Unbiased facts and figures

Anne T Kegg,

12 Holmwood Avenue,

Uddingston.

October 2.

I, AND I suspect many other people, am getting very confused in the war of words between SNP and (nearly) New Labour in Scotland regarding the state of the nation's finances.

It must be a duty of the Scottish Office as an act of public information to produce a clear unequivocal exposition of public finance, uncluttered by political rhetoric, so that the voters may make an informed decision as to which of the four parties deserve their support.

It is a negation of democracy to allow major decisions, which could have grave consequences to the constitutional future of our country, to be dictated by Mr Dewar's spin-doctors or Mr Salmond's speech-writers.

N P Johnston,

29 High Street, Kinross.

October 2.

WHEN politicians, especially those in the party of government, start using statistics which purport to rubbish their opponents' case, I become suspicious. Experience has shown that, at best, they are being selective with their figures.

Now that a slanging match has started between the Unionists and the SNP, about the alleged costs/benefits of independence, it would be nice to see both sides' claims being subjected to equally rigorous scrutiny. Such scrutiny is certainly, and rightly, being given to the SNP's claims, but not to their opponents'.

How can it be, for example, that Unionists can claim such a huge deficit exists between Scotland's tax take and expenditure, yet at the same time say ''England is stronger with Scotland''? If we really are being subsidised to the hilt, why are the English so desperate to keep us that they will go so far as to say that it is ''morally wrong'' for Scots to want independence? I fail to see how they can have these arguments both ways.

It was sad to see your normally perceptive political editor today suspend his critical faculties by totally accepting the Unionist figures on the alleged structural deficit. I hope in the coming months before the elections for the Scottish Parliament The Herald will do its readers a service by providing a more balanced criticism so that we can judge for ourselves.

Andrew M Fraser,

Cradlehall Cottage, Inverness.

October 1.

SO Alf Young in his article today takes issue with the ''near-legendary #27bn figure unearthed in a Parliamentary answer''. He suggests that this figure is invalid as most of the surplus was due to the early 80s contribution ''pumping the best part of #20bn a year into the UK Government's coffers''.

Certainly, that figure may now be history, and may not happen again, at least at such a wondrous figure. Perhaps, though, Alf Young could project what surplus Scotland could now be contributing to the UK ''coffers'' if such wealth had actually all been invested into Scotland's industrial base.

The peak may be transient, but investment in our own structures and economy at that time with that amount of money would surely not only have resulted in a greater revenue-raising capacity for the ''coffers'' but indeed would also have produced a more viable long-term revenue for the Government.

David J Hood,

9 Church Avenue, Newmains.

October 2.

MR Dewar surely gives the game away when he trumpets ''Scotland does well out of identifiable expenditure''. I think many of us would like to know just how well Scotland does out of non-identifiable expenditure. To take one example, how many fighter or bomber aircraft are built in Scotland? How many Trident submarines are built in Scotland? None, thank God.

How many companies making their money in Scotland pay corporation tax through their London headquarters? How many workers in Scotland have their income-tax affairs handled by an English-based tax centre?

I am a Health Service pensioner paid through the Paymaster General in Crawley in Sussex. My income-tax affairs are handled by a department in Wales. Does that make me a Welsh taxpayer? I have no idea, nor I suspect does Mr Dewar.

I cannot understand (well, maybe I can) why the Labour Party insists on treating what should be public information as an exclusively party matter. I suspect that its assault on SNP economics might shrivel if subjected to real scrutiny.

Arthur Dillon,

Knapperna Cottage,

Udny, Ellon.

October 2.

HAVING over the years got used to seeing various members of the SNP blame our English neighbours for almost all that is wrong in the world today, I had to laugh today seeing that Councillor Gordon Murray thinks that they are also responsible for the decline in Scottish football. Is he really suggesting that Craig Brown has been planted by the English in order to achieve poor results?

The councillor just confirms my belief that most SNP members are well-balanced people - ie, chips on both shoulders.

Derek I G Harper,

Lillybank, Alford, Aberdeenshire.

October 5.