Readers' Letters: SNP leadership has done precious little meaningful listening

In his speech at the SNP conference, Humza Yousaf said that to achieve independence there would be a need for “listening, campaigning, persuading” (“Yousaf sees off independence strategy rebellion”, 16 October). His predecessor Nicola Sturgeon said similar things at previous conferences. Yet the reality is that over the last decade the SNP leadership has done precious little meaningful listening, preferring to only hear those who agree with them, and when it comes to persuading, their style on all manner of issues has been to seek to impose their dogmatic views and policies on the rest of us.

'Listening, campaigning, persuading' are Humza Yousaf's watchwords on winning Scottish Independence (Picture: Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images)

That just leaves campaigning, and sadly that is the one thing that the SNP has majored on, so often prioritising political point scoring and posturing over effective government.

There is little reason to think that the continuity First Minister, or “First Activist”, to use his own suggested alternate persona, will be any more interested in responding to the opinions of the majority of Scots, or any more successful in winning them over.

Instead it seems we must all join the long wait for the 2026 Holyrood elections. Then at last there is hope that the SNP will be delivered a message from an electorate sick and tired of incompetence, obsession and denial from those who have built a reputation for missed targets, failures and scandals. When they first came into power the SNP promised to give us a new kind of politics. Few predicted how this would prove to be the case for all the wrong reasons.

After 16 years of government founded primarily on grievance and divisiveness, we must hope that the pool of people willing to be taken in by SNP spin and promises will continue to decline.

Keith Howell, West Linton, Scottish Borders

We see you

You might wonder why – given that the SNP have a majority of Westminster seats at the moment – such a target should be considered a mandate for independence at the next election? The answer is simple. In no previous election has independence been the focus of an SNP campaign. Indeed, in some cases the word “independence” barely got a mention – not that that prevented them from claiming, post-election, that every vote cast for them was in fact a vote for independence!

So why the change of tack to put independence at the forefront in the next election? Surely not a long overdue outbreak of honesty with the electorate! The answer is again simple. The SNP could not possibly hope to run a successful campaign based on their record in government. On the issues that matter to the public such as the health service, education, the economy – I could go on – not to mention the disastrous handling of major projects such as ferry or road building, the polls show that the electorate are seeing the SNP for the floundering, feckless and incompetent lot they have been for many years.

No doubt it is the “First Activist” in Humza Yousaf that makes him so predisposed to wheeling out the word "inspire" at every opportunity. I wonder how many Scots will be inspired by this latest – the fourth, is it? – position on how to achieve independence? Or who will even care?

Colin Hamilton, Edinburgh

Yes will prevail

In line with the Scottish political conference scene I welcome the support of Edinburgh University's Professor Lindsay Paterson and his research on independence, going back to 1979; the year the first referendum for devolution occurred. His firm conclusion, like that of Sir John Curtice, is that support for independence "is not going away” and a majority of “above 60 per cent” will happen in the very near future.

The research, now published in The Political Quarterly, also concluded that “the level of support for independence, and of opposition to it, are unlikely to be effected by the transient fortunes of the SNP”.

It’s now abundantly clear that young Scots – and indeed, people born since the late 1960s – are pushing the Yes campaign for independence, irrespective of any political agenda.

Grant Frazer, Newtonmore, Highland

Bin the Lords

Sixty years ago, on 19 October 2023, the Earl of Home in the House of Lords, later Sir Alec Douglas-Home, became Prime Minister. He was the choice of the outgoing Harold Macmillan, a choice endorsed by the Queen. In the Letters page of The Scotsman on 23 October 1963 J Sneddon wrote: “A Prime Minister has now emerged who has still to be elected to the Commons! What kind of democracy has ours become to countenance such an abuse?” Such an abuse has not been repeated – yet. The “i” newspaper of 6 October 2017, on the question of whether Ruth Davidson could become Prime Minister, reported “Political commentator David Torrance points out that, constitutionally, being an MP is not a prerequisite to becoming prime minister. ‘Sir Alec Douglas-Home was PM for two weeks without being an MP, pending a by-election in Perth,’ he said.”

Fundamental to this abuse is that the House of Lords is unelected by registered voters. The Liberal, Conservative and Labour parties have all failed to either abolish the second legislative chamber, or reform it into a fully elected body. This failure has led to absurdities like the election in the House of Lords on 13 June 2023 of the hereditary 7th Earl Russell to replace the 15th Viscount Falkland. Or the arrival in the Lords on 12 July 2023 of the former Conservative special adviser Baroness Owen of Alderley Edge, the youngest recipient of a life peerage. Registered voters didn’t get ballot papers for any of this. People who think that the UK is, or could become, a full democracy are kidding themselves.

Labour has backtracked on Lords’ reform. I couldn’t find any mention of the Lords in Keir Starmer’s conference speech or in Labour’s five missions. I support the SNP’s opposition to the House of Lords, and its principled refusal to nominate peers. An independent Scotland would be free of the House of Lords, and would be a full democracy.

E Campbell, Newton Mearns, East Renfrewshire

Raise cycling VAT

Cycling is good for the physical and mental health of people. However, while there are some designated cycle routes there are definitely not enough.

Living in the Highlands I see every day cyclists being forced to share the smaller roads with motorists, which is a danger to both parties. More designated lanes for cyclists need to be made.

This, however, needs to be funded and with the parlous state of public finances there simply isn’t the money available for this. An equivalent to the vehicle excise duty for cyclists would no doubt cost more money to implement and enforce than it would bring in to the public purse to fund these improvements.

A scheme which I believe would be cheaper and easier to implement would be to increase the VAT on cycles and cycling products. This would bring in much-needed cash to bring about these improvements.

If an extra two per cent was added to the VAT then a cycle costing £1,000 with the VAT bringing it up to £1,200 would then cost £1,220. If someone can pay £1200 for a bike then an extra £20 wouldn’t break the bank. That sum of £20 would be ringfenced solely for improvements to the cycling network. Cycling products would include helmets, clothing and the mechanical parts for cycles.

While it would no doubt not bring in all the money required for the improvements, it would at least be a start.

Chris Henzler, Bonar Bridge, Highland

Raw nerve?

In his attack on me Benedict Bate wrongly states that I inferred that all cyclists were rogue cyclists (Letters, 11 October). Perhaps I touched a sensitive nerve and as a cyclist he was not happy. For his information, I have been a driver for 60 years and have had, touch wood, no accidents or speeding offences. Perhaps this was helped by passing the Advanced Driving test all those years ago. Perhaps there should be an Advanced Cycling test and Benedict Tate could show us his certificate.

Clark Cross, Linlithgow, West Lothian

Pie in sky

Promoting a four-day working week is another pie in the sky Continuity SNP/Green illusion to entice the gullible into supporting them. This, along with guaranteed basic income and countless other freebies, would be funded by “Scotland’s vast renewable resources” and taxing wealthy Tories after “de-colonisation”.

It may indeed suit some journalists like Laura Waddell (Perspective, 12 October) to go “Zooming into meetings from home” rather than actually being in the office. This model might even boost productivity in certain private companies, as her quoted research suggests. That’s entirely their business, and good luck to them.

But is Ms Waddell seriously suggesting that the NHS could function if this practice was universally adopted? What about law enforcement? “Sorry, there’s nobody here to respond to your emergency right now, we’re on flexi-time. Please try calling later.”Would schools and nurseries only operate Monday-Thursday in the People’s Republic of Scotland? Imagine what nationalised ScotRail services would look like.

Or would this experiment be confined to the ever-increasing number of civil servants employed by the Scottish Government?

Martin O’Gorman, Edinburgh

​Give VAR boot

With reference to your editorial of 14 October may I add that it seems VAR’s main contribution to football is the removal of why we watch it. Goals.

Lewis Finnie, Edinburgh

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.