Readers' Letters: UK must beware of Covid from China flights

It’s clear that reports from China show the Covid epidemic there far from being kept under control.

How much of a danger are travellers from China after Covid restrictions were eased there? (Picture: Adobe)

Yet with the Chinese government easing restrictions on international travel, there is surely an increased danger that travellers from China into the UK are raising the risk of increased Covid infections and other variants in this country.

With half the passengers on a flight from China to Italy having been found to be infected with Covid, it's surely prudent that the UK should follow Italy and the US's example by requiring a negative test from travellers from China until the situation is rationalised and the risk assessed. We know that the Chinese government is secretive and cares little for those outwith China and even those within, so the UK government should not be complacent and should put the welfare of its own citizens first.

Bob MacDougall, Oxhill, Stirlingshire

Our own way

The Treaty of Union and all that has followed, including parliamentary devolution, is clear. Scotland has always been, and still is, free to follow its own paths in crucially important issues like health, education, and the legal system. Elizabeth Scott provides a list of outcomes of these powers, including free personal care, brought in by the Labour/Lib Dem coalition (Letters, 29 December).

But she is mistaken when she suggests that Westminster wants to curtail or take over such devolved competencies. The NHS in England has its own problems, and shows absolutely no desire to take over the failing Scottish one. If Scottish universities want to take large numbers of fee-paying students from abroad to make up for the feeble funding they get from the Scottish Government, nobody at Westminster will stop them. And the debate we are having about the Not Proven verdict is a brilliant example of the idiosyncratic independence of the Scottish legal system.

Hugh Pennington, Aberdeen

Bankrupt ideas

Elizabeth Scott gives us an impressive list of the benefits bestowed on us by the SNP Government, from free prescriptions to free university education. I won't itemise them all but we have seen the list many times previously.

Just how many of those benefits does she think we would still be receiving if Scotland had been independent in 2020 and had had to borrow the many billions of pounds needed to cope with the pandemic, instead of having the money pumped into our economy by the UK Treasury?

We would already be suffering massive tax increases and massive cuts in public services, many times more stringent than anything in John Swinney's recent budget. And worse would be still to come with another massive round of borrowing in the offing, necessitated by the energy crisis resulting from Vladimir Putin's war in Ukraine. Does she really want to live in an independent bankruptcy?

D Mason, Penicuik, Midlothian

A Saltire shared

Once again a letter talking about the choices of independence is accompanied by a photo of a Saltire and a Union Jack, as if those represent the two options (Letters, Scotsman Online, 29 December).

The Saltire is a powerful symbol of Scotland, and belongs to all of us, including those who still believe Scotland is better off (in the long run) remaining part of the Union. So why has it been allowed to be appropriated by the subset of Scots who want to leave?

Please recognise that we are all arguing for Scotland and what we think is the best way forward, and let those of us who think the best option is remaining part of the union proudly claim the Saltire as well.

Ian Brockbank, Edinburgh

Balancing act

Reading the Letters columns in The Scotsman of 27 December, I found myself in broad agreement with Victor Clements and Gerald Edwards in their criticism of the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill and the procedure leading up to its passing. Mr Clements also pointed out the necessity of having another body, such as a second chamber or, in this case, the Supreme Court to ensure mature scrutiny of proposed Bills.

On the other hand I completely disagree with the letters of James Scott and Stan Grodynski, in which they follow the party line of “She who must be obeyed”. This was an issue on which every party should have allowed a free vote. I applaud those MSPs who defied their party’s whip to vote according to conscience. I also pay tribute to the many women, both famous and obscure, who, often at great cost to themselves, have spoken out in defence of women’s rights, which have been ignored in this Bill. Assurances to the contrary are just not credible.

Among the many worrying aspects in this legislation is the requirement to make a commitment under oath to live as the opposite sex for the rest of their lives. Will the penalty of a fine or prison sentence deter the immature or uncertain? Ought such a person who later regrets their transition be criminalised when they de-transition? Will this provision become a dead letter? What about those who have no fixed gender identity?

The success of this small minority in sponsoring this legislation and the virtual blocking out of those who put forward a contrary position backed by evidence is worrying. The LGBTQ+ movement has been so successful in implanting their seeming belief that sex is a many gendered thing in all sections of society that many of our institutions have been strongly influenced. The most worrying aspect is its capture of the education system, so that young children are being taught a biased view of sex, gender and sexuality which has no scientific basis and is in danger of destabilising young people.

Certainly LGBTQ+ people should be given their full civil rights, but this does not include infringing the civil rights of others for freedom of speech and belief.

(Rev Dr ) Donald M MacDonald, Edinburgh

Quiet energy

Why do politicians fail to point out to voters that a phase out of gas (currently 10p/unit) and replacement by electricity (currently around 35p/unit) will result in a massive increase in household and NHS energy bills, especially as gas supplies four times the energy demand of electricity?

Ian Moir, Castle Douglas, Dumfries & Galloway

Write to The Scotsman

We welcome your thoughts. 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. No letters submitted elsewhere, please. If referring to an article, include date, page number and heading.

Subscribe

Subscribe at www.scotsman.com/subscriptions