IF Nicola Sturgeon thinks that offering some form of confirmatory vote will change some wavering No voters to change their minds and vote Yes in another referendum then she is badly mistaken ("Sturgeon confirms a Yes vote on independence could be reversed", The Herald, September 21).
First, most Scots realise that with independence the chaos and damage to the Scottish economy would be swift and most likely irreversible due to major fundamental changes following an independence vote. For example, we would have a different currency, flight of the financial sector to England to secure their customer base, collapse of shipbuilding on the Clyde and loss of Ministry of Defence jobs and so on. Furthermore, there would be a huge amount of acrimony engendered about who should pay for the future subsidies of green energy based in Scotland, funding the £25 billion required to decommission the oil rigs and of course Trident.
If that was not enough to concentrate the mind then how about the immediate ending of the Barnett Formula and the catastrophic impact on public services, notwithstanding issues about possible tariffs (outside the UK and EU) and border issues?
As a result of the financial crisis we should also expect a mass exodus of people to the rUK and beyond along with the inevitable collapse of property prices similar to what happened in Ireland in 2008.
Furthermore, once the scale of the economic challenges were fully realised by the Scottish people further chaos would follow with the SNP decimated at the polls and the wealthier regions of Scotland demanding autonomy and or retaining close political and economic links with rUK.
In this scenario there would be no stable government to honour some vague pledge on neverendums by Ms Sturgeon.
Ian Lakin, Aberdeen AB13.
I WATCHED Richard Leonard squirming on Sunday Politics Scotland (BBC1, September 22) as he tried to justify his position that Indyref2 should be refused if there was an SNP/Green majority in the 2021 Holyrood elect.
What should be saying is a referendum is based on total votes, so unless the nationalists get at least 50 per cent of the votes there would be no evidence of support for Indyref2, and voters should be absolutely clear that any vote for nationalists is a vote for division, incompetence and Indyref2.
Her should also say that the Labour Party will fight tooth and nail to stop it by offering winning policies and working together with the LibDems and Tories in a non-aggression pact to win seats and form a UK-supporting government.
Allan Sutherland, Stonehaven.
ALEXANDER R McKay (Letters, August 21) contends that Nicola Sturgeon whilst in Germany did not see anyone of importance. In fact she was receiving the M100 Media Award. It represents the fact that she defends European Values and Freedoms. I read the article by the author Jorg Luyken, who also writes for the Daily Telegraph. For me, a German, who has lived and worked in Scotland for 44 years I found the article one-sided and condescending.
I am not a member of the SNP but I do follow politics and like to inform myself as much as I can. I don’t agree with everything Ms Sturgeon and her Government does. As every constituency in Scotland voted to remain in the EU, I also expect her to stand up for Scotland in this matter, and I expect the same of every Scottish MP.
Rosie Lang, Douglas.
IN Alexander McKay’s world Nicola Sturgeon would operate between Bute House and Holyrood, and never go anywhere else. I swear I saw New Zealand’s hugely impressive Prime Minister at the Rugby World Cup in Japan. Just let Ms Sturgeon try that one.
He is also way off beam with his remarks about Der Spiegel. That newspaper emphatically did not call her "populist", but rather a contributor with strong links to the Tories in north-east Scotland made these comments. And, as for Ms Sturgeon's "incurable addiction for photo opportunities of any kind’, has Mr McKay already forgotten about the greatest photo opportunist of all time: Ruth Davidson?
Finally, where does he find a "dramatic drop in poll ratings"? I haven’t come across that one myself.
Ian M Baillie, Alexandria
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel