I was dismayed to read the emotive language employed by Michael Kelly (Perspective, 21 February). The words “hatred”, “separatists” and “separation” as applied to the SNP and its supporters are
abhorrent in the extreme.
I personally have not heard any SNP representative or leader express such anti- English hatred.
“Suspicion and distrust” of the UK Government is wholly justified. For example, consider the Freedom of Information documents kept secret over the years in relation to North Sea oil.
European funding may be boring for Mr Kelly but I find it highly interesting, considering that the UK Government will control its disbursement throughout the countries of the UK. That’s right, Mr Kelly, Scotland is not a region but a country.
To say that this is an “artificial row” manufactured by Nicola Sturgeon is absurd.
We are entitled to a fair share of any monies due.
This may not happen if the UK Government is not questioned by our majority government here in Holyrood.
The SNP government’s argument is not for “separation” but for independence. “Selfish and isolationist”?
Mr Kelly should really apply those labels to the UK Government.
Look at London and the south-east of England for proof of that. They appear to be doing rather better than the other “regions” of your mother country.
Michael Kelly’s suggestion that Nicola Sturgeon has taken the SNP back to a default position of anti-Englishness is both unfair and below the normally good standard of his pieces.
It is true that a separatist party in the run-up to the referendum can be expected to blame cuts on a London-based UK Government. What else would he expect it to do?
Did his own Labour Party north of the Border never play the England/Scotland card?
I am more likely to end up a No than a Yes voter in the referendum next year but it is inaccurate of Michael Kelly to attribute to the modern SNP an alleged “anti-English” sentiment, which I have never seen or heard it exhibit.
It is disappointing to read Michael Kelly’s puerile sarcasm about Ms Sturgeon on the page opposite Lord McConnell’s balanced approach.
He may have misspoken or misremembered Spiro Agnew, vice president to President Nixon. Agnew resigned in 1973, having been accused of accepting cash payments during his time as governor of Maryland and before.
He did not contest the charge of tax evasion. What relevance this has to Scottish politics escapes me.