Readers' Letters: No Commonwealth Games marathon is a missed chance to promote Glasgow

Eilish McColgan of Scotland performed heroics at this weekend’s London Marathon to be the first female British finisher, despite suffering a severe injury during the race.

In the men’s race, Sabastian Sawe of Kenya made world history by becoming the first official sub two-hour marathon runner.

Unfortunately, neither Eilish nor Sabastian will be able to run in this year’s Commonwealth Games marathon. Why? Because there isn’t one. The Commonwealth Games organisers should hang their heads in shame for excluding the marathon, one of the oldest and most classic events in international sport.

Scotland's Eilish McColgan crossed the finish line of the women's London Marathon in seventh place, making her the first female British finisher (Picture: Alex Davidson/Getty Images)

Despite the financial difficulties faced by this year’s Games, the marathon could have been self-financing if it were a mass participation event, with the elite athletes representing their countries starting ,say, 20 minutes before the mass participants, who would pay an entry fee. I put this proposal to the Commonwealth Games Federation (CGF) over a year ago but received no satisfactory response. If the CGF felt incapable of organising a marathon they could have sought the assistance of the organisers of the London Marathon or the Edinburgh Marathon or the Great Scottish Run.

Because of CGF incompetence, a huge opportunity has been lost to showcase Glasgow and Scotland to a worldwide TV audience. I fear for the future of the Commonwealth Games because the current organisers are not fit for purpose.

Scotland and our Commonwealth deserve better,

Dennis Canavan, Former Convener of the Cross-party Sports Group in the Scottish Parliament, Bannockburn, Stirling

Answers please

Newspaper columns and letters pages are full of anguished pleas and well meaning suggestions from citizens who despair of the state of our politics. So here's another, the difference being that this one would work, would improve the public's view of politicians, would cost nothing and could be implemented immediately.

All that is required is for the Speaker at Westminster and the Presiding Officer at Holyrood to reprimand evasive answers to parliamentary questions and, if necessary, to require the question to be asked again (and again and again) until it is answered properly.

Graham M McLeod, Kinross, Perth and Kinross

No change

I am sure if the electorate in 2014 had known that the “change” they were promised by the Better Together campaign would change absolutely nothing they might have changed the way they chose to vote. So are those who were children in 2014 and now get to vote unionist or nationalist? Are they part of the so-called unionist vote or the nationalist vote or is the truth that there is no such thing?

Maybe if unionists had actually delivered some of the change they promised in 2014 instead of believing that having won the referendum they didn't have any obligation to do anything, this subject would not be the live issue it is now.

The first thing that happened after the vote was the announcement of English Votes for English Laws. Then we had the Brexit referendum, despite being told the best way to stay in EU was to vote No.

When the vote was out, despite these promises, David Cameron could not deliver and the problem was passed to Theresa May, and when she couldn't deliver, to Boris Johnson. Then when the Johnson ministry collapsed, as if things could not get any worse, it was Liz Truss as leader and Prime Minister.

When she won the watch for the shortest-serving prime minister, having wrecked the economy, the person left holding the baby and who was forced to call the inevitable election was Rishi Sunak. That led to Sir Keir Starmer and the Labour Party government on a promise of – yes, you've guessed it – change.

So if Westminster won't change then perhaps the electorate is forced into drastic measures to force the necessary change, such as proportional representation, preferably the Single Transferable Vote, House of Lords reform or abolition, and federalism as absolute minimum.

Failing that, Scottish independence it will be, apparently, and the only folk to blame for that are the unionists and the federalist politicians for using the word “change” to win elections without changing anything.

Peter Ovenstone, Peterhead, Aberdeenshire

Ordering doctors

As a retired GP I agree with the BMA Scottish GP Committee article on the front page of Saturday’s Scotsman (“GP services left ‘in peril’ say doctors”). Walk-in clinics are not the solution to patient access.

In the run-up to the Scottish election next month every party has pledged to stop the 8am rush and improve GP availability. I have heard this at every election and no party has come up with a workable solution. This is partly because there is no one plan that fits all. Patient needs are different in Stornoway compared to at a deprived inner city practice.

A practice’s ability to see patients depends on many factors including location, the number of patients on the practice list and the make-up of the list. including age, ethnicity and deprivation. Premises, staffing levels – both of doctors and admin staff – all play a part. I worked in a large health centre with several practices. Some used an open access model where patients turned up at 9am and would be seen. Online triage was another model. We used a system which had most appointments bookable on the day. We also provided bookable-in-advance appointments and had urgent slots at the end of each surgery to cope with unexpected demand. We tried to have a GP free most of the day to triage any extra contacts and deal with them appropriately. The system was not perfect but it worked for us and our patients.

Each model was developed over time to cope with practice resources and specific patient demand. I suspect that any political party's GP access plan will fail unless practices are allowed, within reason, to develop and be resourced to provide practice and population-specific ways of improving patient access. This individual way of working used to be a strength of General Practice and I hope it won’t be lost.

(Dr) Gordon Scott, Edinburgh

Falklands problem

Recent concerns about the attitude of the USA to British ownership of the Falkland Islands seem to have slipped very quickly from the news agenda but this doesn’t mean the matter has been resolved

My understanding is that Great Britain (as it was then) took over the uninhabited islands to use as a coaling station for the fleets it sent out far and wide to rule the waves.

Those fleets no longer exist and if they did they would not be fuelled by coal, so there seems to be no strategic reason for the UK to hold onto them at continuing expense.

The islanders, when they were last able to express an opinion, voted overwhelmingly for the Falklands to remain a British possession, but the power of the UK has withered greatly since the Falklands War and I doubt if it could cobble together anything like the force that was mustered then.

I think it unlikely that the islanders would want to throw in their lot with Argentina but I imagine the USA would not view with equanimity the possibility of the islands being taken over by a hostile power, so perhaps it will come round to making the islanders an offer the majority of them are inclined to accept.

S Beck, Edinburgh

Memo to King

King Charles faces a difficult state visit after the Pentagon released a memo of a review of its support for British sovereignty over the Falkland Islands. This has nothing to do with democracy, demonstrated by 99.8 per cent of Falkland Islanders wanting to stay British, it is retaliation for not joining US action against Iran. To say this is petty parochialism is an understatement. The UK had to go it alone to retake the Falklands with minimal US help, their ambassador to the UN favouring Argentina.

The UK and other European nations are not “freeloading”, as US Secretary of War “Pistol” Pete Hegseth claims. According to the House of Commons the UK exports more to the US than any other nation. It needs us more than we need it. The UK could easily trade more with Europe, including on defence, rather than with the US.

Europe would rather have the US in Nato, however, while it builds up its own forces. King Charles should use his visit to demonstrate how Nato has kept world peace for nearly 80 years. He should state how the UK stands with Europe in successfully supporting Ukraine in its fight against Vladimir Putin and how Russian influence in Eastern Europe has been blunted by democratic power in Hungary.

US President Donald Trump must be left in no doubt that the tide is turning towards a more liberated and united Europe, with the UK playing a central role. He must be convinced that through respecting the UK and Europe he has more to gain than wooing Putin and China’s Xi.

Neil Anderson, Edinburgh

Free for all

I've got a great vote-winning idea for First Minister John Swinney.

Instead of trying (and failing) to cap prices on boring stuff like eggs, milk and bread, or free schoolbags, why not offer everybody who votes SNP on May 7 a £50 voucher for Just Eat, McDonalds or Greggs?

Nothing like a Krispy Kreme, Steak Bake or Big Mac to get the Indy juices moving, and the ideal snack for the interval at the £200-worth of SNP-approved list of “cultural events”! Leave food rationing and low-carb diets to Reform and the Tories!

Allan Sutherland, Stonehaven, Aberdeenshire

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, and in the body of the email – no attachments – and avoid 'Letters to the Editor/Readers’ Letters' or similar in your subject line. If referring to an article, include date, page number and heading. No poems.