This is how Starmer fixes ‘the Scotland problem’

Letters to the editor: our readers share their views. Please send your letters to letters@independent.co.uk

If the prime minister is serious about resetting the relationship between Westminster and the devolved nations, he must first set a level playing field (Getty)

On winning the election, Keir Starmer said he wishes to reset Westminster’s relationship with the devolved nations. The SNP, representing the wishes of many who would like independence, has had its attempts to secure a second referendum undermined. First by Boris Johnson’s government (despite the nationalist majority in Holyrood) and again by the Supreme Court in November 2022, outlining the constitutional relationship between Scotland and the UK.

Interestingly, Starmer, at the time of the court’s decision, said he would not allow a second referendum if he was in government, even if the Supreme Court agreed it was legal.

If the prime minister is serious about resetting the relationship between Westminster and the devolved nations, he must first set a level playing field. He must play fair and let the people of Scotland know what the democratic route to independence is.

Notably, Anas Sarwar, the Scottish Labour leader, has recently refused to answer this question. A failure to provide clarification on this issue suggests that there is, in fact, no route. If this is the case, the Labour Party, it might seem, is hoping that the 2026 Scottish elections will bring the debate to an end.

With a Labour victory, the issue of independence can be sidelined, avoiding the need to present what might be the uncomfortable truth: that the union of Scotland and the rest of the UK is not a voluntary one.

Stuart Smith

Aberdeen

A shark attack of a different kind

James Dyson has expressed disappointment at the failure of the country – and the Tory party – to offer a welcoming embrace to the appalling damage of Liz Truss and Kwasi Kwarteng’s very special “fiscal event” that ripped through our economy with the suddenness and ferocity of a shark attack. He praised them for “doing the right thing” apparently in the name of growth.

Growth for whom? Certainly not for the economy in general, or for the thousands of families adversely impacted. The consequences will continue for many years to come. That single act was a significant contributor to the massive defeat the Tory party has just suffered.

It seems ironic that his vacuum cleaner business, which moved to Singapore after Brexit (which Dyson supported), is now being mauled by a different kind of shark attack: market competition, which appears to have resulted in a loss of close to a quarter or more of Dyson’s remnant workforce in the UK.

Unlike the record-breaking Truss premiership, the shortest in history, it is an attack that is sadly likely to continue.

David Nelmes

Newport

A blame game

Tony Blair was right to spell out the advantages of a vastly enlarged scope for effective data collection throughout the NHS and health providers. It would undoubtedly lead to substantial breakthroughs in life science research. This research could lead to the eradication of cancer and many other fatal diseases.

However, coming back down to earth for a moment, none of this will be worth a fig unless there is an equal – or even better – emphasis on data security. Data owners have to be kept accountable and responsible for the possible risk of hacking.

Peter Smith-Cullen

Dunston

Socialism is still a dirty word

In response to Frank Sterle Jr, writing to The Independent, I say this: I agree with his sentiment, but there are two facts that make Bernie Sanders replacing Joe Biden impossible.

Firstly, Sanders sits as an independent, albeit with a close relationship to the Democrats.

Secondly, Sanders versus Donald Trump would, I fear, lead to a second Trump presidency. The average American voter still seems to have a fear of socialism, which I believe is the legacy of the “reds under the bed” period, where the fear of communism led to the McCarthy era. Anyone suspected of harbouring socialist sympathies was hounded as unpatriotic and un-American.

Those at the top could never spend all of the money they have in their lifetime, but still don’t want to pay their rightful share of taxes for the common good. Socialism is still a dirty word in the US.

An openly socialist candidate could never succeed for those reasons, meaning a certain second term for Trump.

Karen Brittain

York

Some need a lesson in defeat

If anybody thought that the Conservative Party had learnt a lesson from their recent election defeat, look no further than the former home secretary Suella Braverman’s recent speech. The post-election ceasefire from party infighting is clearly over!

Sayeeda Warsicertainly made her opinion clear, by saying of Braverman: “I have been warning of her brand of toxic, divisive politics for years.”

If this is the start of the new Conservative Party, then I’m sure the vast majority of floating voters will follow me in steering well clear of it.

Geoffrey Brooking

Havant