IT comes as no surprise to us cynics that the major topic in the General Election has been manipulated into accusations of a new referendum in the pipeline.

Why the SNP should be questioned as to their aspirations for independence is farcical, it being their raison d'etre. The fact, however, remains that the country could have a referendum every year and unless the majority of Scots want it, Scotland will remain part of the UK; I think you will find that is called democracy. What is not completely clear is what would actually happen if only 51 per cent of Scots ever vote for independence. I believe that wanting independence and actually getting it is not one and the same thing and independence is unlikely to be easily achieved even in the event of a simple democratic majority in favour of it.

That asides what the manufactured furore about sneaky nationalists not denying their implicit nationalist aspirations does is to hide from the less well-informed section of the electorate that you cannot slide a fag paper between the policies of the three major parties being as they are part of the same establishment beast. It's just yet more smoke and mirrors to confuse the hard-of-thinking from a self-anointed political elite who feel they know better than those they are paid to represent.

Meanwhile in these times of austerity I can't recall hearing of any retired MPs having to rely on welfare payments to survive; that is if one discounts turning up at the House of Lords and picking up £300 a day just to snooze on the leather benches talk to their pals and have a subsidised lunch and drinkies. Now that is some retirement home they have designed for themselves.

David J Crawford,

Flat 3/3 131 Shuna Street,

Glasgow.

MAY I respectfully point out to Sir Charles Gray, Bob Holman and the other signatories (Letters, May 4) who don't want a second independence referendum, that the only people talking, indeed obsessing, about another referendum are the Labour Party, the Conservative Party and the Liberal Democrats. Nicola Sturgeon, on the other hand, is talking about giving Scotland a powerful voice at Westminster and ending austerity throughout the UK.

I suspect that the Unionist parties' chatter about a non-existent referendum is an attempt to deflect attention away from the further austerity plans they intend to inflict or support, and I hope that all those who signed the letter in good faith, and with the best of intentions, will think again.

Ruth Marr,

99 Grampian Road,

Stirling.

HAVING had a referendum, I am certainly not in a hurry for another one and this issue does not in any way influence my voting intentions.

What is at stake for me now is the whole idea of being Scottish in this so called family of nations.

To put it simply the Conservatives, Labour, LibDems and even Ukip have stated that they will not seek an accord with the SNP under any circumstances even if this party is the democratic choice of the Scottish people.

This is not some high principled stand for Great Britain but a rejection of a country, its aspirations and beliefs.

I hope that those who are voting in Scotland, no matter their land of birth, will stand up to be counted and reject this absurd, arrogant, cynical, unprincipled and deeply undemocratic stance.

During the referendum I listened to and respected the views of both sides and accepted the people's will.

Now, however, we are facing something completely different and all Scots regardless of their political affiliations should speak up loud and clear and reject a philosophy that seeks to marginalise and diminish a nation.

Iain A J McKie,

27 Donnini Court,

South Beach Road,

Ayr.

THE political shenanigans of recent weeks have confirmed in me the belief that we in Scotland have much to be thankful for in the distinct democratic advantage we enjoy over the other countries of the UK.

We already have a generous measure of devolved government, with a realistic prospect of more to come. A succession of Scottish governments have, by and large, exercised competent, responsible and just governance, so that we enjoy a greater level of social justice and sense of nationhood than other parts of the UK. And we now have a First Minister who is almost certainly the most genuine, respected and charismatic leader seen anywhere in the UK for many a year.

Back-room deals after this week's election will dictate whether or not the rest of the UK is allowed to benefit from the effects of the stronger Scottish voice which will descend upon Westminster. But whatever the outcome, we in Scotland will continue to enjoy an enlightened and socially just form of governance streets ahead of that which the small-minded UK party leaders seem hell-bent on perpetuating south of the Border.

Iain Stuart,

34 Oakbank Crescent,

Perth.

SUNDAY'S final leaders debate on BBC Scotland ("Sturgeon warns: We would vote down a Labour Budget", The Herald, May 4) saw the First Minister get her roughest ride yet from opponents and audience alike. She was defensive, almost losing her saintly cool. Evasive as ever about a second referendum, she refused to rule it out if, for example, the next House of Commons authorises replacing Trident.

Putting a second referendum in the next Holyrood manifesto would be the biggest gamble of Nicola Sturgeon's career. Would she risk it?

Judging by Sunday's audience, many voters might not be in the mood. The oil price has tanked, and there's the small matter of the £7.6 billion hole in the full fiscal autonomy arithmetic. And between the manifesto and the moment of truth lurks the greatest threat of all to politicians' best-laid plans: events, dear boy, events (and Harold Macmillan knew a thing or two about them).

Ms Sturgeon knows that if a second referendum before 2020 delivers a second No vote, then the issue is most definitely off the agenda "for a generation". For what it's worth I think there would be a second No vote; more important, I think the First Minister thinks the same.

Martin Ketterer,

Tavistock Drive,

Newlands,

Glasgow.

DAVID Torrance ("Politics are engulfed in a sea change on scale of a tsunami", The Herald, May 4) may well be right; we may be experiencing an electoral sea change. But unlike previous sea changes, this one could have irreversible consequences.

If Scotland elects a large block of SNP MPs, backing a manifesto pledge for full fiscal autonomy (FFA), then we will give the Tories a gift they cannot refuse. The Tory backwoodsmen, who hate the Barnett formula, will be able to argue that so do the Scots. They would surely then pressurise David Cameron to axe it by imposing FFA.

If most of Scotland's Labour MPs are swept away and Mr Cameron's shameful little England campaign wins him more seats in the south, he will lead the largest party with the first chance at getting a Queen's Speech passed. Even if he cannot cobble together a majority coalition with the DUP and Ukip, the juicy carrot of FFA, with a timetable to deliver it quickly, could be irresistible to the SNP. They could suddenly rediscover their tolerance for working with the Tories, as they did with their backstairs deals at Holyrood from 2007 to 2011.

The result, as the Institute for Fiscal Studies has shown, would be economic disaster for Scotland. Whichever party won the 2016 Holyrood election would have to make savage cuts, hike up taxes and run up huge debts. It could make the 2016 election an election no sane party wants to, or dares to, win. And when it all goes wrong, would the rest of the UK let us reunite our finances with theirs? One thing's for sure, we would certainly not get the Barnett formula back.

Alistair Easton,

6 Glencairn Crescent,

Edinburgh.

I APPLAUD Ed Miliband for having Labour's key manifesto pledges set in an 8ft-high stone which will be installed in the Downing Street garden if he wins power ("Miliband feels the weight of tombstone jibes," The Herald, May4 ).

And if he fails to form a government at Westminster there is space to add "RIP" and a site in memoriam at Holyrood can be found after the Scottish Parliament election next year. Who says Labour don't plan ahead?

Meanwhile, should another party leader commission one made of shortbread in case they finish up eating their words?

R Russell Smith,

96 Milton Road,

Kilbirnie.

WHAT part of vote SNP and you do not get Labour as the largest party in Westminster does Nicola Sturgeon not get?

It plainly is a blatant tactic on the part of the SNP, and Nicola Sturgeon particularly, to be telling Scottish voters that somehow it will be Ed Miliband's fault that by voting for SNP and electing 50-plus MPs we get another Conservative Government at Westminster - no doubt as her grand plan to somehow justify another referendum.

The stance that that because she says so Mr Milliband must "do a deal" the with SNP is absurd and quite frankly beyond belief, except of course for Nicola Sturgeon

Derek Riddick,

7 Station Road,

Glasgow.

I ENJOYED Doug Maughan's take on the way the prominent politicians speak (Letters, May 1)

He says Nicola Sturgeon speaks "normal", whereas the leaders of the main parties "use an odd Westminster village dialect".

Does anyone else become as irritated as I do when they use the terms "wanna" (want to), "gonna" (going to), "gorra" (got to)?

As we locals would advise: "Gonnae no dae that? Jist, gonnae no?"

Angus Johnston,

7 Gryfewood Crescent,

Houston.