Letters: Smaller firms cannot afford to crash out of EU

As the Prime Minister reveals an ambitious programme of initiatives to boost UK productivity, his officials must work to ensure that they deliver for all firms no matter where they’re located. New schemes must work in a devolved context and should not duplicate the efforts of the devolved governments.

But the larger threat to the prosperity of our local places is a no-deal no-transition Brexit on October 31, for which the great bulk of smaller firms simply aren’t prepared and, in some cases, cannot prepare.

While businesses must do what they can to prepare for all scenarios, UK ministers must stretch every sinew to avoid the circumstances which would put pressure on so many important local operators.

Andrew McRae, Scotland Policy Chair, Federation of Small Businesses, Glasgow G3.

LIKE many an anti-EU correspondent, William Loneskie (Letters, August 1) enjoys distorting facts to suit his argument. His assertion that the EU is "undemocratic" just doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. We elect our MEPs and each country has the option of vetoing any unwanted legislation. This hardly makes any country "subservient to Brussels", as Mr Loneskie would have us believe. There is strength in the unity of the member nations, as we can see with the EU’s protection of the Irish Republic at the moment.

Far more undemocratic, as far as the UK is concerned, is a Westminster Parliament which almost always favours England’s choices by virtue of the very large majority of its MPs. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland always lie in England’s shadow because of the parliamentary arithmetic.

Mr Loneskie criticises "Europhiles who want to keep the UK in the EU at any cost". Perhaps he hasn’t noticed that Boris Johnson and his right-wing government are spending billions of pounds to push through a Brexit which is going to impoverish most of us. Evidence has been slowly mounting since 2016 that Brexit is an act of unpardonable folly.

Dave Stewart, Glasgow G11.

I HAVE to laugh at the reports in different sections of the media that Boris Johnson was intimidated by a few “hate-filled nationalists” on his visit to Bute House and that he exited via the back door as a cowardly means of escaping their heckling ("Sturgeon: Johnson lacks guts for avoiding Scots during trip north", The Herald, July 30). What absolute rubbish. To think that a thick-skinned character like our new PM would act in such manner, especially as he was probably forewarned on what to expect here, is beyond the pale. On the contrary, I would think this means of departure was probably orchestrated by Nicola Sturgeon herself who on receiving him and the new Scottish Secretary at her front door looked distinctly awkward and uncomfortable and probably would not have wanted a repetition of her obvious displeasure at the visit in the full glare of the cameras once again.

Her lack of statesmanship was evidenced by her stony face when receiving her guests.

She just could not bring herself to dignify her high office and at least appear welcoming to the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom however much their views may differ.

Her only saving grace was the fact that she had removed the Saltires on either side of her fireplace unlike when she insulted Theresa May with their display during her first visit in 2016. My point made in these pages at the time that if displaying flags then at least one of them should be the Union flag. After all, she might be a nationalist but she should also remember she represents the entire Scottish population irrespective of their political persuasion and that Scotland is still, and hopefully always will be, a member of the United Kingdom.

Christopher H Jones, Giffnock.

I FEEL no shame (Alan M Morris, Letters, July 31) in not bringing myself to wave a flag in support of my Unionist views. The quiet majority who oppose the SNP see no need to indulge in flag-waving protests.

For Mr Morris's benefit, may I add that at school I was taught that hyperbole means exaggeration beyond the truth without intent to deceive. The last four words are significant.

David Miller, Milngavie.

THE recent "election" of Boris Johnson to the premiership of the United Kingdom has clearly worried many of your Unionist readers, as evidenced by letters (July 31) from Donald Lewis and Robert IG Scott.

Mr Lewis in particular quotes a selection of voting statistics which he characterises as somehow displaying that the Scottish Government has no legitimate argument for independence. Anyone can play that game of course, so I'll give him a few: only 37 per cent of the British electorate voted to leave the EU; only 27 per cent of the British population voted to leave the EU; less than .002 per cent of the British electorate voted for Boris Johnson to be Prime Minister.

Unionists of course are less concerned about current voting patterns than they are about the direction of travel, just as I was on Wednesday afternoon watching storm clouds approaching Ayr from the north. It wasn't raining yet but I took my washing in.

We will all have more to worry about than getting our washing dried if Mr Johnson and his band of careless opportunists get their way. And Unionists will have more to worry about than Brexit if Britain is dragged out of the EU.

John Jamieson, Ayr.

FURTHER to the comments made by Robert Scott, I see that Nicola Sturgeon, in discussing independence, is quoted as saying to Boris Johnson: "I suggested to him we didn’t have that debate in Bute House – that we took that debate out to the public and let the public decide."

Could someone please remind her that she has already done so and “the will of the Scottish people" did decide.

Mrs Freddie Dale, Glasgow G12.

THE SNP wishes an independent Scotland to be in the EU for three reasons: cash, cash and cash. The Scottish economy will not balance without cash from an external source, currently subsidies from rUK/ Westminster. There are hard heads in Brussels who will not welcome a beggar state, even one with a relatively modest quantity of oil.

William Durward, Bearsden.