Independence debate is about governance, not government

The debate is about governance, not government. We will choose between different policy platforms in the General Election to the parliament of an independent Scotland in 2016, and we will have many more chances to select or reject policy platforms at subsequent elections. In September 2014 we vote to make those choices in 2016 and beyond, whatever they happen to be, vital, relevant and meaningful, rather than mere tragic footnotes to our post-industrial, post-imperial decline and malaise. The referendum is not about what policies we happen to choose to pursue in Scotland in the future with respect to currency or anything else. It is about the very right to choose them.

The anti-independence forces continually seek to set up spurious Aunt Sally arguments just for them to knock down, lambast straw men rather than participate in open debate, and refuse to accept any answer to their questions as satisfactory because they are not interested in answers. They are interested in distracting and exhausting those who are genuinely trying to engage with this debate. They insist it is about the SNP (which it isn't, as the Greens, the Socialists, CND, and the others in the broad coalition that has lined up in favour of independence attest). They try to personalise the debate in the demonised figure of Alex Salmond (we may as well base opposition to the Union on some deep personal antipathy towards the Earl of Seafield who helped steer the Treaty and Act of Union through in 1706/7, because that's precisely how relevant the personality of Alex Salmond is to the future of our children and our children's children). They speculate cynically about Nato, the EU, the currency, and even descend to ridiculous trivia about, for example, the availability of soap operas.

No-one is saying the government of an independent Scotland will at all times pursue policies you personally approve of. But if your government is pursuing a policy you disagree with - such as, for example, the bedroom tax, NHS privatisation, maintaining nuclear weapons on the Clyde, waging catastrophic illegal foreign wars - the grown-up thing to do is exercise your democratic rights and fulfil your democratic responsibilities, rather than remain marooned in some kindergarten complaining about the big boys down at Westminster.

In their insistence on a Plan B they are like someone demanding that we can't go out for pizza unless they are told immediately exactly what alternative toppings of equivalent savouriness will be provided should their preferred topping not be available. No matter what we say they will go on and on until they get their own way and we give up on the idea of going out, because all the time they just wanted to stay in.

Dr Peter Clive,

12 Third Avenue,

Glasgow.

I NOTICE that Culture Secretary Maria Miller is arguing that a Yes vote in September is a vote to leave the BBC. I think there are more than enough reasons to vote Yes in September without the Rt Hon Member for Basingstoke offering up another one.

Graeme Finnie,

Balgillo, Albert Street, Blairgowrie,

Is something politically important happening in Scotland this year to cause the "British" Cabinet to come north for the first time ("Power station plan fuels debate as Cabinets visit the north-east", The Herald, February 24)?

I use the term "British" Cabinet loosely, as the "British" Government website (www.gov.uk/government/ministers), lists 33 Rt Hon members who attend the Cabinet meetings, but of those 33 members, only seven have a truly British remit. Why were the other 26 members, primarily English regional department secretaries, for example the English Education Secretary, English Health Secretary, English Transport Secretary, English Energy Secretary and so on attending what is supposedly a "British" Cabinet?

If the English secretaries are attending "British" Cabinet Meetings, then surely their colleagues from the Northern Irish, Scottish and Welsh Governments should also attend, or is the truth of the matter the fact that the English have already opted for Devo Max for themselves, without any Referendum, discussion or fanfare?

AA Bolland,

4 Main Street, Pinwherry, by Girvan.

I REFER to what was advertised as a TV debate on independence between Scotland's two leading female politicians, Nicola Sturgeon and Johann Lamont ("Battle stations", The Herald, February 26). This, in fact, turned out to be more of a "stair heid rammy" than a serious and measured exchange of opinions.

This proved to be a disservice not only to any quest for elucidation on the issues arising , but also to the reputation of politics in Scotland.

Obviously neither of the participants had heard of the old Chinese proverb "To listen well is as powerful a means of influence as to talk well, and is as essential to all true conversation". The women concerned should set aside any personal animosity and point scoring and, in future, try to do better. The electorate deserves no less.

Ian W Thomson,

38 Kirkintilloch Road,

Lenzie.

There has been much debate about the level of fees which Scottish universities would be able to charge students from the rest of the UK in the event of a Yes vote in the referendum.

However, as a parent with two daughters studying at music college, who previously attended specialist music schools, I wonder what impact a Yes vote would have on the fees payable under the DfE Music and Dance Scheme (MDS) and the St Mary's Music School (Aided Places) (Scotland) Regulations, for Scottish parents wishing to send their children to specialist schools in England and vice-versa.

Both schemes enable children from all over the UK to study at any of the specialist music or dance schools, with any pupil whose parents have a relevant income of around £13,000 or less being entitled to a free place. There is a sliding scale above this threshold which determines the size of the parental contribution towards the fees charged.

Although the DfE and St Mary's schemes and the associated fees are broadly similar, there is a peculiar anomaly between the schemes, which I challenged unsuccessfully with the Scottish Government, whereby in the three years that I had one daughter at Chetham's in Manchester and one at St Mary's in Edinburgh, I paid lower fees for my daughter at Chetham's. Under the English scheme, where a family with an eligible child attending a MDS school in England also has a sibling attending the same, or any other music or dance school, including St Mary's in Edinburgh, a discount in the means-tested parental contribution to fees is allowed. However, under the St Mary's scheme, a discount is only given if both children attend St Mary's.

Given the recent disquiet about the absence of any home-grown soloists in this year's Yehudi Menuhin Violin Competition, I would hope that, regardless of the outcome of the vote in September, the DfE and St Mary's schemes are allowed to continue to operate in the same manner, to give talented musicians and dancers of the future the same, great opportunities which my daughters, and many other gifted young people have been afforded, due entirely to the existence of these excellent schemes.

Alan Robertson,

36 Abbey Drive, Glasgow.

Residents in Scotland will be asked whether they think that Scotland should be an independent country. Heaven forfend that the vote should be in favour of that proposition but it appears that, in that event, there is a general assumption that Alex Salmond would lead the negotiations.

If he is entitled so to do, what happens in the event of a new First Minister being elected before negotiations are concluded?

And what, indeed, happens if negotiations are never concluded? The animosity being stirred up by the present First Minister bodes ill for our future whatever the referendum's outcome.

David Miller,

80 Prestonfield,

Milngavie.