Readers' letters: A painless way to contribute to the NHS

In my lifetime, I am fortunate to have only ever needed one prolonged course of medication. I was very grateful for this and would willingly have paid for it but, being resident in Scotland, there was no method by which any payment could be taken. I believe unreservedly that people who require long term life-preserving and life-enhancing medication should not be required to pay for it and likewise for low-income families. However, the cost of a year’s supply of my medication based on England’s current prescription charges would have amounted to the equivalent of the cost of half a cup of coffee shop coffee each week.

I am so grateful for our NHS that I would like to contribute so that its limited resources could reach further but my £120 a year would get lost in a huge ocean. However, I know there are more people of similar mind around and we all know the powerful effect many little drops can have when joined together.

We have seen this effect evidenced in the huge amounts raised for good causes since retailers were required to charge for carrier bags. It is possible for technology to enable money to be “hived off” at retail pay points into separate and dedicated accounts.

In this anniversary year I would love to see something similar put in place for acquiring funds to go to the NHS. A set amount, say 10p, could be activated on request at checkout or it could be by a rounding up to the nearest pound.

An annual public account of the amount collected could be published along with which section of the NHS has received it. Maybe the NHS could designate a specific area for a year, such as replacement of outdated equipment, cancer medication or local hospital improvement so that people could have “ownership” of the cause.

​This has no connection with private medicine and no donor would reap any individual benefit but public accountability, even just a single annual statement of income and to what aspect of NHS life it had been allocated, would be an important element in guarding against any misconceptions.

​Gail Keating, Bonnyrigg, Midlothian

Royal welcome

I enjoyed the events of Wednesday when the King and Queen were at St Giles’ and where he accepted the Honours of Scotland ().

I remain unconvinced about the Stone of Destiny’s actual relevance to Scotland’s kings (and queens). It may well have been used at Westminster since the time of Edward I, but I still regard it as Scotland’s biggest and best joke against the English. The real stone would be something from the Middle East, not Scottish sandstone. The stone to which I have referred in previous letters is black basalt and carved, probably by Pictish craftsmen. Basalt is much more likely to come from the Levant. Sandstone is not and the Stone is said to have been Jacob’s pillow, I believe, which would tend to rule out the lump we call the Stone of Destiny.

That apart, I was interested to see that a crowd of noisy republicans were carefully positioned outside St Giles’ and that the Scottish Government and Edinburgh Council had a say in that positioning, not just the police. It must surely be a pure coincidence that we have a republican First Minister and republican Green MSPs in the Scottish Government? The latter could not bring themselves to represent the people of Scotland (who didn’t elect them) at a service to confirm Scotland’s Head of State. Pure chance, then, that their howls of “not my king” could be heard during sacred moments of the service?

Strange too how those republicans who were interviewed on the BBC were all, by accent at least, English.

Andrew HN Gray, Edinburgh

Lang Siege

The BBC’s excellent commentary on the big royal event in Edinburgh on Wednesday failed to mention, as the royal cavalcade passed John Knox’s House that the building was for much longer owned by James Mossman, court jeweller, who was executed following the 1571-1573 ‘Lang Siege’ of Edinburgh Castle along with Kirkcaldy of Grange 450 years ago this summer.

His father, John Mossman had been the chief creator, in 1540, of the crown, the oldest in Britain, which has since been the centrepiece of the Honours of Scotland.

Hamish Allan, Edinburgh

President Charles?

When Patrick Harvie made his first speech as an MSP, it was about gay rights. A gay colleague complained to me: “What's he doing, his priority is meant to be the environment.”

The point was well made. The Scottish Green Party is too small to pontificate on side issues that make not a jot of difference to saving the planet. However they could be of some use by inviting King Charles III to be ‘President of Scotland’.

The King would, of course, have to prorogue the Westminster parliament, declare Scotland an independent country, come to the Scottish Parliament, be elected as our first democratically chosen head of state, then abdicate as king of England.

In return he would be given the right to say anything he pleases here, thereby throwing off the stultifying shackles of monarchy, whilst retaining a title. This way everyone would be happy. No need for a second referendum and we would gain a powerful voice on green issues.

H Belda, Penicuik, Midlothian

Real security

I presume that Martin O'Gorman (Letters, 6 July) uses the train service the NHS, and that he or his children/grandchildren will have attended school in Scotland unless they were privately educated.

The idea that paying a fair and reasonable wage to those employed in these sectors is unaffordable or that it causes inflation is simply laughable.

It does, of course, presume that the health and education of Scotland’s people is in itself security, rather than the already delayed and over budget new Dreadnought class of even more highly accurate submarines due to replace Trident.

For some reason Mr O'Gorman and his friends never criticise the overstaffed, out-of-control Ministry of Defence or the ever increasing money we pour into the most highly subsidised monarchy in the world. If we had the Swiss referendum model of direct democracy we could give our views on these issues but I rather suspect the outcome would not be to Mr. O’Gorman's liking.

Marjorie Ellis Thompson, Edinburgh

Biden’s folly

There are worrying report that the Chinese authorities are further building up their use of fossil fuels in enhancing their military’s strength to attack and take over Taiwan.

Meanwhile, the US’s policies, directed by President Biden, are severely curbing their abilities to maintain their military preparedness by switching from petroleum to unreliable “renewable” wind and solar power-based electricity generation.

Fears of developing, malign Chinese military and industrial world domination are being intensified by such potentially dangerous, allegedly “green” US policies.

Charles Wardrop, Perth, Perth & Kinross

Wisdom of age

How is it that a 20-year-old student was ever considered to be the best person to represent a constituency and party in Westminster? Mhairi Black has announced that she will not stand next year (Scotsman, 5 July) and I say not before time. She is a prime example of “talking the talk” and then what?

We should have a lower age limit and evidence of proper work before people can apply to represent others – 30 years old, for example.

Alison Fullarton, Eyemouth, Scottish Borders

Shallow politics

Mhairi Black MP cites the “toxic” working atmosphere at Westminster for her decision not to contest the next general election, but surely the more honest explanation is that she can see the political pendulum swinging against her and her colleagues, and she simply doesn’t want the embarrassment of having the electorate rejecting her.

Ms Black was lauded as a 20-year-old going to Westminster, and for her well-advertised maiden speech, but the reality is that she hasn’t done much compared to her predecessor, and has just been as feeble as the other 44 SNP MPs in their failure to make any impact there, for Scotland, for their constituents or for the UK.

What we need is someone with life experience who can work with others and make a difference, and who can work in a more effective way. Ms Black is a product of the shallow, superficial politics we have had in Scotland for 15 years or so now.

Victor Clements, Aberfeldy, Perth & Kinross

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.