THE UK governments have at last outlined their roadmaps out of lockdown, “based on data not dates”. Whilst this gives some real hope for an end to the restrictions, the “data" is once more purely about the NHS and the disease (which, for clarity, I totally agree should be important in the decision making), but it takes no account of the misery and consequences of lockdown, such as the potential other deaths (for example, suicides, late diagnoses/treatments of other serious illnesses and more), the effects on people’s mental and physical health, the huge damage to the economy and losses of jobs and businesses, the eye-watering costs of furlough / lockdown (and how they will be repaid) etc etc.

These are also very important for millions of people in the UK and will have a huge impact in life after lockdown if they continue unabated. However, they are given zero value in the roadmap and so, we could have a situation where relatively minor changes in the cases and/or deaths will extend the lockdown, even though such delays will cause huge further costs and tragic economic and personal consequences. They therefore also need real consideration – and grown-up discussion – in the weeks and months ahead (and proper and fair reporting by the media), if the decisions made are proportionate to all of the risks and misery being suffered.

Andy Scott, South Queensferry.

* SO perhaps the end of April for the lifting of some restrictions – with the election being a week or so later. Members of the public aren’t totally stupid, First Minister. Hopefully those in the hospitality and travel industry, hairdressers and the like don’t have short memories when casting their vote.

Mhairi Blair, Greenock.

IS A SECULAR SOCIETY BAD?

MICHAEL Kent’s last paragraph on the Hate Crime Bill and secularism (Letters, February 23) is very revealing. “Another step in the drive to” a secular society suggest a deliberate organised project by un-named agents. Who does he believe is orchestrating it? His “to make Scotland a secular society whether we want it or not” pre-supposes that a secular society is a bad thing being forced on the majority against their will.

The reality is that Scotland already is a de facto secular society, it’s just that the Establishment won’t accept it. Christianity and the Church of Scotland are the traditional bastions of religion in Scotland yet the 2011 Census revealed 54 per cent of the population self-identified as “Christian”, a figure that had dropped by one per cent per annum since the previous census. Current Church of Scotland membership is six per cent of the population and getting less by the day. In Scotland since 2006 more Humanist weddings have taken place than under any organised religion.

In a way, as an agnostic, I envy the faith of those who believe in whatever floats their boat or ark but there was a time when those with faith in the religion believed that the world was flat and the sun revolved round the Earth. There was a time when Christianity burned witches and heretics. We live in an age where some who metaphorically kick with the left foot hate those who kick with the right and vice versa, a phenomenon not confined to Christianity.

So is a secular society a bad thing? Well, it is as long as it contains institutionalised discrimination and distribution of wealth based on a social order with as much relevance to the current or future generations as does traditional religion. Why are the lives of those born today essentially predetermined by events that happened centuries ago? Maybe Holyrood could rise from their collective glutei maximi and do something about real rather than theoretical problems.

David J Crawford, Glasgow.

LET'S HAVE THE MCLAGAN TOWER

PETER McLagan was the MP for the county of Linlithgowshire from 1865-1893. Born of mixed parentage in Demarara in 1823, his father, also named Pete, was the joint owner of a coffee plantation in what is now British Guyana. With money which his father obtained as compensation from the sale of "his" slaves he returned to Scotland with his father and older brother, Henry.

Listed as a graduate from Edinburgh University in 1842 he then was noted as a keen agriculturalist and helped establish the Scottish Chamber of Agriculture. After the death of his father in 1860 he inherited the estate of Mid-Calder and Pumpherston (his elder brother having pre-deceased him in 1850). In 1865 he was approached by his local Liberal Association and was asked to represent them in Parliament. This he duly did and won seven successive Parliamentary elections, thereby becoming the longest-serving Scots MP during the reign of Queen Victoria.

Now considering the fankle that the relevant authorities at Edinburgh University are currently engaged in over the renaming of the David Hume Tower, might I suggest that Mr McLagan's name be considered for this "vacancy"?

David Main, Bathgate.

A DEVINE RULER?

I AM in complete agreement with Doug Marr ("There’s no need for a right royal row … but the time has come for change", the Herald, February 22).

I have never understood the blind acceptance that the "Firm" should be above scrutiny over financial matters, and was like most people, I suggest, caught unawares of the recent deposit of about £100 million into the coffers after the auctioning of the seabed.

The only missing thing from Mr Marr's article is a suggestion or two over possible appointees as President. My own thoughts? How about Sir Tom Devine?

Brendan J Keenan, Glasgow.