IT is clear that the spinning machine used within the SNP Government is still in good working order when one reads the contribution made by the First Minister at the event in Edinburgh for EU nationals living in Scotland, (“Sturgeon pondered snap poll to quit UK after Brexit “, The Herald, August 19).

Ms Sturgeon maintains that she declined to go ahead at that time with a second referendum on Scottish independence because of her duty to try to bring people together, to examine all available options, and to find the best way forward for the country. These are, of course, all very commendable aspirations. She omitted, however, to mention the fact that she was not sure that she would win it. That I believe was the real deterrent to the bringing forward by the SNP of another deeply divisive experience for our country at this complicated and politically charged time in its history post-Brexit.

Ian W Thomson,

38 Kirkintilloch Road, Lenzie.

I WAS puzzled to read the closing remarks by Regina Erich about becoming a “pawn in the SNP’s independence campaign” (Letters, August 19). The situation of every UK resident is precisely a constitutional matter, and it is exactly because, in the absence of a written constitution, many of these matters are decided at the whim of passing Prime Ministers that doubt over the residential security of people like Ms Erich can even be called into question.

While genuinely attempting to find a solution to Scotland’s wish to remain in Europe while still part of the UK, Nicola Sturgeon knows deep down this combination is unlikely to succeed, and of course it remains true that she leads a party whose aim will always be Scottish independence. This would be a Scotland with a written constitution which would protect the very rights “EU nationals” here are nervous about and which the UK Government declines to guarantee. Far from being pawns, it is simply in the best interests of EU citizens here to “think actively”, if or when a second referendum becomes reality.

Michael F Troon,

15 Crawford Avenue, Gauldry, Fife.

REGINA Erich (Letters, August 19) can be assured that at a future independence referendum she will be neither a bargaining chip nor a pawn. She will be a voter.

Ruth Marr,

99 Grampian Road,

Stirling.

THE Scottish Government above all others should treat the operation of the Holyrood parliament with great respect. Yet many fear the SNP is trying to use the parliament’s committee system as little more than a convenient mechanism for rubber stamping their performance and legislation (“Pressure grows on Sturgeon over appointment of backbench MSPs as aides”, The Herald, August 18.

Opponents are right to complain when backbench SNP MSPs appointed to the various specialist committees intended to hold the Government to account have in turn been appointed as parliamentary liaison officer (PLO) to the very senior ministers that their committee roles are intended to provide constructive criticism of. This is not the first time the SNP has been accused of disregarding the checks and balances of the Scottish Parliament, with the committee system progressively falling into disrepute during its period in office.

Responding to critics, the SNP spokesperson claimed that in “no sense” does the PLO role prevent them fulfilling the scrutiny role of their respective committees. Yet this is not a credible response, not least because when in opposition the SNP themselves raised concerns about the conflict of interest in parliamentary aides sitting on committees intended to hold the government to account.

Keith Howell,

White Moss, West Linton, Peeblesshire.

YOU have criticised the SNP Government over the ministerial aides appointed to Holyrood committees (“Committee system needs more scrutiny”, Herald editorial, August 15). There is a view that the SNP is stacking committees with placemen and women in order to negate the interrogatory purpose of these committees and ensure that the SNP is in a position to bulldoze through its legislation. Can someone point me to any committee of the Scottish Parliament which has a majority of SNP MSPs on it? Indeed, can someone please quote evidence that any of the preceding SNP governments has ever done any such thing?

Alexandra MacRae,

8 Jubilee Park, Letham, Angus.

YOU highlight a disturbing aspect of the SNP's attitude to the media (“SNP suspected of applying pressure to gag TV journalist”, The Herald, August 19).

We're familiar with former First Minister Alex Salmond's BBC paranoia and many recall organised demonstrations outside the BBC’s Glasgow headquarters prior to the 2014 referendum, seemingly designed to intimidate supposedly pro-Union journalists.

Now it would appear the SNP is attempting to silence STV journalist, Stephen Daisley, whose nuanced reporting has sought to question the Scottish Government policy and practice.

SNP MPs Peter Wishart and now John Nicholson have challenged Mr Daisley's right to question the SNP, with the apparent consequence that Mr Daisley is no longer reporting for STV.

Just as a number of journalists in your newspaper group have the right to support independence, Mr Daisley must retain the ability to write what he believes, unimpeded by senior SNP politicians.

Martin Redfern,

4 Royal Circus, Edinburgh.