Readers’ Letters: Remove chips from shoulders and support England

I find it pathetic, yes pathetic, that so many Scots have such a chip on their shoulders, that they wish anyone would beat England in the World Cup.

If the shoe was on the other foot, people in England would want Scotland to win. They would want fellow countrymen to come home with the World Cup. Many Scots, on the other hand, delight in anyone beating England. In one way, it’s quite amusing, but in reality, it is a sad reflection on us in Scotland.

I wish England well and if they come back with the World Cup, I will be delighted. And if there is a public holiday it will be deserved, unlike the one John Swinney granted to Scotland, widely ignored, for simply qualifying. Now that was embarrassing! A holiday for simply qualifying? What a dreadfully low ambition.

Jubilant England players celebrate their victory over Mexico which saw them go through to quarter-finals of the World Cup and a tie against Norway tonight (Picture: Charlotte Wilson/Getty Images)

Brian Barbour, Haddington, East Lothian

Never British

In his latest farewell address (not his first and probably not his last) Sir Keir Starmer referred to “the soul of the nation”, a “vision for Britain’s future” and a “cause that will unite the country [that is] more than a shared value” as it is “a British ideal”.

Starmer fails to understand that Britain is an island group, not a nation. The island group is home to more than one country and several nations. These countries do not share uniform values or national characteristics. When he refers to “the nation” and “the country” it is clear to me that he means only one and that when he refers to “Britain” he considers that interchangeable with “England”.

Starmer’s “British ideal” sits comfortably with his pandering to the parties of the far right that exploit the fears of working people so that they will attack the “strangers” that Starmer said now inhabit these islands.

It sits well with ever increasing investment in an expanding arsenal of weapons of mass destructionat the expense of better support for the working class; it has no problem with a tax structure that places a disproportionate burden on low earners while the rich get richer; it is happy to locate unnecessary nuclear power plants in a country that is rich with renewable energy while the “GB Energy” company that was promised would be located in Aberdeen employs only a negligible number of staff from north-east Scotland.

These are not the values of my country and they surely will not be evident in an independent Scotland.

Starmer and his likely successor the so called “king of the north” (although his “north” is very far to the south of Scotland) need to be very clear that their Britain is one and the same as England. An unprecedented degree of honesty (or the respect that Starmer promised for Scotland) from either or both would see them admit that they offer nothing to Scotland that an independent Scotland could not achieve as well or better for itself and furthermore they will always serve the interests of south-east Britain before their north, let alone countries beyond the English border.

They must not be surprised when I and many like me reject the toxic union and identify as always Scottish, never British.

Ni Holmes, St Andrews, Fife

Language lesson

Colin McAllister is partly correct (Letters, 9 July) when he says that the original language of Scotland was Old Welsh, though it was actually a cognate language called Old Cumbric. It was the language of Hen Ogledd, the men of the Old North. “Y Gododdin”, the earliest work of literature originating from Britain (though not the earliest writing) was written in that tongue and concerns the Gododdin, known to the Romans as Votadini, who feasted at Din Eidyn for a year before 300 of them rode south. Those 300 included Picts, whose language from north of the Forth was at least as old as Old Cumbric. It was not understandable to Gaelic-speaking St Columba, who required an interpreter when he travelled to the lands of the Picts to preach Christianity.

The Gododdin fought the approaching Angles at Catraeth (thought now to be Catterick) and all but three of them were killed. “Y Gododdin” was written by Aneirin who was one of the three. Place names like Penicuik remain from that time, but by the time of the Venerable Bede in the 700s, English-speaking settlers occupied much of the south-east and south-west of present-day Scotland, leaving their mark in place-names like Prestwick, the finest Anglo-Saxon cross in existence at Ruthwell and the English language.

The spread of English was rapid. It appeared in Scotland a century before Gaelic, around 500AD. After Bannockburn, the celebratory poem called “The Brus” was written in “Inglis” in Aberdeen by Barbour. Wallace’s name derives from the Old English, “waelisc”, meaning “foreigner”. In legend, his fiancée is said to have been Marion Braidfute from Lamington and both her name and her village are names with meanings in English. Later, Gavin Douglas renamed the language in Scotland as Scottis.

Andrew HN Gray, Edinburgh

Fire damage

Like many people, I was distressed to see that the former Debenham's store on Princes Street had been severely damaged by fire on Thursday. There does seem to be an alarming number of such places which have burned down or been needlessly demolished over the last 40 years or so. The former inevitably leads to the latter. We just don’t see any attempt to rebuild these wonderful structures and I can’t help feeling that we are all the poorer as a result.

Think of the Palace Hotel at the corner of Castle Street and Princes Street in 1991 (odd, because I remember it as a bombsite in 1982!). Add in the Gilded Balloon, Jenner’s and the College of Art in Glasgow. Remember VA Tech Parson’s Peebles in 1999? My whole office stood and watched that one, with clouds of black smoke rising above the city. Then, there was the fire near Glasgow’s Central Station in March this year.

Of course, some buildings were deliberately destroyed, like the Venetian-styled Life Association of Scotland on Princes Street which was thoughtfully replaced by a blank, concrete structure in the late 1960s.

There were actually plans after the war to demolish the entire New Town, leaving only the Scott Monument standing and having the whole thing rebuilt in concrete. Is someone now trying to finish the job?

Peter Hopkins, Edinburgh

Restoration plea

We are writing on behalf of the Scottish Liberal Club to express our sadness at the destruction by fire of 109 Princes Street.

The Scottish Liberal Club was inaugurated in 1879, the year before William Gladstone became MP for Midlothian and formed the second of his four Liberal governments.

Rapidly acquiring premises at 109 Princes Street, this magnificent building became the centre for political and social activity in the decades of Liberal predominance in Scotland.

We sold the building in 1970 and moved a fine bust of Gladstone and other artifacts into the Debenhams premises next door. “Gladstone’s Library” was a centrepiece of the store until it was sold in 2023.

Fortunately, we moved Gladstone into storage, but we had to leave the valuable oak panelling and other architectural features.

We deeply regret the loss of 109 Princes Street and the damage to the adjoining premises, and urge Historic Environment Scotland, the Cockburn Society and City of Edinburgh Council to work together towards restoring these historic buildings.

Lin Macmillan, president, and Faith Sutherland, convener, Scottish Liberal Club

Trusted facts

Martin Roche writes that if two new nuclear power stations were to be built in the Scotland they would each have an operating life of 40 years (Perspective, 10 July). This is incorrect.

Had Mr Roche kept up with the technology he should be aware that the Nuclear Regulator has extended the operating life span of Sizewell B to 60 years. That is 50 per cent more than the figure he quotes.

He fails to highlight the power source to keep the lights on in Scotland under dunkelflaute weather conditions. In a 21st century economy “the wind will blow for most days of the year” will see a collapse of the economy when the wind does not blow.

The net zero debate really does require a trusted unit to lay out the ground rules for a debate over energy. The SNP have yet to endorse their draft energy paper of 2023. Surely what is needed is for Holyrood to provide a contract to a body such as the Fraser of Allander Institute to provide the basic facts needed to power Scotland after 2045.

Ian Moir, Castle Douglas, Dumfries and Galloway

Déjà vu

It’s déjà vu all over again. I seem to be reading the same letter just about every other day in The Scotsman. Yes, you guessed it. Stan Grodynski (Letters, 10 May) is writing yet again about “broken Britain” and the need, in his view, for “constitutional change”. For some reason, he thinks that a return to Liz Truss and her ignominious 49-day reign are regarded by many as a realistic aspiration and that she and Farage are the only alternative to Scotland going its own way. This is diversionary nonsense.

Why on earth would anyone think that breaking up the UK – broken-up Britain – would solve the problems that there undoubtedly are today? What has this trial run for Scottish separatism, this last quarter of a century, achieved to suggest that Scotland would do better in its own? What would “constitutional change” on its own achieve to make Scotland prosperous, happy and healthy and wise?

Jill Stephenson, Edinburgh

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, and in the body of the email – no attachments – and avoid ‘Letters to the Editor/Readers’ Letters’ or similar in your subject line. If referring to an article, include date, page number and heading. No poems.