WhilE I welcome Wendy Alexander's damascene conversation regarding the concept of popular sovereignty, I am puzzled by it. It seems a strange time for the Labour Party in Scotland to back an independence referendum. With independence and the status-quo running neck-and-neck in the polls in a straight contest - what Ms Alexander appears to have backed - it betrays the panic in Labour's ranks that it now feels this is its only way forward. To put it bluntly, it has seen the turn of the tide and wishes to make a quick dash for it before the causeway (to its preferred devolved future) is closed over behind it.

As a proponent of independence I am firmly of the opinion that a referendum could well be won in the coming three or four months - were it held. However, the current minority administration at Holyrood stood on a manifesto commitment to hold a referendum on the future of the country, only after having established a reputation for competence in its first term.

While I would agree that the past year has seen major strides made toward this goal, it is unfair simply to "hardwire" a referendum from Westminster at this stage. In addition, such a referendum could have all sorts of undemocratic provisions imposed on Scotland, as was the case in 1979.

It may not be overwhelming, but it is genuine. In contrast, Scottish Labour was mauled at the Holyrood election of last year, and UK Labour suffered further damaged as the Tories advanced last week in England and Wales. Alex Salmond was elected First Minister by the people of Scotland, while Wendy Alexander and Gordon Brown have not even received a democratic mandate from their own parties. Finally, 2010 looks likely to be a year of key referendums throughout the UK - in Wales Labour appears to have agreed on a referendum on extended devolution in that year, and there may yet be a referendum on the future of Northern Ireland as well. Therefore, I judge it is little more than a sign of growing desperation that Labour now feels the decision on Scotland's constitutional future must be made at this instant - while the going remains relatively good - before things become decidedly worse for them.

Patrick Kirkwood, 22 Weston Terrace, West Kilbride. Now that Wendy Alexander is apparently in favour of a referendum on Scottish independence, will she pay for the costs of setting up her short-lived commission on devolution? Only in March this year she was against such a referendum. Is there no end to the Labour Party U-turns these days?

Mags MacLaren, 2 Avondale Drive, Paisley. When David Cameron tagged the Prime Minister as "a loser, not a leader" he was merely doing with words as Peter Mandelson had with deeds in 1994. Now, at Gordon Brown's first great electoral test, both men have been vindicated wildly beyond their respective hopes and fears. TV psephologists gave us some helpful benchmarks before the local elections in England and Wales. A loss of 100 seats would be bad news for New Labour and 200 would be a disaster. Labour lost more than 330 seats.

Comparisons are inevitable between Gordon Brown and Iain Duncan Smith, the hapless Tory leader, dumped by his own MPs in 2003. The ex-Chancellor has long experience of high office, is an arch-policy wonk and a man of great political calculation. None of this applied to poor IDS. Yet, in leadership skills, Gordon Brown makes IDS look like Winston Churchill and Napoleon rolled into one. Brown remains a workaholic, hands-on, interfering, micro-managing obsessive. On matters of high strategy he is weak and indecisive.

These failures of leadership have how plunged his party into an electoral abyss, with a smaller popular vote than the Liberal Democrats. Labour heartland councils in the north of England fell to their opponents. Gordon Brown even delivered London to Boris Johnson, a glorified "paper" candidate chosen by the Tories only because they had written off a metropolis that no serious Tory wanted to contest. Scottish Labour must be relieved to have escaped Thursday's bloodbath, given the news from Wales. If Labour citadels such as Blaenau Gwent, Merthyr Tydfil and Torfaen can crumble then what hope for even for Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill or Airdrie and Shotts? Never glad confident Gordon again.

Thomas McLaughlin, 4 Munro Road, Jordanhill, Glasgow. Alex Orr (Letters, May 2) commented on the London Unionist newspaper poll question - asking if respondents wanted Scotland to be "a completely separate state outside the UK", which, of course, achieved the result sought by the paper.

This was followed by Alexander McKay (Letters, May 3) to say that Scotland would be "isolated from the rest of the UK" and to claim anything else would be "dishonest".

Here we are again in the world of emotive words when discussing a perfectly simple proposal. Words used by Unionists of all persuasions are all designed to convey a disaster scenario and I quote some used many times: break, split, destroy, tear out, smash, rip apart and more recently wrench.

Of course Scotland would be isolated from the UK, but in a lesser way than Portugal is isolated from Spain, Norway from Sweden, France from Germany, and Italy from Austria and every other country with a contiguous border with another. There would initially still be links between Scotland with England in defence, currency and the monarchy at least. Such so-called "isolation", however, total or otherwise, allows a country freedom to form its own associations and treaties without being under the control of another state.

Nigel Dewar Gibb, 15 Kirklee Road, Glasgow.