I AGREE entirely with Mark Smith (“The soft Yes supporters who could decide all our futures”, The Herald, December 9), the crux of the matter being his question “if Brexit is bad for the economy and hurts the weakest in society, what on Earth will independence do?”

I have often challenged nationalists with my question “How will the poor, the sick, the unemployed, the homeless and the disabled cope with the inevitable financial turmoil following independence on top of Brexit?” It will take many years of trade talks to sort out Scotland’s terms of trade with the EU and the UK. Needless to say, I have received no answer.

Until the nationalists come up with an answer as to how they will protect those at the margins of society in a post-EU, post-UK Scotland I shall not give further consideration to voting Yes in IndyRef2 even though I have come close to thinking I ought to in recent months.

John Milne, Uddingston.

I RECENTLY retired from a career as a public health doctor in Glasgow. I would like to appeal to the Scottish public to vote SNP on Thursday, whether or not they support independence, in the interests of the public health.

I believe the SNP has the best prospect of reducing the income and wealth gap, introducing protective public health policy, investing in health-promoting infrastructure and pre-school education, moving toward renewable energy, and creating a fairer Scotland. The First Minister recently called for a debate on the future of the Royal Family, which is critical if we are to stop believing that it is acceptable for some people to live under a bridge while some people live in castles. The SNP's overall approach is the only strategy that has any chance of both preserving the planet and improving the health of the Scottish people. A society characterised by a significant number of extremely rich people and a sizeable fraction of very poor people is never going to progress. Particularly if it remains largely controlled by a much larger country that is ruled by private school elites, who shamelessly deceive the electorate and incite racist bigotry.

In contrast to Labour, the SNP policy is opposed to the nuclear deterrent which has been a historical threat to global public health and a waste of scarce resources. Decades of reaping what we sow, in the Middle East, should have taught us that we in the West have created our enemies and that nuclear weapons cannot protect us from them now. Only dialogue and an ethical foreign policy will achieve that. In contrast to Labour, the SNP has a very effective leader.

I will be voting SNP because I fear a majority government under Boris Johnson. Do I think Scotland could easily "go it alone"? Maybe not. But I would rather pay more tax in an independent Scotland to make it work than be affluent in a divided country that is oppressed by Westminster, angered by daily lies from Conservative politicians that go largely uncontested by the BBC. I believe the SNP has tried its best to both improve the public health and preserve the NHS in Scotland with inadequate resources from Westminster superimposed on years of discriminatory regional policy dating back to the creation of the New Towns and Thatcherite closures of critical Scottish industries. I shudder to think what the future holds for the public health in Scotland if the Conservatives win an outright majority on Thursday.

Dr Helene Irvine, Buchlyvie.