Scotland would be vulnerable as a very small fish in the EU

The EU might make concessions to Scotland in exchange for fish, though not highly likely. A more difficult situation could arise, though. A country such as Spain might obstruct Scotland's application to the EU precisely in order to get at Scotland's fish stocks. It would be quite reasonable for Mr Salmond to ask for frigates and jets from the rest of the UK (rUK). The problem is he would be unlikely to get any of these things and there would be little he could do about it. So come independence day, Scotland could have just three unarmed patrol boats to fend off the Spanish fishing fleet. Having seen the recent antics off Gibraltar and the size of the Spanish fleet, it would not be enough. Could never happen? It did happen in the 1970s when a number of newly-independent West African states found independence day was marked by the arrival of Japanese and Russian factory ships and trawlers who hoovered up all the fish they could, ignoring quotas, marine reserves and diplomatic protests.

Oil may prove less of an attraction to the EU than Prof Brown thinks. Half of the states in the EU produce their own oil. Falling oil prices, combined with rising offshore exploration and extraction costs attract specialist investors who are more likely to come from Qatar than from Frankfurt. The EU appears more interested in what happens in Algeria, Libya and Iran than in what might happen off the coast of Scotland. Some of our neighbours were less than happy with the UK's share of continental shelf rights and might wish to revisit the question of maritime boundaries before they supported a Scottish application. Then there would be the question of where the maritime boundaries with the rUK would be drawn - the certainties expressed in the Scottish Government's recent White Paper might prove less certain if ever put to the test.

Seen from the EU perspective, Scotland's resources and requests for special treatment would seem very small and Mr Salmond's ebullience as expressed in the White Paper misplaced.

Russell Vallance,

4, West Douglas Drive, Helensburgh.

PR chief David Haigh may, or may not, be eventually proved correct in his speculation that a Yes vote in next year's referendum might be costly in terms of brand valuation ("Yes vote 'to cost Britain millions in brand valuation'", The Herald, December 4), but I am not convinced that the situation he envisages will have more than marginal impact on an independent Scotland.

Two years ago I completed the 500-mile Camino de Santiago long-distance walkway across the north of Spain. Along the way I met hundreds of walkers, of all ages, from more than 40 countries, principally located in mainland Europe, north and south America, the old Commonwealth and south-east Asia. Invariably, as soon as I said that I came from Scotland, their faces broke into a smile and I was the recipient of a deluge of references (in no particular order) to whisky, golf, bagpipes, tartan, Nessie, shortbread, Robert Burns, scenery and environ­ment, seafood, Aberdeen-Angus beef, curling (from a Swede), oilfields and shipbuilding (yes, even yet).

My reflections on all of that, both at the time and since, were that in Scotland as a country we were extremely fortunate to have such a positive worldwide "brand" recog­nition - one that a marketing company would give its eye teeth for, and spend millions of pounds on promotional activities to achieve.

And, incidentally, I can truthfully say no-one mentioned "Britain" in the course of any of these conversations. So Mr Haigh can rest easy on any concerns over our account.

Brian McGarry,

37 Preston Crescent, Inverkeithing.

I NOTE that in commenting on the Scottish Government's White Paper Atholl Duncan, executive director of the Institute of Chartered Account­ants of Scotland (ICAS), claims that "accountants want to see the evid­ence, they want to see the numbers. It's in their DNA" ("Accountancy chief questions White Paper", The Herald, December 4).

Maybe so, but in examining and certifying company annual accounts, chartered accountants deal mainly with the past, not the future. In all my years in business I don't recall the auditors ever asking for evidence and detailed figures of sales income, overhead costs, profit margins or tax liabilities four or five years ahead. Yet in wider national economic terms that is the kind of detail they expect the Scottish Government to produce and guarantee.

The auditors were certainly interested in the company's future financial stability and resources to continue its business activities, and its plans for developing and expanding these assets. Scotland has an abundance of such resources, both in well-established industries like engineering, farming and agriculture, fisheries, whisky, and tourism, and new innovations like computer games. It also has established and vast new potential resources in energy production with onshore and offshore wind, wave, tidal and hydro-electric, which are now being developed and will grow in importance and economic benefit in the years ahead. And of course there is still at least 40 years of North Sea oil, plus huge new fields now being explored in the north Atlantic.

So if Scotland were a plc, its accountants would be very confident of its future development and prosperity. Why should the members of ICAS be so pessimistic?

And incidentally, I have been a member for more than 50 years, and don't recall being sent a questionnaire asking my opinion. So how does Mr Duncan know what his members think about this issue?

Iain AD Mann,

7 Kelvin Court, Glasgow.

MANY thanks for publishing Ingratitude by Alan MacGillivary as your Poem of the Day. Other readers will judge for themselves its literary merit (although I thought the diction and scansion pretty ropey) but the historic factors pointed out by your Poetry Editor, Lesley Duncan, are particularly telling.

In the first half with its cod-Victorian evocation of "good Sir James", Mr MacGillivary as good as admits that these are irrelevant as Spain was not founded until the reconquista of 1492, whereas the Bruce lived some 200 years before.

The second half with its references to the Spanish Civil War goes on to commit further crimes against history. First, there is little if any evidence that Scots who joined the International Brigades included Scottish nationalists. In fact the newly-formed SNP at the time included members of the former right-wing Scottish Party, and in 1939, it would go on to oppose Scottish mobilisation against the Nazis.

Secondly, any comparison between the left-wing International Brigades and the capitalist European Union is nonsense.

And thirdly, the invocation of La Pasionara ignores the unfortunate fact that Dolores Ibarruri chose not to "die on her feet" but instead to flee to the Soviet Union, where she was part of the Stalinist establishment which had betrayed the Republican cause. During her time there, the USSR annexed the Baltic States and subjugated other Warsaw Pact countries, which does not suggest an enthusiasm for the independence of smaller countries (despite a belated protest on her part when Czechoslovakia was invaded).

However, The Herald is to be applauded for publishing this poem: it shows the clear preferences for myth over history, and sentiment over intellect, which sum up much of the spurious appeal of the case for independence in the referendum debate.

Peter A Russell,

87 Munro Road, Jordanhill,

Glasgow.