Louise Renton took this image of a mother sheltering her lambs at Bothwell Farm, Cranshaws, on Tuesday.
Please email photographs, with a brief caption, to firstname.lastname@example.org
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
OUTRAGED EU ENTHUSIASTS
So, for the next two years our fishermen are tied in to existing EU fisheries regulations as part of the Brexit transition agreement.
Shock, horror on the SNP benches at Holyrood and the Walthew residence (letters, March 29).
Am I missing something? These EU enthusiasts are outraged that the Scottish fishing industry is being given the benefit of effectively remaining in the EU for another two years. Surely that goes some way towards what they wanted when they voted “remain”.
Richard Walthew says “fishermen were shafted when we were taken into Europe by the Tories, and they have been shafted again as we are being taken out by the Tories”.
Actually, we were taken in and out by referendums, but let’s go along with Mr Walthew’s alternative truth. His answer to this outrage – and I wouldn’t normally choose to use the following inelegant phraseology – is to shaft them for a third time with independence (throwing the regulatory framework once more into the air), and for a fourth time by re-joining the EU – whose main interest in Scotland appears to be its fish.
You couldn’t make it up, although George Orwell’s “double think” perfectly describes Mr Walthew’s cognitive dissonance.
As for the SNP, for the sake of balance, one must give credit where it’s due.
The Marine Protected Areas created around Scotland by our present devolved government are a welcome first step in protecting biodiversity around our coast.
Unfortunately, sections of the Scottish (and EU) fishing industry are, to say the least, not fully “on board” with the the concept of protecting the marine environment in this way.
MANIPULATING THE ‘LOWER ORDERS’
With the revelations about the questionable practices of shadowy organisations such as Cambridge Analytica, people are becoming more aware of the corrupt ways in which Britain is governed.
Our scandalously-undemocratic UK democracy is essentially dominated by a right-wing establishment consisting of Westminster, Whitehall, the House of Lords, the aristocracy, wealthy elites and corporations, the media, and many reactionary organisations such as The Bow Group, Bruges Group, the Centre for Policy Studies, Margaret Thatcher Foundation, Reform and Scotland in Union.
The sole purpose of all these entities is the domination of life in Britain. During the odd interregnum when the Labour party is in power, little, if anything, changes.
The incubators for these elite characters are Eton, Harrow, Oxford and Cambridge, after which their arrogant sense of entitlement is rewarded by well-paid jobs in the City or politics. The incompetence of many is often exposed, but indulged by their tribal elders.
The overriding objective of the establishment is that it should always remain in power, and no impediment will be allowed to stand in the way of this.
While there have been splits in left-wing political parties, including Labour, it is well over a century since a split occurred in the right. If you watch debates in the House of Commons you may see Tory MPs speak against government policy, such as Universal Credit, but when it comes to a vote they invariably side with the government.
Their only principle is power.
How do inhumane policies such as the rape clause enter the statute books?
A think-tank like the ones listed above will come up with some outlandish idea which will only affect the ‘lower orders’, of course, and which they know the general public will not accept. The idea is fed to supporting papers such as the Daily Mail, Express, Times and Telegraph. Editors know how to manipulate unpleasant news so that gullible readers will accept and indeed approve the measure.
It was in this way that disabled and unemployed people were attacked by their peers because they had been demonised by the Tories and the press, though the idea probably came from a think-tank. So, eventually, the original ‘unacceptable’ idea becomes government policy.
The Scottish people have a chance to escape the corruption, nepotism and rapacity of this system, but it won’t happen if we, the common people, vote for Unionist parties.
WHERE THERE’S A WILL, THERE’S A WAY
As a British Heart Foundation (BHF) professor at the Glasgow Cardiovascular Research Centre, I see first-hand how devastating heart disease can be.
We are determined to spare more families the pain of losing a loved one to these conditions.
Research funded by theBHF has helped halve death rates from heart and circulatory diseases over the past 50 years. So much of our work has only been possible thanks to the amazing individuals who have remembered the BHF in their will. These special gifts fund more than a quarter of all cardiovascular research in the UK.
In the past year people across Scotland left more than £3.8m in their wills to the BHF to help fund life-saving cardiovascular research. I would personally like to honour these people and express our gratitude to their families for making research breakthroughs possible and helping to save thousands of lives.
But there’s still so much more to do, and there are 685,000 people in Scotland living with cardiovascular disease right now. A new study shows that almost a third (31%) of over-65s in Scotland polled said that they would consider leaving a gift in their will to charity – the top motivations for this included “wanting to make a difference” and it “feeling like the right thing to do”.
I would like to say a huge thank-you to all those who have already decided to support the BHF in this unique way and encourage more people to consider doing the same, so we can unlock further medical breakthroughs and save more lives.
A gift of any size, after you’ve provided for your loved ones, will enable the BHF to continue to fund pioneering research so we can beat heart and circulatory disease for good.
To find out more about leaving a gift in your will, please visit bhf.org.uk/wills