I CONGRATULATE Neil Mackay on his columnist of the year accolade, but I need to take very strong issue with his views on the monarchy ("We need to talk about abolishing the monarchy", The Herald. July 2).

The institution should have been buried decades, if not centuries, ago, he says; and replaced by what, I wonder? A presidency? Who would visit these shores to wallow in the traditions of a presidency? The young royals are laughing at the general public, are they? The young royals are, in fact, among the best assets which we now have in this country, in my view. The unified Ireland and independent Scotland of Mr Mackay’s discourse remain to be seen; together with their relationship to “The Firm”.

Abolish the monarchy? We need to think very long and hard before we go down this road, I think; the loss, in my opinion, would be ours, and quite incalculable, despite all the perceived imperfections of the royal house and its ancient rituals.

Brian D Henderson,

Glasgow G42.

NEIL Mackay maintains that "the Queen is the great symbol for the class-ridden stratification of society" and that the monarchy should be "subjected to rigorous debate". I agree with these sentiments unreservedly. He dismisses comprehensively the main arguments in support of the institution based upon the character of the Queen, tradition, and tourism.

However, in my view, he is faced with a profound lack of enthusiasm about doing anything about it. He is, as it were, whistling into the wind. Those of a republican tendency are in a distinct minority, viewed as being a bit eccentric, and are likely to continue to be so regarded for a few generations to come. Large numbers of the Queen's subjects are apathetic and could not care less. Other significant numbers consider that somehow the Royal Family is interwoven with the very fact of being British. Some believe that having a Royal Family puts us one up on those countries which do not have one. Moreover, most British people are not traditionally up for anything of a revolutionary nature and, in my view, it would take something like a major change of attitude to dispatch the monarchy.

To me, most of what Mr Mackay wrote made complete sense. However, he is preaching to the converted so far as I am concerned. One lacuna in his narrative was that he did describe his preference for a new form of head of state once the monarchy has ended. That would be an important element in securing, hopefully and eventually on the sunlit uplands, his desired constitutional change.

Ian W Thomson, Lenzie.

THANK you, Neil Mackay. Hopefully people will engage with the much-needed grown-up conversation.

Anne Thornson, Edinburgh EH16.