Red herring of EU membership will not deflect Yes campaign

The increasing indication is that the Better Together planners believe the Scots to be stupid and are relying more and more on this to see off a Yes vote.

The notion that the EU will find some special new powers to throw out a Scotland which has achieved its independence through an approved constitutional process, that already fulfils all the conditions to retain its decades-long membership, has most of the EU's gas and oil, has a huge proportion of its fishing grounds and has a command of the North Atlantic is absurd.

All significant political persons (including the posturing Spanish Government) know this, as do all informed commentators and journalists. More importantly all politically astute Scots are also aware of this and the more they are fed the EU scare story by politicians and journalists they know are deliberately trying to confuse the more they watch these same figures undermine the Better Together campaign and destroy their own credibility.

In decades of political campaigning not once have I been involved in a concerned conversation about Scotland's position re the EU.

This is perhaps because confident Scots can look a short distance across the North Sea at our nearest neighbours, some in the EU and some out of it, and note the well ordered, prosperous societies they have achieved and have the full confidence that Scotland, in the EU or out of it, can do exactly the same.

David McEwan Hill,

1 Tom Nan Ragh,

Dalinlongart,

Sandbank,

Argyll.

RECENT discussion of the status of the rest of the UK (rUK) in the event of a Yes vote in September's referendum raises an interesting possibility.

If it becomes accepted that both Scotland and rUK will have to apply for EU membership, this will be of great interest to the substantial, and apparently growing, number of people in England who are keen to leave the EU.

Once the Eurosceptics realise the implications, one would think that they might lend their support to the Yes campaign - an interesting development.

Jim Morrison,

30 Pendicle Road,

Bearsden.

DAVID Torrance makes important points in his analysis of an independent Scotland's relationship with the EU. Notably, he is right to emphasise that an honest analysis of the democratic inadequacies of the British Union lends itself equally well to an analysis of the deficiencies of the European Union.

However, an independent Scottish state would be well positioned to vocalise opposition to the policies of the European Commission on matters of (egalitarian) principle where UK governments have refused to act. For instance, Westminster authorities have been remarkably reticent to oppose EU pursuit of Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) with African nations. Indeed, New Labour doyen Peter Mandelson played a central role in pushing these premature EPA arrangements on to sceptical African partners, in spite of the deindustrialisation and lost livelihoods inevitably experienced upon liberalisation of tariffs in African contexts. An independent Scottish state - with a seat on the European Council - would be able to effectively challenge such developmentally dubious trade arrangements with countries of the global south. This would mark a significant departure from the inaction of cynical Westminster governments beholden to corporate interests and to neoliberal politicians such as former EU Trade Commissioner Mandelson.

Dr Mark Langan,

33 Merchants Quay,

Salford.

I HAVE a few predictions for 2014: the nationalists will try their damnedest to hijack the Commonwealth Games, the Homecoming, the Ryder Cup, Burns Night and the anniversary of Bannockburn - and they will spend large amounts of taxpayers' cash doing so. They will continue to talk of Scotland in the same breath as Quebec, Panama and the Basque and Catalan regions of Spain. They will keep trying to bribe us with our own money and inundate us with uncosted political promises. We will be given more misleading information about a currency union with England and about EU membership.

The SNP government will carry on blaming Westminster for anything that goes wrong whilst cheerfully taking credit for anything that happens to go right. It will keep accusing the No campaign of scaremongering whilst itself cynically scaremongering about a No vote. Alex Salmond will continue to enjoy a remarkably easy ride from television journalists and will chuckle at any criticisms or awkward questions put his way. Millionaire expat nationalists will pay Scotland a visit to remind us how to vote. A failed Labour MSP will dramatically "convert" to the nationalist cause, mainly for the attention.

Oh, and just one prediction for 2015: Thousands of copies of the "wish list without a price list" nationalist manifesto, Scotland's Future, will be pulped.

Keith Gilmour,

0/1, 18 Netherton Gardens,

Netherton Gate,

Glasgow.

JAMES Kelly's Agenda contribution ("Scottish Government should make a date with the real world", The Herald, December 30) demands a response.

While it is not for me to defend the Government, perhaps Mr Kelly will reflect that we have the Government we have because the Labour Party rendered itself unelectable and his latest version of policy-free carping appears to suggest it is still stuck in the same place.

For example, he makes much of the need for debate on social housing, and of course it is a matter crying out for urgent positive action. However, visit Scottish Labour's website and midst the many campaigns you will find no mention of any campaign on social housing, nor indeed any other substantive policies on this or any other issue.

Is Mr Kelly able to point me to a single novel policy initiative on social housing proposed by him and thwarted because the Scottish Government is not living in "the real world"?

Stuart Chalmers,

Whitecraigs Court,

Glasgow.

I HOPE that in the next critical months of a new year, those taking part in the debate on Scotland's independence will raise the standard of discussion to higher levels than they have managed so far. We Scots are already thoroughly hacked off with the total negativity and scaremongering of the No campaign, with its constant demands for more and more detailed information about tax rates, oil revenues and many other facts and figures which cannot possibly be predicted even four or five years into the future, never mind for generations.

Despite the efforts of the Unionist politicians, this year's referendum should not be treated as if it were a General Election, with party manifestos promising the earth just to win votes. It is not about having a few pounds more in your pocket, lower taxes, more schools and hospitals, less crime, free education, better childcare, and low unemployment, important as all these are. The people of Scotland will not be electing a political party to govern us for a few years, we will be deciding the future of our nation for perhaps the next 300 years or more.

Our decision should be about having the self-confidence to assume full charge of all of our own internal and external affairs and take our rightful place in the world of free nations. It should be about having the confidence that we are fully capable of growing a strong economy and paying our way in the world. It must be about realising how fortunate our small nation is to have such vast natural resources, many successful industries, a talented and well-trained workforce, and much warmth and goodwill from all corners of the world.

In short, a vote for independence in September will show that we have confidence and self-belief in ourselves, high aspirations, strong convictions, and a clear vision of what Scotland's future could be. With our nation's proud history to inspire us, why on earth should we Scots choose to deny any of that?

Iain AD Mann,

7 Kelvin Court,

Glasgow.