health but by economics.
The fact that our friends down south may now travel abroad and even to Scotland will highly likely lead to spikes in the infection rate and that some of this will also transmit to us in Scotland.
Give the first minister some credit. She may actually be doing this the right way.
Time will tell.
Dr David A Ross.
32 Broadlands,
Carnoustie.
Contempt for Scotland clear from Johnson
Sir, – In my letter published on June 19 I pointed out that the prime minister “appears to have scant regard for the interests and concerns of the other three members of the current Union”.
This was borne out by his announcing of the lifting of restrictions and his moving towards air bridges without consulting any of the other governing bodies.
Inevitably his break with the four nation approach has caused considerable concern in these three other countries.
Nicola Sturgeon has raised the possibility of quarantine, as a last resort, if scientific evidence shows that outbreaks elsewhere threaten Scotland’s efforts to defeat Covid-19.
At all times she has stressed that this would be a non-political decision based on medical evidence in order to eradicate the virus.
In Parliament the PM described this as “absolutely astonishing and shameful”.
It came in the very week that Westminster had to declare a second lockdown in Leicester to deal with new outbreaks and the day after a cross border outbreak was identified in Dumfries and Galloway.
He was joined in his attack by Alister Jack, Secretary of State for Scotland, who in theory looks after Scotland’s interests at Westminster.
Mr Jack, an entrepreneur, has been almost invisible during the crisis except to demand an easing of restrictions to benefit business interests.
He described the first minister as “reckless” and “divisive” and “bad for business”.
As the MP for Dumfries and Galloway, he has shown his constituents where his priorities lie.
Perhaps the most worrying part of the debate was the PM admitted that he had had no discussions with the Scottish Parliament and shouted that there was no such thing as a Scottish border.
This display of contempt for Scotland and for Holyrood suggests a very real threat that, desperate to distract from his own mishandling of the Covid-19 crisis and encouraged by the shift to the right in English politics, he may launch a campaign to frustrate the efforts of the Scottish and Welsh parliaments and indeed threaten their very existence.
Ken Guild.
76 Brown Street,
Broughty Ferry.
Sturgeon’s stock Covid answers
Sir, – Astute political operator that she is, Nicola Sturgeon manages to sidestep nearly every difficult question relating to her management of coronavirus and Scotland’s tragically high death toll in a way that will surely be the envy of Downing Street politicians.
She has two stock responses.
The first is to accuse the person asking the question of politicising the situation, thus making them look petty, giving her free reign not to answer. Meantime, in almost the same breath, she’ll contrive to criticise Boris Johnson, while loftily insisting she’s above political games.
Ms Sturgeon’s other standard answer is to state rather grandly that only she has experience of managing a pandemic – particularly when challenged by opposition MPs or MSPs.
In saying this, she implies the politician asking the question doesn’t know what they’re talking about and so does not deserve an answer.
Meaningful scrutiny is circumvented by Ms Sturgeon.
But in a democracy and with well over 4,000 Covid deaths in Scotland, should it be?
Martin Redfern.
Melrose,
Roxburghshire.
Hjul has right to trans opinion
Sir, – I refer to the letter from Laura MacLaren and Rebecca McClune (Do not strip trans women of their identity, Courier, June 30), in which they attack Jenny Hjul’s article and opinion on trans rights as ignorant and offensive.
Human rights work through respect and free speech, which your contributors are attempting to suppress.
Jenny Hjul has the absolute right to express an opinion.
I do not think it is displaying ignorance or offence to question the basis of the cult of LGBT activists who insist that society must understand and empathise totally with individuals who feel they should become someone other than the person to whom their mothers gave birth.
Derek Farmer.
Knightsward Farm,
Anstruther.
