OVER the past few months there have been numerous letters highlighting the generosity of the English Treasury in giving billions to the Scottish economy to keep us afloat during the pandemic.

Could I remind them all that Scotland saved the English economy in the 1970s with our oil resources, as they were about to go cap in hand to the IMF?

At that time, had we not been lied to about the life of our oil resources, we could have been as rich a country as Norway, having no need for English hand-outs.

The present assistance is only a fraction of what we’ve put into the Treasury, not only with our oil revenues but exports of food, whisky, technology, etcetera.

This is ongoing even today although the oil revenues have depleted; we still make billions selling it to other nations who are not going green as the UK but depend on this resource.

The Westminster government also make millions dishing out licences for companies to search for more oil and gas in our waters. There is much more available to make much more for us before we are milked further.

Also in the Herald’s letters page (“One consequence of independence”, April 23) Stephen Simpson, a company director, gives a list of government policies failure in Scotland. This can be duplicated on a grander scale in England, to where he’s apparently considering moving his Scottish-based company.

I would suggest that he do that, as we do not want companies in Scotland run by directors with no vision or backbone. He probably does not have a full grasp of the situation as it looks like he lives in Powys, in Wales,

I’m also a director of a company, which I started during the downturn in the 1980s, I had faith in my country and we’ve never looked back, We are still going strong.

Never would I consider not backing an independent country with so much future to look forward to.

Tom Webb, Callander.


MY first impression was to agree with Russell Hopwood’s letter (April 23), in as much as we are approaching a critical election ahead, but that was where my agreement ended. The picture painted by Mr Hopwood is certainly not how I view Scotland.

First, we have his reference to finances – monies pouring in from the UK Treasury to Scotland – begging the questions: is there no Scottish money going into the UK Treasury?; where do our taxes go?; where does the business tax raised in Scotland go?

These are questions that Mr Hopwood needs to ask himself. And, of course, where has all the wealth created over decades from Scottish oil gone? It certainly has not gone into any future funding for Scotland.

On poverty and, in particular, child poverty, Mr Hopwood conveniently overlooks the Child Payment – £10 a week, which will be doubled if the SNP wins the election – that is currently being rolled out in Scotland.

It is the only place in the UK that is taking this positive action in an effort to tackle child poverty.

I do concede that much more needs to be done, but when 86 per cent of welfare spend in Scotland is reserved to Westminster, the Scottish Government is limited in making progress on the massive issue of poverty.

The harrowing drugs deaths in Scotland are an issue Mr Hopwood highlights and I would respectfully ask, why have we no safe consumption rooms in Scotland?

Time and time again the SNP MP Alison Thewliss has demanded safe rooms in her constituency in Glasgow, but time and time again this request has been denied, because Scotland does not have devolved powers on drug policy.

However, in an effort to address the harrowing death rate from drugs in Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon has appointed a Drugs Minister and set £250 million funding in place to tackle the issue with the limited powers we do have on drugs.

So we really do need to see both sides of the argument and, yes, highlight the grievances, but we must also highlight the positive steps that are being taken amidst such limited powers.

Catriona C Clark, Banknock, Falkirk.


NICOLA Sturgeon continues to seek to hoodwink the Scottish nation into believing that her, and her Nationalist Party’s fanatical obsession with divorcing us from the rest of the UK, will deliver the dream.

* What she is not so keen on telling us every day when she smugly addresses the Scots are a few indisputable truths:

* How far behind we are in comparison to other UK nations in delivering Covid19 vaccinations

* That Scottish children have spent an average of six weeks’ less time in school during the pandemic than their English counterparts

* That the money for the furlough scheme to help preserve jobs throughout the pandemic came from the UK government – not Holyrood

* That the facts and figures quoted by the SNP in support of independence are drawn from 2018 – pre-pandemic and based on fanciful North Sea Oil revenues.

* That there will be significant job losses because of her intention to call for the removal of Trident, and from national and international companies withdrawing their offices from Scotland

* The decrease in property values in the wake of vast swathes of disillusioned Scots selling up and heading south of the border

* and the inevitable reduction in tax revenues to the Scottish government as a result of many of the above points.

It is indeed a dream. And what is more, it is not a dream we will be able to wake up from, for it will quickly descend into a hellish nightmare that will be real.

It is time for Scottish voters to stand up to Nicola Sturgeon and say “no more” to the suffering that she is prepared to inflict on this nation in pursuit of vanity.

Daniel Lander, Glasgow.


RUTH Marr’s letter (April 22) says she finds it strange that another of your readers has placed his trust in Anas Sarwar at the forthcoming election.

Ms Marr goes on to explain that her beloved First Minister has her sights set on lifting children out of poverty, and therefore the reader should give both his votes to the SNP.

Why on earth would any sane voter do that, when the SNP has been in power for 14 years, and is the party which has caused the existing state in which our children find themselves?

Case closed. The reader has made the correct decision by placing his trust in Anas Sarwar, or indeed in any other candidate whose party could only do much better for our country and rid it of the desperate state in which we find ourselves, thanks to the collapsing SNP.

Walter Paul, Glasgow.


I AM grateful to George Rennie for pointing out that the SNP have suggested a bridge from Gourock to Dunoon (letters, April 23). I had missed that, but what a brilliant idea, especially if the cost could be kept down to the £1.35 billion of the Queensferry Crossing, as suggested by Mr Rennie.

A quick visit to Google Earth showed me that another crossing from Portavadie to Tarbert or, perhaps, at Lochgilphead would open up the Mull of Kintyre and provide a quicker route to Inveraray and Oban while also relieving the situation at the Rest and Be Thankful.

The whole of that beautiful area, opened up by two or three bridges for less than £5 billion, would provide a huge economic boost for such a large part of Scotland. Compared to the £20 billion suggested by Boris and the Tories for pie in the sky across Beaufort’s Dyke, a Gourock-to-Dunoon crossing makes real sense.

John Jamieson, Ayr.


IT is not often that Willie Rennie commands attention, but his assertion that a pro-referendum majority in Holyrood would not constitute a legitimate mandate is astonishing and anti-democratic.

Is this the same minority Liberal Democratic party that howled for an EU referendum in 2007/2008, not because they wanted to leave, but simply to jump on a populist bandwagon? An EU referendum was eventually held by a party which won less than 37 per cent of the vote on a two-thirds turnout.

Mr Rennie also wants that “vacuum of integrity”, Boris Johnson, to decide whether Scots should have a say in their own futures. Did the Scottish Lib Dems (and Scottish Labour) not sign up to the Claim of Right, which happened to mention “the sovereign right of the Scottish people to determine the form of government best suited to their needs”?

Mr Rennie asserted a year ago that Holyrood had all the powers it needed, yet his party again puts forward its fictitious claim of standing in favour of “federalism”.

G.R. Weir, Ochiltree.


I LOVED George Galloway’s hilarious Party Political Broadcast. Best of all was the mondegreen: at the end, I discovered that his party is called All for Unity; up to that point, I’d thought his candidates were saying All for Lunacy. Which might have been more appropriate.

Doug Maughan, Dunblane.