THE three most notorious lies must surely be: "The cheque's in the post"; " Of course I'll still respect you in the morning, darling"; and 'Vote No and we'll honour the Vow'.

 

David Cameron may not engender the same wave of national loathing in Scotland as did Mrs Thatcher, but nevertheless most Scots must have welcomed Mr Cameron's visit with about as much enthusiasm as the January weather ("Holyrood powers Bil: Sturgeon and PM at loggerheads", The Herald, January 23). Of course, apart from his one MP, Mr Cameron has nothing to lose in Scotland and so doesn't really need to bother disguising his condescension to the troublemakers up north, as he set out his watered-down version of more powers to the Scottish Parliament in an attempt to appease the natives and their greedy demands that The Vow should be fully honoured.

Desperate times demanded desperate measures and the desperate Mr Cameron would have agreed to anything to stop a Yes vote in September, so the home rule plans of back bencher Gordon Brown were clutched at by Mr Cameron and his two colleagues in the other Unionist parties much as drowning men would clutch at a straw.

Naturally, something must be delivered to quieten the clamour of the 45 per cent who voted Yes and the many others who were seduced into voting No by the promises of meaningful new powers for Scotland, hence the visit from Mr Cameron, complete with his trinket proposals. The response from let-down Scottish voters should be to take their own vow, and implement it in full at the polling stations in May.

Ruth Marr,

99 Grampian Road,

Stirling.

PROPOSALS by David Cameron and George Osborne that SNP MPs should not be allowed to vote on the UK budget is bizarre and utterly reprehensible (" Cameron sticks with vote ban plans for Budget", The Herald, January 23).

For good or ill Scots rejected independence last September, the UK was retained and as such SNP MPs clearly have as much right to vote on the UK budget at Westminster as MPs from south of the border. We are all part of the UK and the creation of two types of MPs is simply not tenable.

This is further reinforced by the recent statement from the First Minister that SNP MPs should vote to save the English NHS. Indeed, in 2003, for example, SNP MPs voted against Foundation Hospitals in England on the basis that moves to privatise the NHS in England pose a threat to Scotland's budget under the Barnett Formula.

The SNP position at Westminster has very honourably been not to vote on matters which don't impact on Scotland. However, privatising the English NHS threatens the Scottish budget and until such a time as Scotland becomes fully financially autonomous it would be highly irresponsible for SNP MPs to turn their backs on a matter of such significance.

Alex Orr,

Flat 2, 77 Leamington Terrace,

Edinburgh.

RATHER than discussing who should take part in the proposed BBC TV general election debate ("TV debate U-turn over inclusion of mujltiple parties delights SNP", The Herald, January 23), might it not be more appropriate to consider whether such a debate should take place?

If the inferred purpose of the debate is to assist the electorate in how they should use their vote, then going by the experience of the debate at the last election, it is unlikely to be helpful.

Many of the electorate who voted for Nick Clegg, the acclaimed winner of the debate, felt badly let down by his subsequent performance in government and have since made their views clear in that regard.

Mr Clegg, the debate winner, is now bottom of the poll in the leadership race. What does that tell you? Perhaps that this format favours style over substance.

George Wanless,

Gracefield Court,

Musselburgh.

THE argument over whether the SNP should be represented in the televised debates in the run-up to the General Election should be widened to include programes like BBC's Question Time , if this week's show(Janaury 23) is a taste of what to expect in the months ahead .

The farrago of ignorant and almost racist comments directed at Scots by several members of the panel when the issue of the SNP's decision to widen the scope of their voting intentions at Westminster was raised was breathtaking.

With no Scottish representation on the panel the unsupported myths which were prevalent during the referendum campaign were given full rein. Scotland and the Scots according to the Ukip representative just "take and take and take and take".

While one can expect such ignorance from the English Independence Party ( which strangely calls itself Ukip , the editor of the Independent, Amol Rajan, displayed a woeful lack of knowledge of Scotland's economic position vis-a-vis that of the UK, and the Liberal, Tim Farron, was just insulting.

The unctuous host, David Dimbleby, perhaps a touch embarrassed during this character assassination of Scots and the SNP, commented that there were no Scots on the panel, as if just becoming aware of the fact.

This display of contempt for Scotland, Scots and the elected government of Scotland was naked and unrestrained. Whatever happened to the love bombing, Scotland stay with us and Better Together?

James Mills,

29 Armour Square,

Johnstone.