WE have had two referenda in recent years – the Scottish independence referendum and the EU in-out vote.

The independence referendum, supposedly held because it was “the wish of the Scottish people” to be independent, was strongly promoted by the Scottish Government. It published a White Paper “wish list” masquerading as fact. Opposing it was a coalition of parties who gave reasoned argument to support their view without even using the term “cliff edge”. After this bitter and divisive campaign (labelled “joyous and civic” by the SNP) it transpired that separation was not the will of the people after all. The Nationalists blamed “Project Fear” and have continued to push for separation ever since, so the divisions never healed.

The same SNP says the EU referendum was unnecessary, held only in order to solve internal divisions within the Tory Party and appease the far right. The Tory Government opposed Brexit and published reasons why it would be detrimental. Despite this, the UK public chose to believe a group from various parties who, with no collective responsibility for implementing the outcome, published their “facts” on the side of the bus. This too was branded “Project Fear” – of immigrants and ever-closer union with Europe.

In both referenda, the public voted contrary to the wishes of the sponsoring government, demonstrating that referenda are blunt instruments with uncertain outcomes. Despite this, the response from SNP and others who don’t like the outcomes is to re-run both, even though secretly delighted with the outcome of the EUref which provides yet another “Project Fear” Brexit version of a “hard right Tory cliff edge” as a banner under which its Braveheart supporters can all rally. Ironically, many Scots who voted Remain in EUref, in order to avoid Indyref2, now find that vote being used for exactly the opposite. Many who voted for independence now find their votes being used to keep Scotland under EU rule. Years after the votes, the only tangible benefits are that Scotland dodged the falling oil price bullet and EUref at least temporarily halted the rise of Ukip and the hard-right fringe. A re-run will give them an excuse to whip up new support.

We the voters should be very wary of calls for referenda or re-runs. Motives are suspect, outcomes unpredictable and can there ever be any “facts” about a future we can’t predict?

Mark Openshaw

42 Earlswells Road, Cults, Aberdeen.

ACCORDING to Ian McConnell (“Tory Government panders on Brexit but will not put listening ears on”, Herald Business, March 8), “British” car manufactures have, “with good reason”, revved up their warnings in a week which key surveys warned about UK economic growth having stalled. Indeed, having read his piece everything appears to be doom and gloom regarding the UK economy and all is well with the EU.

Whist accepting that there are fundamental problems with the UK car manufacturing industry (which is almost entirely geared to the EU market and only produces around 330,000 vehicles for our domestic market of 2.7 million) there are undoubtedly other factors at work. For example, the switch from diesel to hybrid and electric cars with the requirement to rationalise production, and in the case of Honda the new trade deal which will allow tariff-free cars into the EU.

Mr McConnell does not mention that the German industrial orders have suffered an unexpected 2.6 per cent fall in January and that the EU has slashed the growth rate from 1.7 per cent to 1.1 per cent (the Bank of England latest forecast is 1.2 per cent for the UK) or that the European Central Bank (ECB) has reacted to the threat of recession across the Eurozone with a promise to keep interest rates at a historic low levels for at least until the end of the year. It is also worth mentioning that it is four years since the ECB introduced negative interest rates for deposits causing stress to capital funds.

Then there is the small matter of unemployment rates which are double in France, two and a half times higher in Italy and more than three time higher in Spain – notwithstanding the youth unemployment in these countries are off the chart.

Undoubtedly there are serious challenges ahead with Brexit and the trade wars, but to suggest we have all the problems whilst the EU is sitting comfortably is utter nonsense.

Ian Lakin,

Pinelands, Murtle Den Road,

Milltimber, Aberdeen.

FORD may stop production of engines at its two remaining automotive plants in the UK, BMW ( the Mini), Groupe PSA of France (Vauxhall , Bentley, Toyota and Nissan are likely to exit post-Brexit UK, and former Tory minister Norman Tebbit’s infamous 1981 “on you bike” remark, repeated 2011, updated to four wheels comes to mind.

Ordure, ordure. Merde. Or que será, será? Is anyone listening?

R Russell Smith,

96 Milton Road, Kilbirnie.

ALEXANDER McKay (Letters, March 8) suggest that at last we have someone (the Prime Minister) standing up and saying what many in Scotland think. Mr McKay should perhaps turn this around and ask himself why he has been waiting so long for representation. After all, there are Scottish Conservative MPs in Westminster, are they not singing from the same hymn sheet as their leader, the PM?

Mr McKay suggests Scottish politicians working in Scotland should get off their knees and on to the front foot, when in fact we have a Government in Scotland which is dealing with mitigating measurers to Westminster’s continued austerity agenda and its disastrous Brexit. Right here, right now in Scotland as a result of in-fighting in the Tory Party, Scotland is being dragged out of the EU against her wishes and against all promises made that if Scotland voted to remain part of the UK in 2014, the UK Government would protect our membership of the EU.

Mr McKay may well sing the praises of the PM, but if I were Mr McKay I would be keeping quiet about supporting such a voice from within a Government whose disastrous handling of Brexit can only be seen as maladministration.

Catriona C Clark,

52 Hawthorn Drive,

Banknock, Falkirk.

Read more – Letters: Why the Labour movement should back the EU