Readers Letters: The Mystery of Michael Matheson

Michael Matheson's decision not to re-stand for Holyrood is puzzling. He looked the MSP most likely to do this from the start so why has it taken him so long to come to this decision?

Given his history, the electors in his constituency were highly unlikely to give him their vote in sufficient numbers. This just makes the machinations going on inside the SNP even more questionable. The SNP appears to be adopting Labour's slogan of “change” but only as far as swapping failing current MSP's for SNP MPs who failed in last July's general election.

The hope must be to get as many as possible through by the second preference vote. Is this really what Scotland wants?

After months of calls for his resignation Michael Matheson has announced he won't seek re-election as an MSP next year (Picture: Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images)

Gerald Edwards, Glasgow

Calm waters

Initially reported by many as a “cracked hull”, we now find that the issue with the Glen Sannox was a 5-inch defect in a weld seam in a machinery space near the starboard rudder (your report, 17 March).

On 14 March, the well-known and highly respected UK Defence Journal published an article headed “Glen Sannox temporarily withdrawn from service”.

A marine expert was quoted therein, saying: “From the images available, I believe this to be a minor issue related to stress relief or initial flexing in a welded seam, which is not uncommon for vessels newly in service.”

The article also said: “Even advanced naval warships frequently undergo hull inspections and modifications after their first months of operation” and suggested this does not indicate a flaw in the ship’s design or construction.

The marine expert said the crack would likely be assessed and repaired in short order, which is exactly what has happened.

George S Gordon, Juniper Green, Edinburgh

It’s been a while

The Scotman’s front page report of 15 March describes the MV Glen Sannox as “brand new”. Really? The partially built vessel has been lying in the River Clyde for more than six years and no doubt the hull has been deteriorating throughout this period. Will Arran ever get a good and reliable ferry service?

KW McKay, Carrbridge, Inverness-shire

Can’t see wood

I always find it strange that there can be a disconnect between what we see with our eyes and what we know with our brain. In his article “Why deer could wreck our environment” (Perspective, 15 March), Duncan Orr-Ewing says red deer are woodland animals.

Presumably he just knows this, because his eyes would tell him otherwise! Anyone, surely, can see that red deer can survive well on our open Scottish hills, and have done successfully for the last few thousand years when our hills have been naturally treeless.

If red deer were woodland animals they would not survive if there were no woodland. Is this not obvious? In fact, unlike roe deer, they have a wide ecological amplitude, surviving in both woodland and on open ground.

Red deer eat trees, yes, and this might be one reason trees are rare on the Scottish hills. Modern ecological research highlights the role of large mammals in shaping terrestrial ecosystems, and also that there is nothing natural about low grazing levels.

Why are people so certain trees should be there, when woodland is the least resilient habitat in our hills and the evidence shows it declined naturally?

In terms of peatlands, red deer can do some damage at times, but this must always have been the case. Most are undamaged by deer and, in any case, are of low fertility and not particularly attractive to grazing animals. A report a few years ago by NatureScot showed no correlation, across Scotland as a whole, between the density of grazing animals and the amount of eroding peat.

James Fenton, Oban

Sky high

Councils in Scotland have pleaded poverty and raised council tax to eye-watering levels but they still seem to be able to pay salaries of over £100,000 to numerous staff.

The Taxpayers’ Alliance last year released their Town Hall Rich List for 2022/23 revealing the numbers of council employees with total remuneration of over £100,000. In Scotland Aberdeen City had nine with a top salary of £199,839. The City of Edinburgh had 13 over £100,000 and the highest was £193,306. West Lothian had 13 over £100,000 with the top one on £186,370 and two on £163,013. Glasgow City had 42 over £100,000 with the highest on £278,469, another five over £200,000 and ten on £185,022. They will all have received large salary increases since then.

These highly paid officials have allowed the arrears of council tax to escalate and now the total for Scotland is £1.8 billion, up from £1.3bn last year. Edinburgh has £310 million, Glasgow City £417m and Falkirk, which imposed a 15.6 per cent increase in council tax, has £45m outstanding. No wonder our Scottish council tax bills are high, our roads full of potholes and vital services cut.

Clark Cross, Linlithgow, West Lothian

Divided opinions

It is critical for constructive debate on topical issues that both sides of opposing arguments are presented, and it is laudable that The Scotsman attempts to achieve this in its Letters pages.

The letters of Jill Stephenson and Mary Thomas (17 March) not only represent contrasting opinions but demonstrate different approaches to conveying their respective perspectives.

While Ms Stephenson employs emotive language and narrowly attempts to define Nicola Sturgeon’s contribution to Scottish politics by her advancement of the Scottish Parliament’s cross-party aims to bring Scotland into line with many of our European neighbours on gender recognition reform (in order to ease difficulties experienced by one of the most marginalised groups in our society), Ms Thomas conveys a broader appraisal of Ms Sturgeon’s time as first minister and presents the GRR bill in a wider context.

Most would agree Ms Sturgeon is an intelligent and compassionate individual, and that during her long period in frontline politics she has consistently sought to advance the prospects of the poor and disadvantaged in Scotland, but Ms Stephenson would have readers believe that Ms Sturgeon, thoughtlessly and dispassionately, has “damaged the dignity, privacy and safety of half of our population”.

Certainly the words of Ms Thomas appear more reasonable, as well as less visceral, and others can judge for themselves whether Ms Thomas’s words, or the words of Ms Stephenson, are more “divisive”.

Stan Grodynski, Longniddry, East Lothian

Church decline

The sale of Braemar church building to a hotelier puts the whole future of the Church of Scotland into sharp focus (your report, 11 March). The reason given is a “dwindling congregation”, but sadly, that is an all too sad story nationwide.

The blunt truth is that the Church of Scotland has far too many buildings for all the wrong reasons, historical rather than religious. When the United Presbyterian and United Free churches combined with the Presbyterians in 1929 to form the Church of Scotland, the number of buildings automatically tripled.

While, in the near 100 years since, there have been many Unions and readjustments, there are still too many buildings in city centres and towns, but less so in villages, where they're central to the community.

The time is rapidly approaching when there will be no church presence in an increasing number of villages, perhaps including Braemar, with the decisions being made by remote mega presbyteries, and even more remotely, 121 George Street.

Even in the Church of Scotland's continuing decline, which, after all, is not irreversible, the emphasis should be on parish and community.

Ian Petrie, Edinburgh

Risky talk

I am alarmed at the statement from Sir Keir Starmer that the UK and other countries are preparing “military planning” and moving to “an operational phase” in Ukraine.

Last year the Russian YouTube channel Military Summary published a precis of what they said was a document obtained by Russian military intelligence detailing a British plan for a Nato expeditionary force into Ukraine. It said the first stage would be to introduce a no-fly zone west of the Dnieper river. Immediately after, Nato troops in three spearheads would race towards the Dnieper and fortify that line. Western Ukraine would be brought into the Nato and EU orbit.

That is quite possible since Russia's air force would probably be destroyed if they tried to fight the USAF and the RAF. However, it would appear the USAF is now out of the equation.

Starmer may have this plan, or something similar, in mind but seems to be under the illusion that “boots on the ground” and "planes in the air" in Ukraine will have no consequences here in Britain. Putin has so far not retaliated when Storm Shadow missiles, supplied by us, have been used against targets within Russia. He does, however, have the new Oreshnik missile which can travel at nearly two miles per second, equipped with multiple warheads against which we have no defence.

I just hope Sir Keir is using that well-trodden path taken by leaders struggling at home to big up threats from overseas, and is not really serious of sending Britain's military into Ukraine, otherwise the balloon will well and truly go up.

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.