Sir, Magnus Linklater (Opinion, Sept 1) is right. Deep divisions have been exposed by both the Yes and No campaigns and opened up wounds which will be hard to heal. The Church of Scotland decided to remain neutral, but influential members of the Kirk deeply committed to social justice, including the leader of the Iona Community Peter MacDonald, are expressing the concerns shared by many of us who work with and for the poorest citizens of England and voting yes.
He said: “I no longer believe the Westminster government is capable of delivering the socially just and equitable society in which I want to live. The British state no longer serves the needs of all its people. Economic policies have favoured the wealthy who have grown richer, and stigmatised the poor and vulnerable who are paying for the failures of the private financial sector.” Even if Scotland votes No the wounds will remain unhealed north and south of the border until confidence of every UK citizen in the fairness of the Westminster government is restored.
The Rev Paul Nicolson
Taxpayers Against Poverty
London N17
Advertisement
Sir, In the wake of the second referendum debate there has been much triumphalism on the Yes side, which feels that Alex Salmond’s performance will lead to ultimate victory. If that proves to be true it is an alarming premonition of “independence” since all he did was heckle Alistair Darling in front of a partisan crowd bent on drowning out any argument it did not want to hear.
This is not what passes for debating in a civilised nation and I doubt any uncommitted voter was converted to the cause of destroying that most successful union: the United Kingdom.
The Rev Dr John Cameron
St Andrews, Fife
Sir, The choice of 2014 for the Scottish referendum may have suited those in favour of independence, being the 700th anniversary of the great Scottish victory over England at Bannockburn. They may have forgotten another important anniversary. It is 500 years since the birth of John Knox, who sought to bring the two nations together and used his influence to enlist English soldiers to fight alongside the Scots, for the first time, to successfully drive out the French from Edinburgh.
Advertisement
He was instrumental in shaping the Scottish character, the national church and other admirable institutions and paved the way for the union of a shared sovereign in 1603 and the eventual complete union in 1707 which has served both nations very well.
Dr Brian Scott
Lincoln
Sir, In championing the use of the current British summer time throughout the year, Stephen Williams (letters, Aug 30) demonstrates the arrogance of those south of the border from which I, for one, would like to escape. Are we to be eternally grateful that we in Scotland are in receipt of that which the UK government has “afforded them in the past”. He gives the game away by declaring only a “passing interest” in the referendum. Perhaps if he had paid more attention he would understand our reaction to such an attitude.
Advertisement
Paul N Hutchison
Crail, Fife
Advertisement
Sir, One of the frustrations of being a Scot in the United Kingdom is the common assumption south of the border that anything true of England must also be true of Scotland. A classic example is Alexandra Frean’s US Notebook (Opinion, Aug 29). She informs us that in the four-year degrees in the US, “students are not required to specialise until the end of the second year”, a system, she adds that, “British universities might do well to emulate”.
Scottish universities have long done this, and their example has influenced the US.
David Stevenson
Professor Emeritus of Scottish History, University of St Andrews
Advertisement
Fife
Sir, Charles McCarthy (letters, Aug 30) says that Scotland would be the only nation that has rejected independence. He seems to have conveniently forgotten that Quebec twice rejected independence from Canada in referendums in 1980 and 1995.
Simon Baker
Hereford