SO the Scottish Government and Nicola Sturgeon think that nationalising the railways is a good idea ("Sturgeon: Give us the power to nationalise our railways", The Herald, December 21). Clearly it has a track record of running nationalised organisations that justifies this suggestion.

ScotRail seems to have a number of woes: lack of manpower, low or delayed investment in infrastructure, incompetent management and so on.

What about the Scottish Government’s credentials? Which of the following organisations suffer from lack of manpower, low or delayed investment in infrastructure, incompetent management and the like?

NHS – tick. Education – tick. Transport – tick. Police– tick.

Nationalisation still sound good? Hmmm.

The Scottish Government already runs a Nationalised Transport company, Calmac. I suggest it asks the islanders how good this service is and is likely to be in future. You yourself exposed the frailty of Calmac's operations and punctuality.

Don’t think for two minutes that nationalising the railways will fix ScotRail's woes. There is zero evidence that our Government is up to the task.

Sometimes it’s better to fix the problem rather than reorganising. As the Roman Arbiter Gaius Petronius said: “We tend to meet any new (bad) situation by reorganising, and a wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress while producing confusion, inefficiency, and demoralisation."

Ian McNair,

47A James Street, Cellardyke, Fife.

NICOLA Sturgeon wants to nationalise the Scottish Rail system. I'm off to the bookies to put a few pounds on that being as big a disastrous power grab as the failed, abandoned, Transport Police merger, the EU Farm Payments screw-up, and the most recent, whereby the new Social Security Agency (£400 million to set up, £200m a year to run), is paying the UK Government £7m a year for it to control Carers Allowance until 2020, six months after it asked it to take charge of disability payments.

Allan Sutherland,

1 Willow Row, Stonehaven.

THE SNP Government has big ideas but little ability. It bought Prestwick airport years ago with a view to turning it into a profitable business; we are still waiting. Likewise it bailed out a troubled ship maker with no upturn in sight.

It endlessly proposes to instigate a user-friendly Scottish bank and a not-for-profit power company but with nothing to show except for words. Now the SNP wants to run a railway with the huge costs and problems that entails.

Meantime Scotland is in dire need of a health service that actually works for everyone as well as an education system that delivers for all. If the SNP cannot even fix the already-devolved basics after 11 years of trying what hope is there for it taking on an even bigger workload and delivering it successfully? You have to learn to walk before you can run.

Dr Gerald Edwards,

Broom Road, Glasgow.

YOUR banner headline of today proves entirely the delusional nature of the Scottish Government. This is a mere diversionary tactic to get the Scottish electorate's collective eye off the ball from more important poor performance statistics and pressing social issues.

How can she be serious?

CalMac ferries are in disarray, the Borders Railway design was far too small for the passenger uptake. Then we have had all the shenanigans and excuses about not fixing the A82 at the Rest and be Thankful and the general state of our roads network.

No, I think Abelio's record and service shows a far safer pair of hands and bet than this shuddering, thought-provoking proposal.

Archie Burleigh,

Meigle Cottage, Skelmorlie.

NICOLA Sturgeon's suggestion that nationalisation could be considered for the rail network should fill the rail-using public with dread. Consider another state-owned enterprise and the depths of poor performance it has reached – Calmac in its various forms collectively owned by the Government, boats that are old, that break down, and a service that does not deliver real connections to the islands together with an arrogant attitude that only exists in a monopoly. Yes, the rail network needs fixed but so does Calmac. When is this Government going to do something about these two vital travel operations?

Lindsay Keir,

Inchgarvie,

Isle of Arran.

PETER A Russell (Letters, December 21) claims that "nationalism seeks differences, barriers and walls", but most countries in the world, unlike Scotland, operate and co-operate successfully as independent nations, and the most spectacular "differences, barriers and walls" are about to close around Scotland when we are dragged out of the EU against our will.

I'm disappointed that Mr Russell has failed to apologise for his offensive comment in his earlier letter, but in the spirit of the season, I will turn the other cheek and wish him a Merry Christmas, and Yes, a Happy New Year.

Ruth Marr,

99 Grampian Road, Stirling.

ANALOGIES are poor analytical tools when used clumsily; and so it proves when Philip Adams (Letters, December 21), in response to Iain Macwhirter’s article (“The logical stance for Labour would be to back May’s deal”, The Herald, December 19), states: “Let us suppose that the SNP won a future referendum on Scottish independence but say, Renfrewshire “voted overwhelmingly” for Scotland to remain in the UK; in such a case, I suggest the Scottish Government’s stance would be indistinguishable from Westminster’s stance regarding Scotland’s vote within the EU referendum”.

Mr Adams’s analogy is flawed for the simple reason that Renfrewshire, unlike Scotland, and indeed the UK, does not have a Parliament. What Mr Adams needs to address is whether it is “right” for the UK Parliament to overrule, or ignore, the Scottish Parliament, and whether it is “right” for the DUP, given its pro-Brexit stance, to represent Northern Ireland, which voted Remain, at Westminster. May I therefore, likewise, suggest that it will take more than analogies to address these conundrums.

P Fabien,

41 Kingsborough Gardens, Glasgow.