Readers' Letters: As Scotland cries out for government, SNP wants to talk Gaza at Holyrood
MSPs have no business spending parliamentary time on Gaza, says reader
It is typical of Holyrood that, after the recess, the plans are to debate, of all things, Gaza.
Not any of the other wars or mass deaths or atrocities in the Middle East, of which there are many, but specifically Gaza.
The very thought of Scottish education, or housing, or the NHS and waiting times, or ferries, or record drug deaths, or the A9, or the tens of millions wasted on crackpot schemes, or in any way bettering the lives of the people they represent in Scotland, does not seem even to enter the heads of those in the SNP who arrange these matters.
Whatever they or anyone in Holyrood have to say or think about Gaza is totally irrelevant. No-one in any position of influence in the world cares or would give their thoughts a nanosecond of consideration.
Please SNP, in the time you have left, get back to concentrating on running domestic matters in Scotland within your remit with even a modicum of competence. Leave the rest of the world alone.
Alexander McKay, Edinburgh
Give peace a chance
Diane Foley has devoted her life to seeking peace after her son Jim was cruelly decapitated by Syrian terrorists in 2014. Fresh from an audience with Pope Leo, Ms Foley relayed their deep concerns over the direction of the Gaza War.
As Ian Petrie suggests (Letters, 30 August) the Pope’s plea to stop the killings and starvation will be ignored. Ms Foley doesn’t think Israel’s Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, is interested in peace or the hostages, but rather saving himself. US President Donald Trump claims to want to stop the killings but supports Israel’s incursion into Gaza City, thus accelerating the genocide of women and children, while Prime Minister Keir Starmer is content to pacify Trump and crystallise the UK’s lack of influence. Failure to grant Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas a visa to the UN assembly confirms Trump’s opposition to a two-state solution, questioning his willingness for peace.
It seems 2025 will be remembered as the year when peace was in reach but those with influence failed to deliver. Warmongers Vladimir Putin of Russia and Netanyahu continue to make gains while “peacemakers” are unwilling to get tyrants to back down through intense pressure. Punitive sanctions on Russia and its trading partners and stopping arms shipments to Israel have been talked about but self interest gets in the way. Trump will give up if he can’t secure peace without compromising his interests.
Leaders need to step up and invest in solutions, otherwise they are complicit in killings. Advisors with Trump’s ear, like Vice President JD Vance, need to ensure Trump’s forthcoming meeting with the Pope has meaning, and pro-Zionist views, like those of envoy Steve Witkoff, are marginalised. Trump can prosecute peace in Gaza and Ukraine but he needs to listen to the right people and want it more.
Neil Anderson, Edinburgh
Overhaul needed
Brian Wilson attacks the “list” system for choosing some of our MSPs (Perspective, 30 August). Judging by readers’ letters, he is not alone in disliking this system.
This stance is illogical Those elected by the first-past-the-post system aren’t known to the people who elect them, they are chosen on the basis of the party they espouse. This was made plain a few years ago when instead of the ballot paper having just a list of all the candidates’ names the party allegiance of each candidate was incorporated.
I would agree that the present voting system for the devolved administration needs an overhaul. The low voter turnout is another concern. I would suggest one course would be to have a much smaller number of MSPs, all chosen on a proportional system and all able to participate in government. A separate part of the ballot to choose the first minister might also encourage persons of some standing to come forward, which I suspect is what Mr Wilson desires
S Beck, Edinburgh
Mine treasure
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch is absolutely right when she says we must continue to drill for oil in the North Sea. Modern civilisation depends on oil and gas production.
Marine gas oil for all the ships at sea – container ships, warships, fishing boats, dredgers, tankers, crude carriers, ferries. Diesel fuel for the excavators which mine rare earths for EVs or dig out the foundations for wind farms, buildings or airports. Avgas for holiday jets, cargo planes, fighter aircraft, air ambulances. Millions of gallons of gear oil for the UK's 13,000 windmills. Plastics to manufacture mobile phones, car parts, surgeons' gowns and visors, TVs and computers, surfboards and dinghies. Gas for propane bottles, industrial use, fire extinguishers and air conditioning units. Oil and gas derivatives for pharmaceuticals of all kinds.
And given the financial crisis which faces the UK economy, with interest payments on debt at a staggering £100 billion a year, it makes sense to boost economic activity in every way possible, and therefore tax receipts. The more firms drilling for oil in offshore waters the bigger the Treasury's tax take.
In addition, misguided people like Ed Miliband also want British coal to remain in the ground, and praise the refusal of planning permission for a new coalmine. But coal is needed to manufacture pristine steel, so if we want to continue to produce fine steel in Britain we need coking coal, as we do for quality cement production. Surely it makes more sense to mine it here than import it via Immingham?
Instead of virtue signalling, and pretending we can control the climate of this complex planet, what is required is maximising all the treasure under our feet here onshore, and extracting as much as possible from the continental shelf. We need an energy abundance, not scarcity. To prepare for climate change we need energy – as much as we can get.
William Loneskie, Oxton, Lauder, Berwickshire
Write to The Scotsman
We welcome your thoughts – NO letters submitted elsewhere, please. Write to [email protected] including name, address and phone number – we won't print full details. Keep letters under 300 words, with no attachments, and avoid 'Letters to the Editor/Readers’ Letters' or similar in your subject line – be specific. If referring to an article, include date, page number and heading.
Comments
Want to join the conversation? Please or to comment on this article.