Stronger voice

3
Have your say

David Mundell MP offered the SNP a massive open goal when he challenged them to outline what changes they’d make to the welfare system if given the opportunity (your report, 30 June).

Any other party would have leapt at the chance to outline their plans to help people back to work and support society’s most vulnerable.

Instead, the SNP’s Dr Eilidh Whiteford was left mumbling about the need for more powers with no idea of how they would be used.

Similarly, on Monday Ian Murray MP gave the SNP an opportunity to have their full fiscal autonomy policy evaluated by a truly independent panel of experts.

The backing of such a group would have made full fiscal autonomy all but certain. Rather than backing the proposal, however, the SNP group in Westminster chose to work “hand in glove” with the Tories to block Murray’s amendment.

Stewart Hosie MP, the SNP Deputy Leader, had to fall back on Nationalist rhetoric to distract his core support – questioning SNP policy in such a way was “talking Scotland down”.

Both these episodes show that the SNP group in Westminster has no real aim other than to manufacture grievances in order to bring Scotland closer to a second decisive referendum.

Is this the stronger voice for Scotland we were promised?

(Dr) Scott Arthur

Buckstone Gardens

Edinburgh

It is astonishing that, in the 
debate about more powers for Holyrood, Scottish Secretary David Mundell should demand from the SNP a description of the measures it would introduce on welfare.

So, victory in the 2016 Holyrood elections has been conceded to the SNP – an admission of 
defeat!

As the Smith proposals were influenced most by the unionist majority parties, and therefore more in accord with their wishes, it is they who should also be divulging their own proposals – or are they all content with the delivery of welfare along the present lines from Westminster?

Douglas R Mayer

Thomson Crescent

Currie

Back to the top of the page