While I await an assessment of Nicola Sturgeon’s career from a non-unionist perspective from the fair-minded Guardian, I’ll take issue with Martin Kettle on just one of his criticisms (Nicola Sturgeon’s immense political talent is undeniable, 14 August).
He states that Sturgeon’s “gender recognition reforms were dogmatic and divisive”. After lengthy consultation, the gender recognition reform (Scotland) bill was passed by the Scottish parliament with a significant majority, the Conservatives being the only party voting against. If it had been enacted, Scotland would have aligned with the majority of European countries on this issue. However, the UK government used section 35 of the Scotland Act to stop it. So the dogma and divisiveness came from the UK, not Sturgeon or the Scottish government, and Scotland and the UK remain conservative outliers in Europe with regard to trans rights.
John Warburton
Edinburgh
• It was the fact that Nicola Sturgeon was a personable working-class woman with strong values that made the contrast between her and Boris Johnson so stark. Is it her support for independence that led to cold treatment in the British media? The headline on Martin Kettle’s article suggests so. But this raises the question of whether being pro-union is really less nationalistic than being pro-independence. In any case, many Scots remember Nicola fondly, something that can’t be said for many of this island’s recent political leaders.
Duncan Macrae
Inverness
• Have an opinion on anything you’ve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
