Letters / No to Wir Shetland offer
Given the discussion and responses my previous letter (‘Callous and uncaring Home Office’, SN 13/7/16) has now generated both online and in these pages, I would like to take a moment to clarify and expand on some of what it said.
Firstly, it was not my intention to accuse Wir Shetland of being actively opposed to immigration. I understand that this will have been the conclusion many readers drew and apologise that my wording did not put adequate distance between these issues.
My criticism of Wir Shetland relates to its general approach rather than to individual policies. I believe at times it defines itself more by what it is against than what it actually stands for and that this is at least partly to blame for the aggressive behaviour of some supporters. The incident I had described, of abusive comments directed towards a Shetland-based business that had spoken out following the EU referendum result, was intended to bring attention to this.
Despite supporting a group that ostensibly stands for making Shetland a better and more prosperous place, for these supporters strong anti-EU views seemed to take precedence over the welfare of a local business. The owner of ESPL Regulatory Consulting had shared views on the matter not in line with the respondents’ own and was now not an employer deserving of support but an enemy to be treated as hostile.
Opposition to the Common Fisheries Policy is broadly to be expected from those who feel Shetland has been mistreated by distant governments, but it can feel when reading these views that those not virulently anti-EU on all issues are treated as not caring about the isles.
The same sentiment is seen in relation to the SNP and to Scottish independence more generally. While there are fair criticisms to be levelled at Holyrood’s governing party for its approach to local governance, and on unique issues affecting Shetland, I do not believe this demands a position of blanket opposition to the party. It is possible to be critical of the SNP on these issues and still broadly support them on balance, and it is certainly possible to be critical of the SNP and still support Scottish independence.
Yes, these are the views of individuals, but I believe the approach the group has taken to date has attracted this sort of rhetoric. This sort of hostile and aggressive discourse appears on the ‘Wir Shetland’ Facebook page, where posts written or shared by the page itself have referred to ‘gullible Remain-voting idiots’ and frequently refer to Nicola Sturgeon by the sexist nickname ‘Wee Nippy’.
The constitution of Wir Shetland includes clauses stating all members agree to opposition of the European Union and of Scottish independence. I believe this prescriptive set of views means some see Wir Shetland as a vehicle for anti-EU and anti-independence sentiment as much as for anything pro-Shetland. It also means those who don’t share either of those views cannot join the group without accepting they will be counted among a membership who supposedly do.
I thank James Titcomb for the fair-minded letter he wrote in response to me (‘Immigration not a factor’, SN 13/07/2016) but I hope this follow up will go some way to explaining why I will not be taking up his offer to join the group at this time.
Toby Sandison
364 Gorgie Road, Edinburgh
Become a member of Shetland News
Shetland News is asking its many readers to consider paying for membership to get additional features and services: -
- Remove non-local ads;
- Bookmark posts to read later;
- Exclusive curated weekly newsletter;
- Hide membership messages;
- Comments open for discussion.
If you appreciate what we do and feel strongly about impartial local journalism, then please become a member of Shetland News by either making a single payment, or setting up a monthly, quarterly or yearly subscription.
Already a member? Sign in to hide this message.
