Sir,– Climate change, poor productivity, ageing population, falling education standards, mass migration, energy security, and cyber threats are all examples of the many problems that our society faces.
After years of debate and a referendum, there is still no clear evidence, or majority of opinion that remaining in the EU would solve any of our “real” problems.
The same can be said for leaving the EU, whether it be under the negotiated deal, no deal, EEA, Norway or Canada style with various pluses.
While we and our politicians devote most of the national debate to arguing over Brexit, little progress is made on tackling the issues that really matter to us.
Whatever your views on Brexit, one thing that should be obvious to us all is that any attempt to add Scotland’s separation from the UK into the mix would be irresponsible folly.
It would simply add to the distraction with no clear notion of which of our problems it is supposed to address.
There are three post-Brexit scenarios.
It could be a success for the UK – in which case why would Scotland want to separate?
It could be a disaster – in which case why would Scotland want to repeat and compound the error by separating from its biggest trading and cultural partner?
Or it could be somewhere in between leaving us wondering why we have spent so much time on it.
Let’s resolve Brexit one way or another and then get on with making the UK the best it can be.
Mark Openshaw,
42 Earlswells Road,
Cults.
There is still an alternative
Sir, – I feel obliged to comment on the actions of the Prime Minister regarding the Brexit withdrawal agreement.
It should really be called the May withdrawal agreement as the PM is the only person who now sees it as inevitable and the best deal we can get.
It has been rejected by many in her own party, by the opposition in Westminster and by the Scottish Parliament and – of course – the DUP.
Yet instead of listening to everyone and taking on board the concerns of the many, Mrs May attempts to body swerve all the opposition and create a people strategy.
This entails “talking directly” to the public on a national tour with the mantra that not only is this the best deal but the only deal on the table.
The outcome of all this is that Theresa May hopes to get this flawed withdrawal agreement through parliament.
It is an agreement that satisfies no one, appeals to the perceived fatigue of the public, a business sector that receives lukewarm certainties and worst of all implies all will be well for the Northern Irish, fisheries and Gibraltar.
After more than two years why are we in this situation?
Thankfully we in Scotland have a real alternative not available to the rest of the UK.
Why, independence of course.
Dan Wood,
Charles Melvin Grdns,
Kirriemuir.
Stockpiling far from appealing
Sir, – I couldn’t find my TV remote at 6.55pm on Tuesday and ended up watching the first few minutes of BBC’s One Show.
The first item was about the UK’s biggest cold store, in Wakefield, which has been inundated with requests from food manufacturers who want to stockpile in case Brexit causes food shortages and mass starvation.
Key foods being stockpiled reassuringly included those well-known disaster staples McCain’s chips, ice cream and Yorkshire pudding.
I Googled “disaster food relief” and found the
ready.gov/food
site which recommends the following supplies in an emergency: “peanut butter,whole wheat crackers (vacuum packing to prolong freshness), nuts and trail mix, cereal power bars and granola bars, dried fruit, canned meat and canned vegetables such as beans, carrots and peas”.
Yuck!
It’s enough to make a chap want to vote remain.
The people’s vote is clearly a case of “let them eat cake”.
Allan Sutherland,
1 Willow Row,
Stonehaven.
People can plot the way forward
Sir, – Now that we are fully aware of Theresa May’s Brexit deal and that it lurches toward inevitable defeat in the House of Commons, one of the few options left on the table to address the resulting impasse is that of a public vote.
The question to be put to the electorate is fairly straightforward – support the deal, leave the EU with no deal or remain within the EU.
These remarks will draw ire about the potential confusion caused by a multi-option referendum on the UK’s future relationship.
Multi-option referendums on constitutional change, however, are not unusual and have actually been undertaken in a number of places.
For example, Newfoundland, then a British colony, held a three-option referendum in 1948 to decide whether it should enter the Canadian Confederation, remain under British rule or regain its independence.
The eventual decision by Newfoundlanders was to enter the Canadian Confederation.
Ironically, while originally it was deemed there should only be two options on the ballot paper, the British Government intervened and overruled the convention (the body established to decide on Newfoundland’s constitutional future), and decided that confederation with Canada should also be on the ballot paper.
Most political questions are in fact multi-optional, and while the politicians have had the opportunity to deal with Brexit and failed, the people must now be given the chance to plot the way ahead.
Alex Orr,
Flat 3,
2 Marchmont Road,
Edinburgh.
Two sides to every story
Sir, – One could not help but be amused by the rhetoric of Nicola Sturgeon, alleging the so called “bad Brexit deal” could cost each Scot £1610 annually, but making no mention of the loss of the Barnet premium ( £2000) following a successful independence vote.
The phrase be careful what you wish for springs to mind.
A G Walker,
Puddledub Cottage, Guthrie,
Forfar.
Pace of closure was a real shock
Sir, – I was shocked to read about the closure of Butterstone school.
I fail to understand why such short notice was given.
It must be devastating for the parents whose children attend what is such a specialised school.
Previously when a school has been at risk there has been time to put together a case.
With this rapid decision there has been no such opportunity – it is a real shame.
Thomas Brown,
18 Garry Place,
Bankfoot.
SNP too keen on pet projects
Sir, – Transport secretary Michael Matheson admitted that nine out of 10 bridges on Scotland’s main roads have defects and the cost of fixing the defects is £570 million.
Our damaged and potholed roads require £1.6 billion.
Rather than tackling these issues the SNP have used taxpayers’ money for pet projects.
We have seen free this and free that – not least “free” prescriptions which have in actual fact so far cost £7 billion.
And what about foreign aid?
Malawi has just been given £300,000 toward the £2.7 million it gets every year.
Pakistan, Bangladesh, India, Rwanda, Tanzania, Zambia and Malawi receives £9 million every year to “strengthen international bonds” and for Scotland to be a “good global citizen”.
This is an expensive ego trip since the UK already gives £14 billion a year.
It is time to repair our infrastructure before Scotland becomes a third world country.
Clark Cross,
138 Springfield Road,
Linlithgow.
We still have a sporting chance
Sir, – Regarding James Stevenson’s question: “Does anyone know if UK sportsmen and sportswomen will be able to compete in European Championship tournaments?” (Letters, November 27).
Norway, Iceland, Faroe Islands, Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Macedonia, Monaco… none are in the EU.
It baffles me as to why anyone would equate the EU with Europe.
They are European Championships, not EU Championships.
Thomas Murray,
127 Cairns Crescent,
Perth.