Letters: Time to accept the EU is not a better prospect than the UK

With Scotland’s public services critically needing the undivided attention of our Government, the SNP instead chooses to prioritise grievance and divisiveness on Brexit, trying to secure a breakaway from the rest of the UK.

Yet as all the signs are the people of Scotland are not falling for the SNP’s attempts to paint the EU as a more attractive prospect than the UK, why is the First Minister simply not listening?

Keith Howell,

White Moss, West Linton, Peeblesshire.

AS an SNP voter, I commend Dr Gerald Edwards (Letters, January 10) for his insightfully sensible overview of the plausible impending Scottish economic disaster unless the SNP “catches a grip”, and Nicola Sturgeon stops blindly pursuing her "teenage dreams" of Scottish Independence, as Martin Redfern Lletters, January 10) puts it.

I also note that in your Letters Pages for the above date, Iain AD Mann continues to promote his one-sided argument for Scottish independence; he makes a fair point about Scotland currently having tariff-free movement across the EU for "a significant proportion of...trade and business”; however, Scotland's major trade and business partner is the rest of the UK; therefore, Scottish independence would visit upon us just those impeding tariffs for our dealings with our current major trade and business partner.

Also, his suggestion that the winning proportion in the recent EU Referendum should have been perhaps 60-40, smacks of throwing the toys out of the pram because his side lost a democratic vote.

Perhaps Mr Mann should take note of the today’s headline in The Herald: “Polls force Sturgeon to rule out 2017 independence vote” (The Herald, January 10).

I respect anyone's stance for Scottish Independence, but urge them to a measured consideration.

Philip Adams.

7 Whirlie Road, Crosslee, Renfrewshire.

FOR once I find myself in complete agreement with Iain AD Mann, who suggested David Cameron should have required something more than a simple majority for a vote of such major constitutional significance as Brexit. He proposed 60-40. I agree and propose the same margin should apply in any future vote on Scottish Independence.

Robin Mather,

23f Eskside West, Musselburgh.

MANY of your correspondents continue to lambast Westminster for supposedly marginalising Scotland. We can have no separate negotiating position for staying in the EU. The UK is the sole Brexit agent and it is useless threatening (with a big stick?) the United Kingdom Prime Minister with another independence referendum if she does not press for us to get a special stay of execution after Article 50 is signed into force.

Then again there is your correspondents’ failure to accept that the rUK is our main trading partner, that we get a good whack from the block grant enabling us to spend some £1,400 per head more than the average UK citizen (so we can afford baby boxes and not have food banks) and that on our own we would face the £15 billion annual fiscal deficit (accumulating) plus our £120bn share of the UK accumulated debt.

The EU itself may not be quite the same after the forthcoming leadership elections, and whatever negotiations the 27 permit could well be very different from the hard/soft notions continually pushed at us. Neither the UK nor us separately anyway have much bargaining power, whatever is said about EU nationals' rights here, about our financial support being needed, about the 27 needing our trade more than we need theirs, particularly if they are in no way accommodating.

The UK has rejected the European Union, the consequences are incalculable, so all UK citizens must get stuck back in to reverse the complacency which has developed over our innate abilities. In spite of the monetary shortfalls, enhanced training and education are essential, and we must press families and pupils early on to aim high. There must be anrEmphasis on looking after one's own health. Taxation must be realigned to help all this. this time we really are all in it - up to our necks.

Joe Darby,

Glenburn, St Martins Mill, Cullicudden, Dingwall.

IN Martin Redfern’s letter (January 10), there is an oversight that is even shared among the Scottish political commentariat, including your own David Torrance (“There’s rhyme and reason in Sturgeon’s Brexit manoeuvres”, The Herald, January 9).

When the First Minister appointed her council of experts to advise on protecting Scotland’s relationship with Europe, does it not seem likely that she considered Theresa May might take the UK out of the single market? Was the purpose of the council of experts not precisely to examine the possibilities for Scotland to maintain that relationship in some form, even if the rest of the UK leaves, which today seems more likely following Mrs May’s pronouncements at the weekend?

Moreover, if Nicola Sturgeon appointed that committee of experts in the context of protecting Scottish interests in the event of being taken out of the single market – what has come to be called a “hard Brexit” – was the obvious next question, in the confusion that has followed the EU referendum result, not “what if there is a ‘soft Brexit’, First Minister?” Well, she has answered that question – there would be no need, on those grounds, for another independence referendum, for Scotland’s interests would be protected.

This is not, as Mr Redfern claims, “scaling back on Brexit demands”, but on making clear that her demands are contingent on the actions of the Westminster government with regard to Brexit.

For good measure, Mr Redfern also throws in that the First Minister would not call a referendum now because the opinion polls are against her. He might not have noticed but no referendum has been called and no independence campaign initiated. Even more importantly, while the polls suggest support for independence remains at or about 45 per cent, that is more than half as much again as when the last referendum was called, as then support for independence stood at around 28 per cent. Now we have a much better starting position, I think.

Al0sdair Galloway,

14 Silverton Avenue, Dumbarton.

YOUR editorial (“Correct decision on referendum”, The Herald, January 10”) in focusing on the genuine challenges facing Nicola Sturgeon on the timing of another independence referendum astutely employed the popular quote from Horace “carpe diem”: “seize the day”.

It is worthwhile looking at the (quite excellent) passage from which this aphorism is derived as it provides several quite profound lessons for current political observers.

“Ask not ('tis forbidden knowledge), what our destined term of years,

Mine and yours; nor scan the tables of your Babylonish seers.

Better far to bear the future, my Leuconoe, like the past,

Whether Jove has many winters yet to give, or this our last; This, that makes the Tyrrhene billows spend their strength against the shore.

Strain your wine and prove your wisdom; life is short; should hope be more?

In this moment of our talking, envious time has ebb'd away.

Seize the present; trust tomorrow e'en as little as you may”.

There is one very contemporary piece of advice Horace offers Ms Sturgeon and indeed your political editor : “be careful about trusting pollsters”. Horace says it much more eloquently: “Nor scan the tables of your Babylonish seers.”

Thom Cross,

18 Needle Green, Carluke.