logo
SNP failures will discourage anyone who wants to move to Scotland

SNP failures will discourage anyone who wants to move to Scotland

Why would anyone come here when they will be paying higher taxes if they earn over £30,318? We may need people who will be paid a lower salary but they may be married to a higher earner.
Why would anyone come north of the central belt when our infrastructure doesn't lend itself to easy travel to the rest of the country? Imagine how much safer and quicker a dualled A9 and A96 would make it to get to the capital.
Why would anyone come here when there is a housing shortage, long NHS waits, falling education standards and a party in power that is more interested in seeking grievance than improving our lives?
The best way to make people want to come here is to offer them a great incentive to work and live here.
That means doing the hard work to improve our NHS, provide drug rehabilitation facilities, restore our first class education system and stop taxing people more than those in England. Of course the SNP have had 18 years to do that, and failed at every turn.
Jane Lax, Aberlour.
Read more letters:
Hospitality for Hamas
Stephen Flynn has promoted hatred of Israel to the core of his programme for Scotland ('Stephen Flynn: Independent Scotland would cut ties with Israel', June 10). Perhaps he would like to invite Hamas leaders for state visits including the finest of whisky and golf hospitality.
Tim Cox, Bern 6, Switzerland.
More left-wing nonsense
Anne Wimberley (letters, June 9) sadly displays the usual failings of the left – and indeed in numerous ways.
First, she brands all those with views contrary to her own as 'far right', echoing the hysterical nonsense of much of today's liberal press. She then makes the usual liberal-left generalisation of grouping all migration as one, totally failing to make any distinction between out-of-control illegal immigration and those valued workers arriving through valid, approved and documented routes.
Finally, she blindly declares invalid statistics as facts with no regard for the true figures, her exaggerated claim of the NHS being kept running by 40% immigrant staff being utter nonsense. The true figure is around 19% in England, and less than 10% in Scotland.
None of those have arrived the UK in large groups of undocumented young men via rubber boats across the English Channel, mobile phones in hand and eager to claim their financial benefits, free accommodation, free education, and free healthcare from a system already under strain and made worse every day by the demands of their illegal presence.
Steph Johnson, Glasgow
The wealthy won't have to worry
Good to see that Westminster's man in Scotland, Ian Murray, does not want public money to be spent on 'millionaire pensioners' ('Scottish Government refuses to rule out changes to pensioners' winter payment', June 10). I trust that no rich MP, peer or peeress of pensioner age will be able to claim heating, travel or other allowances from the public purse in future under Mr Murray's strictures. This Labour Party, however, always favours the rich over the poor, so the wealthy won't have to worry.
GR Weir, Ochiltree.
How did Reeves justify her sums?
There is an obvious question for John Swinney et al to consider in case they are minded to follow Rachel Reeves' Damascene conversion and pay Scottish pensioners a greater winter fuel payment than presently planned, but means-tested on the basis of their annual income ('Chancellor confirms a major U- turn on winter fuel payment', June 10).
As I understand it, Ms Reeves has set the qualifying income in England and Wales at £35,000 or below, although she has yet to explain how that means-testing will be achieved, and at what cost.
Certainly, qualifying pensioners in Scotland, where it is colder in winter, should receive a payment at least equal to that considered necessary in England and Wales.
My difficulty is that I don't know how Ms Reeves justifies the means-testing figure of £35,000. At first sight it appears reasonable but as it is a gross figure, would a net figure not be a more appropriate yardstick as being what a pensioner has left to pay for fuel and everything else? If a net income figure would be too difficult and costly to establish, simply increase the gross figure a little.
Alan Fitzpatrick, Dunlop, Ayrshire.
* I NOTE that the age at which people can start to receive state pension is rising again. Presumably this is because it is the older age group which is working and paying tax. Perhaps the government should raise the age at which unemployment benefit starts – eg, 16 to 18, or 16 to 21 – to encourage the parents of younger people to get a job.
Elizabeth Hands, Armadale.
EU membership for Scotland? Not so fast
So John Swinney claims that EU membership could bring an independent Scotland 'security, stability and opportunity.' I, too, regret Brexit, but let us never forget that all those voting for independence in 2014, by voting for Scexit also voted for Brexit – Brussels made this very clear before the referendum.
Plus, perhaps unsurprisingly, Swinney ignores that Scotland's excessively high deficit levels – over three times higher than the 3% tolerated by EU fiscal rules – means that, whatever narrative SNP politicians might spin, the EU would reject an application from Scotland, probably for many years, until Holyrood's overspending was brought under control by cutting public services and raising taxes.
Martin Redfern, Melrose, Roxburghshire.
Sarwar's TV interview
Sir Tom Clarke states (letters, June 11) that'As a Labour voter I was very proud' of Anas Sarwar's interview with Martin Geissler.
He was entitled to be, of course, but I saw the interview live, and I'm afraid I continue to think it was one of the most horrendous ones I have listened to, because of the arrogant Mr Sarwar treating the occasion as a dictatorial Party Political Broadcast and brooking no interference from the courteous Mr Geissler. I live in the Southside of the City (although the SNP now describes us as East End), and I have to say that my friends, neighbours and acquaintances – of all political persuasions – do not agree with Sir Tom. Oh, the wonder and pleasure to live in a free society – I think!
Walter Paul, Glasgow.
Destabilising South Africa
Donald Trump's false charge of race discrimination by the South African government against white farmers and offering them refuge in the US is an act of hostility against South Africa. Since South Africa took Israel to the International Court of Justice charging it with genocide the US has ramped up its actions against South Africa.
Trump's Presidential Order, 'Addressing the Egregious Actions of South Africa', promoted the re-settlement of Afrikaners in the US and stated that South Africa had taken aggressive positions towards the United States including 'accusing Israel of genocide.'
It added: 'The United States cannot support the government of South Africa in its undermining United States foreign policy which poses national security threats to our Nation… and our interests.' It concluded 'the United States shall not provide aid or assistance to South Africa.' It could not be made clearer that if you disagree with US support for Israel's actions then you will be punished.
In South Africa's colonial and apartheid past, land distribution was grossly unequal on the basis of race. This remains the case. Whites own 70% of the land while being only 7% of the population.
South Africa in addressing this issue passed the Land Expropriation Act. Land can be expropriated without compensation only in strictly defined circumstances.
The United States intervention, making false claims about the Act and what is happening to white farmers, whilst offering fast-tracked refuge to Afrikaners is a disruptive interference in the affairs of a sovereign country.
The US actions seem designed to destabilise South Africa and stop its support for the Palestinians. South Africa should be applauded for its humanitarian stance in support of the Palestinians and should also be assisted in its journey to overcome 300 years of colonialism and apartheid.
Brian Filling, Chair, Action for Southern Africa (ACTSA) Scotland, Glasgow.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Calm down, Mr Sarwar - don't get too enthusiastic over Hamilton result
Calm down, Mr Sarwar - don't get too enthusiastic over Hamilton result

The Herald Scotland

time29 minutes ago

  • The Herald Scotland

Calm down, Mr Sarwar - don't get too enthusiastic over Hamilton result

While the Labour win was indeed a surprise, it did not indicate a fundamentally different political environment than the one we had previously thought we were in, based on Scottish polling. As other analysts have pointed out since – including Ballot Box Scotland's Allan Faulds, who in these pages provided a sobering corrective to the wild narrative swing that took place last weekend – this was a by-election victory full of caveats. Read more I won't recount all of those caveats, but it suffices to say that going into the by-election, national polling suggested that, based on a proportional swing model, the SNP would win 33.7% of the vote, Labour 28%, and Reform UK 19.2%. The actual results were SNP on 29.4% (a 4.3-point gap), Labour on 31.6% (a 3.6-point gap), and Reform UK on 26.1% (a 6.9-point gap). As far as the SNP and Labour go, the polls had their results within the margin of error for a model of this kind. The only party that significantly outperformed their polling was Reform UK. As Dr Eoghan Kelly, a postdoctoral researcher on the Scottish Election Study team, found by extrapolating the result in Hamilton to the whole of Scotland, if the result were replicated in next year's Holyrood elections then Labour would come third, with 23 seats to Reform UK's 26 seats and the SNP's 49. There's a lot more work for Scottish Labour to do to get back into power in Scotland, and this one by-election win isn't sufficient to suggest otherwise. As we are all reminded before by-elections, and as most of us seem to forget in their aftermath, we cannot draw grand conclusions from them about national politics. But Hamilton was, nevertheless, a shot across the SNP's bow, and not least because it pointed to significant fragility in the supposed SNP leads in what will be closely contested constituencies next year – putting at risk the projected, disproportionate plurality of seats the SNP are expected to win by dint of dominating the constituency results. Let's take a few widely cited models to sketch out where we expect these three parties to end up if the polls do not change dramatically by next May (which they might). Ballot Box Scotland currently expects the SNP to win 59 seats, Labour to win 21, and Reform UK to win 15; Professor Sir John Curtice's latest projection for the Sunday Times had the SNP on 54, Labour on 20 and Reform on 18, and Dr Kelly's model (using my poll averages as inputs) suggests the SNP on 62 seats, Labour on 16, and Reform on 17. My model would have the SNP on 60 seats, Labour on 17, and Reform on 17. The Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election was called after the death of SNP MSP Christina McKelvie (Image: PA) Read more by Mark McGeoghegan: Historically, a party winning the SNP's current level of constituency and regional list support would only win around 47 seats, even short of Professor Curtice's relatively low projection of 54. The SNP's projected overperformance is entirely a result of the split unionist vote, meaning that the SNP can win as little as a third of the constituency vote nationally while sweeping the vast bulk of Scotland's 73 constituency seats. However, if they failed to win those excess constituency seats, they would not be compensated for them with regional list seats, which are allocated proportionally. So, how fragile is this constituency boost? And what does it mean if more close contests, like Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse, slip through the SNP's grasp? My model suggests that a swing of under 5% from the SNP to Labour, compared to current polling, is needed for the SNP to lose a further eight constituency seats. A further two are vulnerable to the Liberal Democrats in the same way, and six to the Conservatives. The swing from the SNP to Labour in Hamilton was, compared to the modelled result, around four points – enough to flip eleven of those 16 close seats. In other words, if the unmodelled swing away from the SNP in Hamilton is replicated elsewhere next May, the SNP would win eleven fewer seats than expected. Only a couple more would be needed to bring them down to the 47-seat mark. Why does this matter? Even with 54 seats, the SNP would likely be able to govern as a minority requiring the support of only one other party, likely the Greens or Liberal Democrats, to pass budgets and legislation. At 47 seats, they would need at least two partners unless Labour or Reform backed them, making the 2026-31 Scottish Parliament the first without a realistic two-party majority since 2011. That isn't necessarily a bad thing. Voters constantly tell us that they want politicians to work together, and establishing a more consensual style of politics has long been a lofty and distant goal of Scotland's political class. And it's an outcome our politicians should be preparing for in the background ahead of next year's elections. Of course, the respective leaders won't admit it in public, least of all John Swinney, as he pushes to secure a big enough minority to rely on the Greens and Liberal Democrats. Still, such an outcome looks much more likely today than it did two weeks ago. The Hamilton by-election result neither indicated that John Swinney's days as First Minister are numbered nor that Anas Sarwar is on track for Bute House. But it did send an obvious signal: the SNP's position is far more fragile than we thought, and little swings in local areas could dramatically change the complexion of the Scottish Parliament next year. Mark McGeoghegan is a Glasgow University researcher of nationalism and contentious politics and an Associate Member of the Centre on Constitutional Change. He can be found on BlueSky @

Readers Letters: Believe carbon capture project support when we see it
Readers Letters: Believe carbon capture project support when we see it

Scotsman

time40 minutes ago

  • Scotsman

Readers Letters: Believe carbon capture project support when we see it

Chancellor Rachel Reeves says financial backing for the Acorn carbon capture and storage project is coming… but when, asks reader Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... More smoke and mirrors from the Labour Party and the UK Government. From my recollection this is the third time the UK Government has proclaimed financial backing for the Acorn carbon capture and storage project (proposed 20 years ago) but there is still no money on the table. While tens of billions of pounds continue to flow into projects south of the Border, Scotland is supposed to be grateful for the UK Government now declaring financial support for the Edinburgh exascale supercomputer a year after it cancelled funding. Increased public spending commitments have been cynically hailed by Labour Party politicians without reference to projected inflation increases or different spending choices made north and south of the Border. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad To cap it all, Scottish Secretary Ian Murray now hypocritically says that the Scottish Government did not spend last year's Budget increase 'wisely' when much of it was spent on increased public sector wages, while the Scottish Government also continued to mitigate the effects of Westminster-imposed austerity. Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves leaves from 11 Downing Street on Wednesday before heading to Parliament to present her Spending Review (Picture: Henry Nicholls/AFP) Or has the 'Governor' now abandoned the last vestiges of socialist principles he presumably once held and if that is the case why are Scottish trade unions still supporting a Labour Party that in government continues to betray the poor and disadvantaged in Scotland while being complicit in the continuing slaughter and devastation in Gaza? Stan Grodynski, Longniddry, East Lothian Power play It's good that Edinburgh is to be blessed with the UK's most powerful supercomputer, but what about the considerable electricity required to support it? Is there now to be a new power station built? For surely our creaking National Grid system will either need to be upgraded or a dedicated and separately managed power station will have to be built to service it. Elizabeth Marshall, Edinburgh Privacy paramount Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Jane Lax (Letters, 12 June) says the police are recording people's sex wrongly. She writes, 'The law is the law', but her description of the law on this is incorrect. The Supreme Court was clear that its recent judgment on the meaning of trans people's sex applies only to the Equality Act. For other law, it remains the case that a gender recognition certificate changes a trans person's legal sex 'for all purposes' (to directly quote the legislation). The Court also said that discrimination against trans people continues to be unlawful under the Equality Act. For the police to ask victims, witnesses or suspects whether they are trans, as a matter of course, would very likely be unlawful indirect discrimination, undermining trans people's right to privacy. The law allows an exception on a case-by-case basis: when asking is necessary and for a legitimate reason. There will be good reason to record that a suspect or victim of crime is trans in some cases where it is relevant to the nature of the crime, or where an accused person is remanded in custody. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad But for the large majority of offences with non-custodial outcomes – theft, vandalism, speeding, and many more – whether anyone involved as victim, witness or suspect is trans will be completely irrelevant to the offence, and should not be asked or recorded. Tim Hopkins, Edinburgh Driving forces Harald Tobermann (Letters, 12 June) wants even 'more buses to ensure balance and harmony on our roads'. Actually we need fewer buses driving around with few passengers in them. Far too much taxpayers' money is spent on public transport and far too little on maintaining and improving public roads. The chaotic Edinburgh tram project cost £1 billion for eight miles and because it was years late and grossly over budget there was a public inquiry into its failings, which cost £13m. Meanwhile, Edinburgh has been turned into an anti-car city with bottlenecks caused by bus lanes, lack of parking, congestion, potholes, and more patches than Windows Vista. While Newcastle has a three-lane city bypass Edinburgh has a two-lane one which is often at a standstill. Sheriffhall roundabout was supposed to be replaced by a flyover with construction beginning this year. What happened to that? The fact is that road users – commercial and private – are being robbed by central government and mostly ignored by local government in favour of subsidised buses and mass travel. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Take, for example, road fund licence, or vehicle tax as the DVLA now styles it. This is £195 for 12 months for a car with a list price under £40,000, but £620 for the first five years if it is over £40,000. A £40,000 car will trouser the government £8,000 in vat. All this largesse doesn't go back into the road system, it goes straight into Rachel Reeves's piggy bank. A new road construction programme would boost economic development, as would reducing taxes on owning and driving cars, vans and lorries. William Loneskie, Oxton, Lauder, Berwickshire Sick society? Who will win a Scotsman Health Hero award ? Despite the nice picture of him on the front of The Scotsman of 11 June, is SNP health minister Neil Gray really in the running? Our NHS is floundering in a sea of crises, the latest being the recent sharp rise in drug deaths. This is even more awful given the SNP's 'clean' drug usage programme at the Thistle in Glasgow which was meant to really help. It is rumoured that John Swinney is considering a cabinet reshuffle. If Mr Gray goes, who can possibly replace him? This is not because Mr Gray is irreplaceable, more to do with the question as to whether anyone in the SNP is able to do the job following a long line of failures, including Nicola Sturgeon and Humza Yousaf. Mr Gray ought to have been a certainty for a hero award. The likelihood he is highly unlikely to get one speaks volumes. Gerald Edwards, Glasgow Fly high Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Lt Cdr Lester May raises an interesting opinion (Letters, 10 June), but I regret to inform him that he is almost a whole century out of date (and more so in the UK context). Military aviation has become acknowledged worldwide as the primary armed force, without which a modern-day army and navy simply could not function. Postulating that a ship-borne or army-ancilliary alternative to an Air Force could ever work is, frankly, farcical. I could refer him to the many studies from the early 1930s onwards, but I think that the current UK perception as encompassed by the Chiefs of Staff Commitee is sufficient to vindicate a tri-service policy. Iain Masterton, Kirknewton, West Lothian Lines of sadness Former Makar Kathleen Jamie this week, commenting on the unveiling of her words on the Canongate wall at Holyrood, said: 'Poetry is democratic. It's available to anybody – through libraries, through memory.' How right she is. I was reminded of a beautiful poem of hers, 'Lochan', which ends with this line: 'underneath a rowan, a white boat waits'. This poem captures my sadness at the growing evidence of a crisis in democracy in Scotland. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Yes, a white boat waits for us all: possibly beside a flamingo or near a needless wind turbine. Let's hope there are some rowans left when our time comes. Mary Howley, Dunoon, Argyll Ferry tale It is somewhat ironic that EU rules put the final voyage of the Hebridean Isles ferry on hold, given the EU funded its construction (your report, 11 June). A grant from the European Regional Development Fund enabled financing of the project and a senior Director-General from the European Commission attended its launch by the Duchess of Kent at Selby on 4 July 1985. Stephen Fox, Edinburgh Lights out In all my years of attending art galleries and museums, I have never encountered such crass irresponsibility as that of Glasgow's Gallery of Modern Art, which clearly think nothing of putting visitors' safety at the height of the tourist season in jeopardy. The ground floor main gallery 'film installation' exhibition for John Akomfrah's Mimesis: African Soldier is in pitch blackness – apart from the small video screens – and near to its only entrance, hidden in perfect darkness, are two large concrete pillars, impossible to see until one literally walks painfully into them, and particularly hazardous to those coming in from the street whose eyes have had no chance to adjust so as to have the remotest chance of spotting the pillars in time. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad When I pointed this out to a staff member, their response was to shrug their shoulders and laugh. There's a twisted irony that this touchy feely, sensitivity training obsessed art gallery eschews basic common sense, never mind basic health and safety training that would never have allowed this dangerous state of affairs to have arisen, unless Glasgow Life (the city council's deniable asset Culture and Sport wing) are determined to bankrupt themselves in a litany of injury claims. Mark Boyle, Johnstone, Renfrewshire Mystery moon On Tuesday night I looked out to the south from my bedroom window and saw the moon, very full and riding high over the Pentlands, but to my amazement, it was bright red! Can anybody tell me, is this a natural phenomenon or is it a celestial forecast of impending doom? Enlightenment please. Sandy Macpherson, Edinburgh Write to The Scotsman

The SNP could be the largest party in 2026 with just 43 MSPs
The SNP could be the largest party in 2026 with just 43 MSPs

The Herald Scotland

timean hour ago

  • The Herald Scotland

The SNP could be the largest party in 2026 with just 43 MSPs

Writing in The Herald, the Associate Member of the Centre on Constitutional Change said: 'If the unmodelled swing away from the SNP in Hamilton is replicated elsewhere next May, the SNP would win eleven fewer seats than expected. 'Only a couple more would be needed to bring them down to the 47-seat mark.' That would make it far harder for the SNP to form a minority government, the academic said. READ MORE Mark McGeoghegan: Scottish Labour should not be too enthusiastic over Hamilton result Councillors fined for safety failings after disabled swimmer almost drowned SNP on track for Holyrood landslide on 35% vote Sixth Aberdeenshire councillor defects to Reform UK amidst Tory collapse Mr McGeoghegan said that while 54 seats might be enough to govern with support from the Greens or Liberal Democrats. However, with 47 seats, Mr Swinney would need at least two partners "unless Labour or Reform backed them, making the 2026–31 Scottish Parliament the first without a realistic two-party majority since 2011.' Last week's by-election saw Labour's Davy Russell narrowly take the seat by 602 votes, winning 31.6% of the vote to the SNP's 29.4%. Reform UK came a close third with 26.1%. Anas Sarwar hugs Davy Russell (Image: Jane Barlow) Polling ahead of the contest had suggested a tight SNP win in the constituency. Mr McGeoghegan said the final result did not indicate a major shift in the national mood, with both Labour and the SNP landing broadly within the expected margin of error. 'The only party that significantly outperformed their polling was Reform UK,' he noted. Using various national projections, Mr McGeoghegan modelled possible outcomes for the 2026 election if current polling averages hold. His own forecast puts the SNP on 60 seats, with Labour and Reform UK tied on 17. Other models — including those by Ballot Box Scotland and Professor Sir John Curtice — predict similar outcomes, with the SNP between 54 and 62 seats, and Labour trailing in the mid-to-high teens. Historically, Mr McGeoghegan said, a party polling at the SNP's current levels 'would only win around 47 seats.' Their current projected overperformance, he added, is due to the fragmented unionist vote, which allows the SNP to win constituencies with relatively low vote shares. 'The SNP's projected overperformance is entirely a result of the split unionist vote,' he said. 'They can win as little as a third of the constituency vote nationally while sweeping the vast bulk of Scotland's 73 constituency seats.' However, those narrow wins are not compensated on the regional list, he warned, meaning small swings could result in substantial seat losses. Mr McGeoghegan said his model suggests a swing of under 5% from the SNP to Labour could cost the SNP a further eight constituency seats — with two vulnerable to the Liberal Democrats and six to the Conservatives. While Labour welcomed the by-election win as a sign of growing momentum, Mr McGeoghegan warned it remained 'a by-election victory full of caveats.' 'It neither indicated that John Swinney's days as First Minister are numbered nor that Anas Sarwar is on track for Bute House,' he said. 'But it did send an obvious signal: the SNP's position is far more fragile than we thought.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store