Readers' Letters: Constance must explain how trans prisoner risks are assessed

Justice Secretary Angela Constance remains constant in her view that self-designated transgender inmates with track records of violence against females can be placed in women’s prisons, unless they are deemed, subjectively and possibly in error even by experts, to present an “unacceptable” risk of harm to staff or other prisoners.

Scottish Justice Secretary Angela Constance at Holyrood

Maybe she could define for us in detail what an “acceptable” risk level would be, and how much the “enhanced monitoring” and “placement in a different area where risks can be mitigated or managed” will cost the already overstretched prison service. She should also confirm that any "rights" such criminals might reasonably have will be secondary to the rights and welfare of the other inmates and the staff.

Surely the prime criterion for any such indulgence should be that transgender inmates prove their sincerity by having had the necessary surgery, thus excluding any with functioning male genitalia. I write as one who read Conundrum by Jan Morris (formerly James Morris) with great sympathy in the 1970s, unlike, I would guess, most modern zealots.

John Birkett, St Andrews, Fife

Mixed blessings

An increasing concern of mine is our dysfunctional electoral system in Scotland. This is the Additional Member System (AMS), also referred to as a “mixed member system” or “mixed member proportional representation”. “Mixed blessing” would be a more accurate description, as it leads to the sort of coalition government which offers weak governance and which requires an unholy mixture of ideas, some of which are unhealthy.

We should consider any system which relies upon coalitions as bad. It is what Israel has, and in the Netherlands it gives us Geert Wilders, the “Mr Nice Guy” who could end up leading the country.

In Scotland, it gives us the SNP/Green coalition. The Greens are out to destroy our economy, and without apology. They want heat pumps that don't work. They want no gas power, coal power or real fires. They want to destroy the fishing industry. They are out to destroy farming and only narrowly missed destroying the corner shops in Scotland through the Deposit Return Scheme.

If we had a simple and effective voting system, as we do for general elections, there would be no need for tiny, unrepresentative parties like the Greens to trouble us with their bizarre, unscientific, extreme left-wing policies. It's time we had a rethink, and I believe that even the SNP would agree.

Dave Anderson, Aberdeen

Not Anti-English

For a number of years now, these letters pages have been dominated by a narrow but sustained series of attacks on the SNP and hence on the possibility of independence for Scotland, though it is wrong to treat the two as synonymous. Such concerted vituperation by unionists of (supposedly) all colours – who more often than not dread the very word “independence” – when added to an overwhelming antipathy from an Anglo-centric press and media in general have brought about the demise of two First Ministers who regularly wiped the floor with their Labour and Tory opposition.

Admittedly, Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon contributed to their own demise, but when their sins are placed beside the appalling examples of sleaze and corruption emanating from London, one is left with a view of politics and politicians which seizes on motes and is blind to beams. For unionists, it seems, there is no bigger picture, at least not one to boast about or even to show in public: Brexit, Truss's O-Level paper, the truly alarming Boris Johnson, the “Northern” railway link (sic) and a host of other calamities are blithely ignored by unionist contributors.

Indeed, more than once, any attempts to point out the injustices and calamities perpetrated by our neighbour have been met with outraged cries of “Anti-English!”, as if Scots did not have friends and relatives south of the Border.

It was refreshing, then, to read some of the letters on 6 December and to make a perhaps pious wish that instead of ignoring the bigger picture, your unionist contributors might proclaim “Here's what you have won”, rather than the constant, drip drip iteration of “Scotland is the only country in the whole wide world which can never be independent”.

Bill Simpson, Carnoustie, Angus

Two Labours

Conflicting opinions have arisen between Anas Sarwar, the Labour leader in Scotland, and Sir Keir Starmer, the UK Labour Leader. Unlike Sarwar, Starmer supports the two-child benefit cap and refused to support a call for a ceasefire in Palestine. Most strikingly Sir Keir Starmer recently heaped praise on Margaret Thatcher. Anas Sarwar, in contrast, confirmed the reality that Thatcher’s policies devastated communities, destroying major industries in Scotland.

The Labour Party in Scotland must realise how increasingly different their values are from those of the Labour Party in England. To defeat even this totally incompetent Conservative Government, UK Labour have to attract English voters with policies reflecting the English electorate’s values. Most clearly Thatcher is still so revered in England that Starmer has to emulate her policies to have a chance of winning. This emphasises a basic difference in attitude between the majority of voters in Scotland and England.

Scotland’s population’s goals and priorities cannot be achieved when we are outnumbered over ten times by the English population. This is very clear, with Scotland being ruled since 1979 by UK Conservative-led governments Scotland didn’t vote for and right wing Tony Blair/Gordon Brown-led Labour governments which continued public service-damaging austerity economics.

This clearly shows Scotland can’t get real democracy reflecting our values while part of the UK. The only realistic way to get policies implemented in Scotland which reflect Scottish Labour voter’s values is if Scotland first becomes independent.

Jim Stamper, Bearsden, East Dunbartonshire

Broken promise

We well remember in 2015 the newly elected First Minister's promise that her “priority” in her term in government was to be education, and asking the country to judge her on that.

More than eight years later, after a much vaunted “National Discussion” which took until May 2023 to be set up and to produce a report, we find the current Education Secretary still seemingly clueless and continuing to dither over the necessary reforms to the educational system. Is it any wonder, therefore, that the newly published OECD report delivers a “devastating indictment” of the SNP's record on education?

Unbelievably, the SNP spin machine claims that the report shows “Scottish Education maintains international standing”! This is the nub of the problem – the SNP simply refuses to admit there is a problem. Down by 11 points in reading, 18 in maths and 7 in science. Nor can the customary trotting out of Covid be used in mitigation since obviously England and all the other areas used in comparison suffered from the pandemic – but the average drop in performance was less than here.

These are the facts. The SNP needs to acknowledge them and take some action beyond setting up yet another consultation. Education policy expert Professor Lindsay Paterson claims the results show “Curriculum for Excellence isn't working” (your report, 6 December). Maybe the SNP could start there.

Colin Hamilton, Edinburgh

A different lens

It is interesting (and perhaps enlightening) to contrast The Scotsman Comment “after Scotland's Pisa results fall 'off a cliff', Curriculum for Excellence must be reviewed” (6 December) with the Guardian headline “UK pupils’ science and maths scores lowest since 2006 in international tests”. Reading scores (OECD Pisa results of 15-year-olds) were high for Scotland and England, but much lower for Wales, which recorded the poorest UK nation score in each of the three primary categories assessed.

It should be noted that Covid had a negative impact on the latest Pisa scores of most countries. Also, these scores do not measure the broadly positive educational work undertaken in Scotland through the Curricuum for Excellence, which cannot be blamed (Lindsay Paterson please take note) for performances “slipping” in Wales and across the rest of the UK.

What is disturbing news for all the Four Nations is that the UK sits second bottom (out of 81 countries) in the OECD measure of “life satisfaction”, perhaps reflecting the dissatisfaction with UK governance across all age-groups today.

Stan Grodynski, Cairnsmore, East Lothian

Dental decay

Further to Steven Robertson's letter of 29 November, my son has been told to see his NHS dentist in another year instead of the usual six months. No doubt some bean-counting MBA at the Scottish Government will assure us all that halving the number of free NHS dental checkups will hardly affect our lives.

I prefer clinical assessments by experts. They tell us that poor dental health will usually lead to consequent deterioration in diet, nutrition, disease resistance and early death.

The government prefers to waste money on futile attempts to rescue shipbuilding with the crushing costs of a home build. Or on new motorways and bridges to boost traffic CO2 – an effective fossil fuel transport subsidy. I could go on.

We are governed by the worst of us. Listen to the experts – and fire the bean counters.

Bruce Whitehead, South Queensferry, 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, 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.