Readers' Letters: It's no surprise immigration is voters' priority

Politicians appear to never see the consequences of their inaction. Our services are failing all across the board, from education to health. Our social security system is not fit for purpose and our increasing taxation really is now robbing Peter to pay Paul. Lack of affordable housing is a major issue.

This is unsustainable and simply adding more numbers to our population is utterly compounding these issues. Integration appears not to be working as well as it should and pressure groups with minimal public support are being given free reign to enforce controversial views.

A democracy relies on majority rule, it is the only way it can work. Right now the tail is very definitely wagging the dog both here at Holyrood and in Westminster too, where the Labour leadership has lost control. Major changes in society have come too fast and our current crop of politicians do not have the wisdom to find the answers.

There really is a two-tier system now, with the disconnect between leaders and the led widening daily. Is it any wonder concerned ordinary people, unjustly tarred as “right wing extremists”, are alarmed at seeing their own rights eroded on a daily basis?

Gerald Edwards, Glasgow

Genuine concerns

While immigration has become the UK’s most important voter concern, according to Statistica, Brian Wilson (Perspective, 23 August) warns “political danger is expressed through ballot boxes in diverse places”. He was referring to Reform winning council by-elections through fear over immigration. YouGov recently reported that a majority expressing a preference wanted to stop immigration immediately and send recent immigrants back.

With SNP-controlled Falkirk Council considering closing asylum hotels, need we be concerned here? As Mr Wilson points out, “it would be a mistake to assume that attitudes are different from other parts of the UK”.

While he was referring to illegal asylum seekers, we should be prepared for immigration to be a significant issue at next year’s Holyrood election. Scotland’s net migration has doubled from 27,000 in 2004 to 56,000 in the year to mid-2024. In 2004 population was expected to fall to under 5 million by 2021 but it has risen to over 5.5 million despite a falling birth rate, with the death rate stalled and life expectancy the lowest in Western Europe.

Over the last 20 years public services have been squeezed, the jobs market has tightened, health has deteriorated and the housing crisis worsened.

Worryingly, for the economy, the working age population has increased by only 5 per cent while the over 65s have soared by 38 per cent, driven by demographics and rising retirees from the rest of the UK. The Government should ditch welfare policies that attract those who have not paid taxes here.

Tax policy should be adjusted to attract migrants with vital skills and keep talent in Scotland. As Brian Wilson states, however, there should be a “recognition that there are genuine concerns” about asylum, and by extension immigration.

Neil Anderson, Edinburgh

Tighten laws

Few can deny the Government is facing considerable challenges on two fronts; namely, immigration and housing. Without being party political, two approaches might be worth considering.

In terms of immigration it might be constructive to: a) bring in a law that no illegal immigrants will be considered for asylum and would be instantly returned to their country of origin; and b) any asylum seeker committing a serious crime would again be instantly returned to their own country.

This would make boat crossings totally unattractive and only allow asylum seekers who were prepared to abide by the laws of this country while awaiting adjudication on their application.

In terms of housing, it would seem to me that as well as climate change, water pollution must be affected by the huge increase in the population without a corresponding increase in the capacity to cope with an increase in sewage disposal. Surely any future planning application must include an element to cater for such an increase.

James Watson, Dunbar, East Lothian

Rural neglect

Alan Woodcock (Letters, 25 August) makes no reference to the failure of the SNP to support rural Scotland. The Barnett formula provides Holyrood with just under £15 billion a year which was to provide politicians at Holyrood with a supplement to ensure the 25 per cent of Scots living in 75 per cent of the landscape obtained similar standards of public services as enjoyed by those in the Central Belt. That means 75 per cent of the formula cash (around £11 billion) should be ringfenced each year for allocation on additional costs resulting from living in remote areas of the countryside.

Time, therefore, for Westminster politicians to accept they failed to note that Holyrood would neglect rural Scots over the utilisation of the £15bn a year and legislates to ensure the Scottish Secretary of State ringfences £11bn a year for rural projects.

That would allow priority cash to dual the A75, the A77, the A9 and the A96 and provide adequate NHS facilities in Wick, Portree and Stranraer by 2030!

Ian Moir, Castle Douglas, Dumfries & Galloway

Where’s the plan?

Alan Woodcock accuses me of saying something I did not actually say: ‘devolution has “failed”.’ I quoted Henry McLeish at length to show that what he was saying amounted to that.

Mr Woodcock tells us the UK is a “basket-case”. Certainly, we have not had our troubles to seek, with the banking crisis, the enormous costs of Covid and those contingent on Russian aggression in Ukraine. This last is the reason that HM Government is “spending billions extra on defence”: the first duty of government is defence of the realm. Mr Woodcock should consult a list of the most indebted countries. In first place is the USA. Very much higher than the UK are other rich countries, Japan and Singapore. Around the UK’s level are France and Italy. Yes, our debt is too high, but, if the UK is a basket-case, so are other prosperous countries.

Mr Woodcock then treats us to the usual nationalist claim: “Scotland can do so much better”. And, as usual, it is a claim without substance. Why has the SNP not shown us its economic and financial plan for its separate Scotland? Because there is not one that exists.

Jill Stephenson, Edinburgh

Bring in brains

We all know Donald Trump is waging war on the top universities in the USA. We are used to a brain drain from the UK to the States. Now for the first time in my life, the drain is in the other direction. Contacts in Oxford, Cambridge and Glasgow report with excitement their recruitment of top scientists, doctors, Infotec specialists and more who are filled with frustration at top US universities and are looking to move.

They offer cutting-edge experience and worldwide reputations. At the same time the UK Government is offering research contracts to our leading universities and the most promising students are doing their own research.

But is Edinburgh University going to benefit? In the past it would have. But now our Vice Chancellor has decided there will be no staff recruitment. His figures tell him that after years of good revenue, this will tail off. My information is that Edinburgh is the third richest university in Britain. I and many other Scotsman readers help to provide this wealth. Should we be happy that it is stashed away in some vault while our alma mater is allowed to decline?

Insiders are deeply depressed. But they are aware that going public may harm their Departments or their own careers. Surely some flexibility is needed.

N Hugh Mackay, Edinburgh

Worrying trend

The rising trend of home schooling is both understandable and worrying, not least because it rules out the whole social side of education (your report, 25 August). After all, many lifelong friendships are forged through the school years.

Teachers in the state sector are asked to do an impossible job with insufficient resources, financial and staff wise. The admirable, but challenging inclusive approach, integrating pupils with special needs, requires far more specialised classroom assistants to support the overstretched teachers.

To say that teachers are undervalued is an understatement, as is the whole question of education itself. Many teachers are stressed out well before retirement age, and retire early. It's scandalous that schools exist on such a tight budget and more investment is required, even if it means a rise in taxes. Home schooling, after all, doesn't come cheap.

Ian Petrie, Edinburgh

Trust problems

Your article (“Trust accused of ‘insider way of dealing’,” 23 August) is just one of many issues relating to the John Muir Trust (JMT) that have been covered in the press in recent years.

All of this is sitting there in plain sight for everyone to see, but JMT members and their supporters tiptoe around the problem and say nothing, and the issues do not get resolved.

The article describes JMT as one of our largest conservation organisations, but that is no longer the case in practice. JMT is not the organisation it used to be. It does not have the same influence, its support from rural communities is largely gone now, and it has very few employees left doing actual land management on their properties, the thing their members want to see.

When JMT members are thinking about their organisation, they need to be thinking about what they are doing today, not what they were doing 30-40 years ago. Today, in 2025, their actual contribution to the issues they say they are interested in is minimal and superficial, and their supporters need to wake up to that and force some changes, or put their money somewhere else.

Victor Clements, Native Woodland Advice, Aberfeldy, Perthshire

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.