Readers' Letters: Scottish Government's stance on defence spending misguided

In light of the statement made by Prime Minister Keir Starmer as he unveiled the government’s defence spending plans,and stating that the UK military is moving to “war-fighting readiness”, I could hardly believe an earlier response to part of the plans by the Scottish Government’s Rural Affairs Secretary Mairi Gougeon, in which she stated: “I think the key difference between ourselves and the UK Government is that, when we have principles, we stick to them.”

I therefore have a question. In attempting to repel any future aggressor, and in the increasingly dangerous world we now live in, is it her intention, as a means of protecting these shores, to send our ground troops to the field of battle in fully electric armoured vehicles fuelled/powered and charged by intermittent wind driven turbines and an assortment of other renewable sources playing the bagpipes and waving claymores?

No wonder The UK Defence Secretary John Healey has accused the Scottish Government of “student union politics” over its decison to lock a £2.5 million grant for a specialist welding centre in Glasgow.

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer delivers a speech during a visit to the BAE Systems' Govan facility yesterday (Picture: Andy Buchanan - WPA Pool/Getty Images)

Neil McKinnon, Glenalmond, Perth & Kinross

Only hope

UK Defence Secretary John Healey appears to have an extensive portfolio encompassing many domains of Westminster governance if his pre-publishing preparation of the public to receive the UK Government’s Strategic Defence Review in the press is anything to go by. Aside from geopolitical considerations regarding a £6 billion spend on a dozen attack submarines and 7,000 upgraded long-range weapons of mass vaporisation he repeatedly emphasises the “opportunities for young people” in Scotland in a bonanza of training and employment roles in “strengthening of the British industrial base in more defence investment”.

This in a Scottish nation that harbours the aspiration of unilateral nuclear disarmament to effectively remove our people from the "first strike” and retaliatory Armageddon that would unfold in the opening exchanges of a tactical nuclear war not of our making.

Mr Healey's helpful and farsighted sustainable industrial and employmemt strategies and his threats to bypass devolved government legislation should represent further wake-up calls to to our people about Starmer and co’s commitment to maintaining a world order of mutual assured destruction, with the Union Jack in the vanguard. These captains of our “wellbeing” economy are the same people facilitating genocide in Gaza, prolonging mass death in the Ukraine and who have seriously considered putting our sons’ “boots on the ground”. They must disappoint their corporate and globalist sponsors and leave office at their earliest convenience and before then cease to patronise the Scottish people with thinly veiled attempts to further exploit and subvert the fabric of Scottish life by promises of prosperity based on death products, carbon phobia and fulfilling the role of being the "battery pack" for a failing UK economy.

When will Scottish Labour Party supporters make the leap of faith to secession from Westminster along with the English regions in communion, not union? Therein lies our only hope.

Andrew Docherty, Selkirk, Scottish Borders

Marine marvels

It is forgivable to believe, nowadays, that the Royal Navy is much diminished. If one watches the familiar archive film of the British Grand fleet in the Great War, led by Admirals Jellicoe and Beatty, steaming out of Rosyth or Scapa Flow, the Royal Navy accounted for 622 warships. By 1939, under the command of Sir Dudley Pound, the number had increased to 1410 and Britain ruled the waves. Only China today has a similar fleet.

Yet one item screams out of the pages of the newly published Strategic Defence Review, namely that the UK will build 12 additional attack submarines at BAE in Barrow, creating 30,000 jobs. Under the radar (or sonar!), the UK already has seven of the lethal Astute Class submarines, called “boats” in the Royal Navy. No other superpower has an equivalent.

The seven Astute class are armed with spearfish heavy torpedoes, and Tomahawk missiles, which can hit a target 1,000 miles away; they feature advanced sensors and optronic masts (there is no periscope).They feature Atlas hydrographic high precision echo sounders and, with 39,000 acoustic tiles, defence strategists say they are as quiet as a baby dolphin. They have unparalleled stealth and combat capability and will have for many years. In Nato exercises with the US Navy they could not be located.

They can circumnavigate the globe undetected, producing their own water and oxygen. More importantly, they can be used and have already been involved in conflict (Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya). By the 2030s the deterrent of the Vanguard Class will have been replaced by Dreadnought submarines, which the Astute class also protect. Were the Dreadnoughts to fire their ICBMs, deterrence would have failed.

The Astute Class and its 12 enhancements will provide that crucial deterrent for years to come.

John V Lloyd, Inverkeithing, Fife

Reform’s cuckoo

Extract Nigel Farage from the electoral equation and who exactly does Reform UK have to offer? Like his mentor and onetime best buddy Donald Trump, Farage cuts more of a presidential figure than a largely absentee MP.

In a first test of their popularity in Scotland, the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election, it will be fascinating to see how Reform UK fares. Gerald Edwards, somewhat optimistically, suggests (Letters, 2 June) that they can't lose, even if it's a close thing,

A recent poll has the staggering statistic that 88 per cent of Scots disapprove of Nigel Farage and his policies. Like Boris Johnson before him, we Scots see him for what he is, an opportunistic chancer.

Farage is the cuckoo of British politics, feeding off the ideas of other parties and claiming them as his own. We can only hope that in Thursday's by-election he's flung out of the political nest.

Ian Petrie, Edinburgh

Democratic fails

The democratic process is the loser when politicians prefer to hide rather than face the electorate and be held accountable for their beliefs, actions and party policies. We had two instances of this during the past week.

First when Labour candidate for the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election Davy Russell refused to take part in a hustings debate on Tuesday night.

On Thursday Labour's deputy leader Angela Rayner had been due to arrive at her party's Hamilton HQ at around 1.15pm to do some canvassing with Russell but abandoned this because the Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign group were holding a demonstration outside. It seems she was not keen on being put on the spot as to why her party was continuing to supply military equipment to Israel amidst the ongoing slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza. One of the most interesting aspects of Ms Rayner's visit was that Labour initially advised the Scottish media that they would have absolutely no access to her. Democracy 0, Labour 2!

Alan Woodcock, Dundee

Wasteful

I notice that David Miliband, our green energy guru, is proposing to hike the green levy on our energy bills to help finance the push to reach net zero in a bid to save the world!

It is difficult for anyone who understands how little this country contributes to the overall noxious gases polluting our world how this emphasis on green energy is worth the vast sums of money being extracted from UK households, business and manufacturing to be spent in this way.

Of course, it is not only the green energy monster that has to be fed through taxation, it is practically all aspects of government with their salaries and pension pots that have to be paid for. For example, we hear that over 50 per cent of the cost of running our Scottish Government is spent on staff salary and pensions... how can that be considered an equitable outcome for our taxes? It is as if we, the taxpayers, are funding a shadow economy that is out of our control!

It really is time to say stop, review where we are in economic terms, ask serious questions regarding funding of all national and local government entities and understand just what the important priorities should be for the country.

As we stand at present none of the current main political parties seem ready to grasp the nettle regarding running our country, concentrating on future needs.

Obviously, the future is a great unknown, however, some of the future requirements should be coming clearer. For example, we know future energy requirements will be at least treble that of today and energy costs need to be reduced markedly. We also know that robotics, AI and IT will impact greatly on the job market in a negative way in terms of job opportunities at the lower skill level end.

In addition there will be need to be a sea change in the perception of the majority of the population as there will be a greater acceptance of self reliance rather than government assistance

In short, back to basics principles of small government, low taxation – and so far none of the political parties (or the voting public) seem ready to embrace this philosophy.

A Lewis, Coylton, Ayrshire

Blind spot

In yesterday’s Now and Then column there was this entry for 1924: The US Congress confirmed citizenship on American Indians. Considering the indigenous people were already there, that was very magnanimous of them.

C Lowson , Fareham, Hants

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.