DOES the SNP see no contradiction between its aim of a fairer society and the suggestion that immigrant workers, particularly highly skilled, highly paid migrants, should pay less income tax than those of us already here (“SNP unveils ‘Golden Hello’ tax breaks for migrants”, The Herald, May 25)? How fair is that? And who qualifies as a migrant? If this is designed to poach doctors, nurses or maths teachers from south of the Border, just watch morale among Scottish workers drop like a stone. And when the temporary tax relief stops, how many migrants will stay? They can simply skedaddle south again, taking their tax windfall with them.

Not only would such an unfair tax regime cause widespread resentment, it appears to confirm that higher taxation for the highly paid, as introduced by the SNP Government only this year, acts as a deterrent to the highly skilled workers we wish to attract. So, first we will deter them from coming with high levels of taxation and then we will try to entice them back with short-term inducements.

This muddled thinking on the impact of tax changes is unlikely to win over any No voters to the cause.

Carole Ford,

132 Terregles Avenue, Glasgow.

HAVE I understood The New Case for Optimism? Does it propose that if you are Scottish, and live, work and invest in Scotland you pay the highest tax in the UK, but if you are not from Scotland you pay less?

Donna McBeath Smith,

8 Alva Street, Edinburgh.

THE SNP has informed us that every person in Scotland will be £4,100 better off after independence (“SNP unveils blueprint to emulate best small economies”, The Herald, May 24). How will we receive this generous windfall? Is it a one-off payment? Will it be annual? Over a lifetime? That’s more than £200,000; £341 every month until I’m 85. Will my employer pay me an extra £4,100? Or will I just feel like I’m £4,100 better off from the warm patriotic glow of living in an independent Scotland?

Will the Dutch-owned ScotRail provide me with a £4,100 discount to make it to work in the first place? Will a new type of benefit be created that will dispense this to me on a monthly basis? At the moment, many of my generation are unable to progress to full-time, steady work and have yet to receive the Living Wage under the SNP, so this would certainly help ameliorate some financial concerns.

I’m sure all questions will be answered, and if not we will just be asked to trust the same party that would have financially ruined Scotland in 2014, as real events proved. Such talk is disingenuous and I expect many of the SNP must know this. The £4,100 figure is good for grabbing headlines and potential votes, as it surely is intended to do, but the notion that this is how much better off I’d be, in real terms, is ludicrous.

David Bone,

1 Ailsa Street West, Girvan.

KEITH Howell (Letters, May 25) cannot be serious when he naively says “there is surely a glaring contradiction in viewing the UK Union as being nothing but bad, despite Scotland having significant influence over its future through devolution and representation in Westminster”.

Significant influence? He is evidently oblivious to the fact that (a) the existing devolved powers are not sufficient to allow the Scottish Government to do what it needs to do in certain areas, for example immigration and taxation (particularly in light of Brexit),

(b) devolution itself is under serious threat from the UK Government and (c) despite a high number of MPs at Westminster, their ‘representation in Westminster’ is scornfully undermined at every turn.

Iain Macwhirter is right. A second vote on Scottish independence is now inevitable (The Herald, May 23).

Dennis White,

4 Vere Road, Blackwood, Lanark.

KEITH Howell touched on the “positives of the UK that have benefited Scotland”. They are far outweighed by the UK’s suppression of the McCrone Report of 1974, which stated that an independent Scotland would prosper on its oil revenue, by the failure of the UK to establish a Norwegian-style oil fund, by stationing nuclear missiles, unwanted by unions, churches and civil society in Scotland, and most recently, by dragging Scotland, against its will to an unwanted, unplanned, divisive and chaotic Brexit.

Colin Campbell,

Braeside, Shuttle Street, Kilbarchan.

I VIEWED today (May 25) the part of Jo Coburn’s political slot featuring the Growth Commission’s report. Her invited contributors on the Daily Politics show in BBC2 were Andrew Wilson, chairman of the commission, and Pamela Nash of Scotland in Union. The total time devoted to their discussion, determined by Ms Coburn, could not have been more than 15 minutes, which considering the importance of the subject was woefully inadequate .

The presentation demonstrated the familiar BBC trivial treatment of similar subject matter. Full marks to Andrew Wilson however for preventing Ms Coburn’s frequent interruptions to distract him .

Irrespective of views held by readers on the content or context of the report, the BBC’s presentation was disgraceful.

J Hamilton,

1 Jackson Place, Bearsden.

HOW different would Scottish history have been if Andrew Wilson had retained his list Holyrood seat in 2011, instead of being demoted in the rankings after internal party wrangling?

He seems a decent, able type of person who, with the support of Alex Salmond, could have already implemented many of the Growth Commission policies, fully exploited devolution, proved the SNP could run an independent Scotland and provided evidence on which to vote Yes or No.

His realism would have scared voters in 2014 but in 2016, having demonstrated real achievements in government, the SNP might have won a convincing mandate for a referendum in 2019.

Instead Scotland declined under the SNP, riven by anger and bitterness, and ruled by pale imitations of the first SNP Cabinet with neither the ability, credentials nor desire to implement the market-based, hard-nosed policies Mr Wilson’s ideas demand.

But he may have done us a favour by legitimising the approach. Maybe all the parties will include the many policies that don’t require independence in their 2021 manifestos.

Allan Sutherland,

1 Willow Row, Stonehaven.