Independence is far from a lost cause. It has never been closer

In the words of John Steinbeck in a letter to Mrs John Kennedy, "you talked of Scotland as a lost cause and that is not true. Scotland is an unwon cause". That pretty much reflects where nationalists believe we are.

The referendum was won by the No campaign on the back of lies, half-truths and fear, especially fear; ably supported by a willing press, largely controlled from London. A five per cent swing in opinion is all that is between Scotland and independence. In a civilised society fear cannot and should not be a sustainable political tool.

It is interesting to note that, within two hours of the referendum, David Cameron had effectively reneged on his vow; within a matter of days Gordon Brown had gone from promising "guaranteed powers" to raising a petition to presumably present to himself and his fellow Unionists to ensure they keep their "vow". And now 10 per cent has been wiped from the stock market. Who would bet the five per cent swing has not already been achieved?

Mr Russell also suggests in his letter that Ms Sturgeon should say that there will not be a further referendum in the foreseeable future. Why not? It is worth pointing out that a referendum is not a prerequisite of becoming indepen­dent. Thirty Members of Parliament returned on a single ticket for indepen­dence next May will do the trick.

Andrew J Beck,

3 Andrew Crescent, Stenhousemuir.

PETER A Russell says that Nicola Sturgeon should affirm that independence is a lost cause. It is not in the remit or power of Ms Sturgeon, and certainly less so in Mr Russell's, to render eternal prognostications on independence. Independence has far too long a history in Scotland for it to be "winkled out" by any process as passed by the name of referendum a month ago - a referendum, if I may say, that was enveloped and surrounded by similar chicanery as that which pertained to the very act of parliamentary union that brought the present constitutional unhap­piness into being.

The vows of the three supposedly-opposed mainstream Westminster political leaders, which preceded the September 18 poll, by a hair's breadth of time, are probably not the least part of the chicanery. And look at the kerfuffle the unfurling of these have caused.

Ian Johnstone,

84 Forman Drive, Peterhead.

I VERY much doubt if Peter A Russell's call to Nicola Sturgeon to reject independence will go down well with the 55,000 new members, including some former members of the Labour Party, who have joined the SNP over the past few weeks.

Ruth Marr,

99 Grampian Road, Stirling.

PETER Russell says that voters in the referendum by a No vote "confirmed their view that such matters as employment and welfare should be addressed on the level of the whole UK". They did no such thing. They simply gave their judgment on the question "should Scotland be an independent country?" Extrapolating from the result which precise areas should he devolved and which retained at Westminster is - to use a journalistic term - editorialising.

Michael Rossi,

66 Canalside Gardens,

Southall, Middlesex.

I READ with interest Alison Rowat's article on Nicola Sturgeon ("It is Sturgeon's gallusness, not her gender, that matters", The Herald, October 17). I have met Ms Sturgeon only once, and that was when she conducted the eulogy at my late father Uisdean's memorial service in Govan earlier this year. I don't know about gallus, but she struck me as a woman of both substance and compassion. I believe that this bodes well for her tenure as First Minister, as she will need both to lead this nation.

Roddy MacDonald,

1 Glenmount Place, Ayr.

I AGREE with almost all the points by Iain AD Mann (Letters, October 16). I disagree only with the final point he made that "internal party politics has resumed normal service in the UK". If you judge UK politics by debates in Westminster then it is true that it looks quite undisturbed by the independence referendum. Only a couple of MPs looked as though they had any inkling of the impact that the referendum has made: the Labour MP Sadiq Khan, who attempted to warn Westminster that it had better pay attention to the fairness and equality issues raised vociferously in Scotland and a Conservative MP who professed astonishment at the statement from David Cameron at the front door of Number 10 on the morning of September 19.

It was depressing to watch the fierce assumption of ownership of the debate by Conservative MPs and the appalling rudeness to the SNP members, who displayed restraint and discipline.

Like your correspondent Thomas Gray (Letters, October 16) I agree that English laws should be debated by English MPs as a matter of democracy. The Labour Party should not have left themselves open to this attack which now seems to threaten their constitutional right to produce another Scottish Prime Minister or Chancellor of the Exchequer.

It seems clear that the commit­ments made by the three leaders of the UK parties will not now materialise. The Smith Commission will struggle to come up with ideas that will be acceptable to the major parties. The proposal for 100 per cent income tax without full fiscal autonomy will mean the reduction of the Barnett Formula and the inevitable erosion of the public funding plans of the SNP Government. The Scottish people will not forget such a betrayal.

Maggie Chetty,

36 Woodend Drive,

Glasgow.

ALTHOUGH I'm hesitant to say it, David Cameron is right in that the issue of the West Lothian Question does need resolved. However, I would not trust him, nor Labour, to push forward a solution that would be fair to all members of the United Kingdom. Each side is in it for their own gain - Mr Cameron to diminish Labour's hold over Westminster power, Gordon Brown to maintain it. The only possible solution would be a complete restructuring of the constitution - one that devolves all powers to the nations of the UK and restructures Westminster into purely concentrating on the issues of foreign, military and higher-level affairs. The SNP are right to call for devo-max is and it surprises me that Labour are not doing the same. Their blindness will not only lead them to fall into the trap set by Mr Cameron, but could severely damage their foothold within Scotland as well.

We can only hope that Lord Smith can hammer out a fair solution, but given the recent performance by Westminster, I am not holding my breath.

William A Main,

1 East Mayfield, Edinburgh.

The great panic which it seems is now being created, possibly with some justification, over the threat of the spread of Ebola ("Leaders agree Ebola action", The Herald, October 16) makes me reflect on the fact that famine, a far greater killer is prolific, throughout our planet and is far more readily treated. I don't hear any cry from politicians to stop famine victims at our airports (beyond the rantings of the Farangists). Is this because they think that poverty and famine are not communicable diseases?

Of course international travel and tourism expose us all to the ills of the world, and some of these are highly infectious or contagious. Plague or Ebola are one form, greed another, and one universal fear we Scots have recently learned to respect is terrorism in all its forms.

Democracy is perhaps the most dangerous to the established powers and fear their most powerful weapon. It says much for our courage that we dare step out of doors to buy a paper, a half-litre of milk and a pie without worrying about contamination. Oh, aye, and picking up something for the food bank and putting the small change in the Oxfam tin. If David Cameron's Cobra and its ilk spent their efforts on matters like famine and drought the world would be a far safer place for us all.

KM Campbell,

Bank House, Doune.

WHEN will the SNP realise that Scotland does not want to leave the UK? The majority of Scots voted No in the referendum and they should accept this.

Ever since the founding of the Scottish Parliament I have felt that it was totally unnecessary, as Scotland was governed by a democratically elected institution, able to vote on matters concerning the entire country.

As for English votes for English laws (Evel), would there ever be anything which concerned England exclusively to the exclusion of all other parts of the United Kingdom? I agree with Gordon Brown when he said: "You can't have representatives elected by the people who are half-in, half-out of the law-making process."

Sheana MacDonald,

Quarter, Hamilton.

I COULD be persuaded to tolerate Ukip's nuttier policies like withdrawing from the EU and might even turn a blind eye to Nigel Farage's conspicuous consumption of real ale and cigarettes which gives regrettable support to the evil alcohol and tobacco industries, if Ukip made it a pre-condition of any coalition that we dump metric measurement in favour of the traditional Imperial system and return pounds, shillings and pence to our pockets and tills.

Adopting these policies would greatly increase Ukip's support amongst pensioners like myself.

John Eoin Douglas,

7 Spey Terrace, Edinburgh.