THE desperation of the Gordon Brown and Jim Murphy "Vow Plus" in trying to win back votes for the Labour Party is plain for all to see, but their latest special offer is fundamentally deficient in four important respects ("Murphy promises new powers if Labour win election", The Herald, February 2).

First, it may be superficially attractive to promise wide powers to create welfare allowances and top up pensions and child benefits, but the Brown/Murphy vow offers no resources to make these changes possible, since the great majority of economic and tax powers would remain at Westminster.

Secondly, they pretend that they would provide Holyrood with "full control" over the £1.8 billion housing benefit budget. In fact, Westminster would retain full control over the amount allocated to Scotland, and both Tory and Labour austerity economics will lead to this amount being significantly cut after the general election.

Thirdly, Mr Murphy continues to prove that he is driven by party political self-interest rather than fundamental principles. Before the 2010 General Election, as Secretary of State for Scotland, he told TV viewers that his first choice cut to balance public finances would be in "the cost of welfare". Jim Murphy will be supporting future Westminster welfare cuts, whilst happy to promote the fantasy that somehow the Scottish Government will be able to compensate for them from the budget it is allocated from Westminster for its other responsibilities.

Fourthly, Gordon Brown's credibility as a proponent of these over-hyped new powers is surely seriously compromised by their weakness in comparison with the devolution of powers to "the maximum extent possible" that he promised less than five months ago would provide "a modern form of Scottish home rule" which would be "as close to federalism as you can get".

What we are being served up is political spin with no substance. If the Labour Party are serious about delivering improved personal incomes, developing welfare benefits and pensions, and promoting social justice, they need to give the Scottish Parliament control of the economic and fiscal means as well as dreaming up these fantasy ends.

Andrew Reid

The Old School, Dundas Street, Comrie.

GORDON Brown is one man with one vote, and the only thing that has changed since he made September 's "Vow" is that we now know that Mr Brown won't be standing as an MP at the General Election in May. Mr Brown, minus his back bench seat at Westminster is therefore in no position whatsoever to make a "Vow Plus" promise or any other promise to the voters of Scotland, and to pretend otherwise is misleading to the point of dishonesty.

Ruth Marr,

99 Grampian Road,

Stirling.

IN response to Iain AD Mann (Letters, February 3), it should be pointed out that just because Alex Salmond said after the referendum result that the Vow had caused many Yes-intending voters to change their mind and vote No does not mean that that is true.

Last week I was throwing out some old Heralds and at the top of the pile was The Herald of January 26, 2012. The front page reported on the announcement by Alex Salmond of the wording of the referendum question and also on a new opinion poll showing that 44 per cent of Scots would vote for independence. The result, nearly three years later, was a 44.7 per cent vote for independence. Res ipsa loquitur.

Daniel Gardner,

12/3 Whistlefield Court,

Bearsden.