The Spectator's Notes

DougS

Chuck:

Generally a good column . . . as always. But you buggered it about a Scottish independence referendum.

The Tores should support a referendum simply because they only have one Scottish seat? How cynical and cold is that? Maybe the Tories (aka the "Unionist Party") actually as a philosophical issue support Union. Don't you?

Your columns always focus on propriety, personal and political . . . as they should. As one of your erudition and accomplishment and faith and decency should. And as you did in the piece on Mrs. Blair.

Why the sudden descent to opportunistic politics?

There probably ought to be a referendum (unfortunately), given how devolution has been handled and where the issue is right now politically. Another Labour constitutional cock-up of historical proportion. But there it is. Gotta' deal with it.

A referendum will likely lose but can be brought up again and again in the hope that it might win, meaning there will always be some doubt as to Scotland's commitment to the Union.

Too bad about that . . . and all the other things Labour has done in the past 11 years to mess up Britain.

I can see you acknowledging the inevitability of at least a referendum but am surprised and disappointed at your reason for supporting one.

Let's hear some interesting (interim) material on Lady Thatcher!

aristeides

Scottish politics won't be "resolved" by a referendum on independence: these issues roll on and on. Look at Quebec or the republic issue in Australia for comparisons.

Alex Salmond would be far cleverer to hold a referendum on joining the Euro in Scotland - that really would set the cat amongst the pigeons!

David Short

I would imagine there would be a majority in England to get rid of Scotland, while there will be a majority against it in Scotland, from what we hear.

But would only English people be allowed to vote in England, and Scottish in Scotland?

How would people be classified?

I'm from the North East and we always had great feelings for Scottish people when I was a kid in the fifties and sixties, and there had been a lot of intermarriage.

We enjoyed The Broons and Oor Wullie in the Sunday Post and had the annuals every year at
Christmas.

But all that seems to have changed. Are bad-tempered, Thatcherite Scots on daytime and late night political TV to blame, I wonder?

robert

Well that's one thing Cameron's got right at least. Heaven preserve us from that self-satisfied blimp, Johnson père! What on earth gives him the right to regale the broadhseets' readers with his insufferable self-publicity?

Shaun Hexter, London

Alex Salmond has played a very clever game on Scottish issues. I live in London and I want to vote on Scottish independence. I think it only fair as I pay for Scotland's upkeep, providing for the higher subsidies from the public purse. I would vote for independence, unless Scotland is given the same financial inducements as England. If they want to go it alone, fine. I don't really see what the English get from the Union to English advantage, possibly besides oil, which I suspect we would have claimed anyway as the stronger nation. We could then export (repatriate) all the Scottish MPs, including the sub-prime minister and his darling chancellor.

jane gould

there is a system for selecting Conservative candidates. it is not perfect; but is much fairer than arbitrary wave-through by the Leadership. had Stanley or indeed Rachel Johnson been parachuted in this very public way, i for one would have found it hard to keep my mouth diplomatically shut. thankfully, DC did the right thing. he always does.