I HOPE the Left in the Yes movement, whatever initial criticisms it may have, will not consign the Growth Commission report to the waste basket, but see it as the basis for discussion and debate, involving careful analysis of its research findings, the assumptions that shape its forecasts, and its assertions on debt reduction and timing in relation to a separate currency.

When I welcomed the report ("It has depth, detail and intellectual rigour", The Herald, May 26) I did so on the basis of a carefully chosen word: that it is not "definitive", meaning that while it is a valuable contribution to the debate, it is not the Bible for an independence campaign. There is no need for the Yes movement to be split on it, as your report suggests today ("More splits emerge over the SNP's Growth Commission plans", The Herald, May 29). Andrew Wilson’s Commission presents its honest view of how it sees Scotland emerge into and handle independence, but there will be other equally honest views that see Scotland take a different direction. These should emerge, not within days of its publication, but after robust debate.

I personally don’t believe, and I have told Andrew this, that there can be any final growth strategy until the details of the Brexit Treaty are known, and as they develop in practical terms. I have other concerns, but I hope mine, and concerns others may have, emerge in public only after we have all gone through it page by page, considered, reconsidered, and are able to produce something we think is better.

Jim Sillars,

97 Grange Loan, Edinburgh.

DR Gerald Edwards (Letters, May 29) claims that "independence is too big a risk to take"; I would argue that independence is too big an opportunity to miss. His letter took me back to the 1997 devolution referendum when the doom merchants distributed leaflets claiming that if we voted for devolution "Scotland would be isolated in the UK"; 20 years on, Scotland is not isolated in the UK, but we are isolated from making many of the choices available to most other independent countries in the world.

As for "the chaos the SNP is inflicting on Scotland right now" would that be the "chaos" of the murder rate falling to its lowest in 40 years? Securing a future for Scottish Steel? Bringing youth unemployment rates down to one of the lowest in the EU? Delivering over 72,000 affordable homes? Meeting world-leading climate change targets?

However, if Scottish voters want to vote the SNP out of government they have the power to do that at Scottish Parliament elections, but given the numbers and under the present constitutional arrangements, they have no such power to get rid of Westminster governments at UK general elections; just as we have no power to stay within the EU despite voting overwhelmingly to remain, unless we grasp the normality and the opportunities of independence.

Ruth Marr,

99 Grampian Road,

Stirling.

YOUR correspondent Dr Gerald Edwards piqued my curiosity. He tells us that the SNP is inflicting chaos on Scotland right now (viewed from furth of Scotland, I'm intrigued by his definition of "chaos"), and then wonders if the people of Scotland can wait until the next elections in 2021 for a 'solution'.

What can this solution be? Is he proposing a revolutionary overthrow of the Government? Or Westminster unilaterally overthrowing Scottish democratic institutions? Given the chaos that would genuinely result from such actions, it might be better to simply wait until 2021 and let democracy run its course. Also, if I might humbly proffer a suggestion, it could help everyone if we avoid the overuse and exaggeration of such terms as "chaos".

Michael Rossi,

66 Canalside Gardens, Southall, Middlesex.

THE much-vaunted Growth Commission report contains only one significant message. For as long as we continue to measure the prospects of the UK or an independent Scotland in terms of economic and financial orthodoxy then there will be long faces all around.

People will not be persuaded to get off their butts and build a better society if they are constantly bombarded by misery economics, unrepayable debt and financial doom.

These are the numbers of the financial and academic establishment – the economics which suit the vested interests of the one per cent. We have governments in power at Westminster and Holyrood unwilling to even contemplate alternative monetary and economic policies.

There are heterodox and monetarist economists out there clamouring to be heard above the din of big business and the siren voices of big finance. Holyrood should, at the very least, offer them the opportunity to produce their version of Scotland’s future.

Come on Nicola, look over the top of your reading glasses.

RF Morrison,

Millaig, 29, Colquhoun Street, Helensburgh.

THE First Minister claims that the proposed relationship with sterling in a broken-off Scotland "would not be the same as’’ that which stands with Panama and the US dollar ("Sturgeon: I’ll confront May over referendum in autumn", The Herald, May 29). She got that right. It would be much worse.

As always when these fantasy assertions are made by the SNP, no allowance is made for what the UK, or EU, or any other will do or think. The assumption seems to be that they will all do exactly what the SNP leaders wish them to do. The best example of this is the assertion that Spain, and other veto-holding countries with troublesome regions of their own, will somehow welcome a broken-off Scotland into the EU.

Some hope. They can piggy-back on the pound sterling if they wish in their economic wonderland but should the UK economy ever catch a mild cold, the SNP’s Scotland will need treatment for severe if not terminal pneumonia.

Alexander McKay,

8/7 New Cut Rigg, Edinburgh.

THE EU’s chief negotiator, Michel Barnier, must have been delighted to find Nicola Sturgeon a willing volunteer to join his team, as she stood alongside him in Brussels and attacked the UK Government’s position. The First Minister will be hoping that the third of her own supporters who voted for Brexit will see the funny side of her working so hard to find a way to give all those powers back to Brussels.

Keith Howell,

White Moss, West Linton, Peeblesshire.

ANDREW Wilson's Growth Commission report recommends that Scotland stops receiving upwards of £10 billion per annum from the rest of the UK and instead pays in £5.3 billion. Which sounds just like the sort of deal that a former RBS economist would come up with.

Peter A Russell,

87 Munro Road, Jordanhill, Glasgow.