THE First Minister begs our indulgence, quoting "experience" as the SNP's unique selling point ("Sturgeon sells SNP’s ‘experience’ as election starting pistol is fired", The Herald, March 25).

In 2007, it was "experience" and the lack thereof which was of most concern in this household; running the local council was small fry compared to governing a country. Domestically, the SNP set about the process of centralisation, reducing parameters to those more in line with the scope of its experience – for example, Police Scotland. Time has marched on and as recently as today (March 25), a number of issues were raised in the pages of The Herald. The party's record in the area of large-scale public works leaves a lot to be desired:

* The Queen Elizabeth University Hospital ("Demand for fatal accident inquiry into child death at Glasgow super-hospital"): "A report had warned of infection issues and the water supply at the hospital just one week before it opened, but it was 'ignored'." To have built a "super-hospital" in the vicinity of the Shieldhall Treatment Works built for Glasgow Corporation to process the sewage of the south side of the city and of the burgh of Govan may have been considered a landmark achievement, but as any Govanite can tell you, the old Southern General Hospital was called the "Suffering General" for a reason.

* Ferguson Marine and the construction of two ferries ("Can Ferguson recover to play key role in Scots shipbuilding?"): Just two small ferries and so far, the cost has risen to more than double the original estimate of £97 million to £250m. Seven years to build a ferry; one can surely not ascribe a lack of experience to the good men of the Clyde, so where then does the fault for the fiasco lie?

As regards Government policy, let us look at education ("Sturgeon is urged to give a date for closing the attainment gap"): "An Audit Scotland report this week found that, despite progress being made, the attainment gap remained wide, with a difference of 36.2% in the number of school leavers with five awards above level five from the most and least affluent backgrounds." For CfE, read the Curriculum for Expedience; the expedience in question was economic. The 2008 Crash had grave consequences, funding was slashed, there were redundancies, early retirement packages. Vague terminology allowed John Swinney to offer "a variety of models" to suit school budgets.

Perhaps the SNP should reflect on its experience to date and attend to the learning of lessons.

Maureen McGarry-O'Hanlon, Balloch.

TIME HAS COME TO SAY NO

I REALLY would have thought that even for someone with Nicola Sturgeon's thick skin the scale of recent events at Holyrood might have led to her considering her position.

The electorate of Scotland is thoroughly disenchanted with the situation at Holyrood. Hopefully the Scottish Parliamentary elections will resolve this wholly unacceptable situation, and cast the SNP into the wilderness.

For far too long now we have been subjected to a political scene which has failed in its role of governing Scotland. For some time now Holyrood has been inundated with intrigue, police investigations, court actions, and downright unpleasantness. It is no longer a matter of what is right, or wrong. The whole ghastly business is making Scotland look like some sort of Eastern European republic of yesteryear.

Surely it is high time, fellow Scots, that we take cognisance of the thoroughly undemocratic nature of the SNP. Its style is more Soviet than democratic. For example, I would suggest that, if you should dare to remonstrate against the SNP party line, you will be accused of being anti-Scottish. In my view membership of the SNP does not denote being loyal to Scotland – it merely denotes political extremism.

The time has come to say no to the policies of the SNP, especially its contention that Scotland should become independent of the UK. Without doubt we are much better off continuing to be a significantly important part of the UK.

Robert IG Scott, Ceres, Fife.

DUMBFOUNDED BY LABOUR STRATEGY

LABOUR’S new campaign attacking the Conservatives floored me; I cannot fathom the reasoning behind why it should do that. It is, it seems, prepared to have all guns blazing at the Tories and not a word, not a syllable, of criticism of the woman and the party who have shamelessly harmed and are continuing to harm Scotland more than its nemesis Margaret Thatcher or any Tory ever did.

Every time Labour looks like it is becoming electable again, the lunatic elements seem to take over.

Alexander McKay, Edinburgh EH6.

BAD TIMES FOR THE TORIES

IT'S been a bad week for the Scottish Tories.

Nicola Sturgeon was exonerated by James Hamilton, they were left hanging out to dry by their erstwhile allies in the no confidence vote and their new leader was exposed as impulsive and inept.

Building the scaffold before the trial might play out well in Hollywood westerns, but not so much in Holyrood hearings.

The poor judgment of Douglas Ross might be excused by inexperience, but there can be no similar excuse for Ruth Davidson and Murdo Fraser. The question is, did they encourage this folly or, worse, try to rein in Mr Ross without success?

Either way, it leaves their party open to charges of political opportunism and desperation.

Bill Calder, Galashiels.

PROCEDURES WILL BE IMPROVED

IT appears Allan Thompson (Letters, March 25) would prefer for Scotland to be run by an anachronistic Westminster Parliament that unashamedly over many decades has made little effort to seriously improve its procedures to facilitate scrupulous handling of sexual harassment complaints, than run by a relatively new Holyrood parliament that has attempted to significantly progress its procedures and, having acknowledged mistakes made, will no doubt improve those procedures further so that those suffering any form of harassment will be encouraged to voice their complaints in the future.

Regrettably recent complainants have essentially been let down, but matters that would have been swept under the carpet elsewhere have in Scotland already been the subject of scrutiny, inquiry and judgments which will make for a more informed Scottish Government, irrespective of its political persuasion, going forward.

Stan Grodynski, Longniddry.

SALMOND PUTTING HIS EGO FIRST

I AM baffled that Alex Salmond is apparently willing to destroy our chances of independence by continuing his battle with the SNP Government ("Salmond takes legal action against Scots Government", The Herald, March 25). If he is responsible for an election result that allows the unionists to kick the referendum into the long grass then history will record that he put his ego before Scotland’s independence, and would put him right up there in Donald Trump ego territory.

Although many serious mistakes have been made in this deplorable saga, remember that it started as a result of his behaviour and the notion of some conspiracy against him has been disproved.

Sandy Slater, Stirling.

BLATANT BRIBERY

I AM appalled at the blatant bribery of the Scottish Government, six weeks before an election, announcing a four per cent rise in pay for NHS workers ("NHS staff in Scotland offered 4% pay rise", The Herald, March 25).

I have no grouse with these workers being properly remunerated, we all know they are underpaid and overworked, but the barefaced effrontery of this obvious "reward for votes" move is breathtaking in its arrogance.

Isobel Hunter, Lenzie.

VACCINE PURCHASE NOT SELFISH

A NUMBER of correspondents have written to express concern because the UK (and other) governments have purchased quantities of Covid-19 vaccines which are far in excess of the requirements necessary to immunise their populations. They say that this action is selfish, and risks depriving third world countries of the means to bring their own Covid-19 outbreaks under control.

However, I do note that the UK Government has contributed £548 million to the £4.3 billion Covax fund, which exists to supply vaccines to low-income countries, so perhaps this is where some of this large quantity of vaccines are destined, after all.

Christopher W Ide, Waterfoot.

WHY BRITAIN AND NOT FRANCE?

DOUG Maughan (Letters, March 25) makes the absurd sweeping generalisation that immigrants arriving in the UK by illegal means are all asylum seekers, rather than economic migrants, and he denounces Priti Patel for showing “ignorance of the realities". I beg to differ.

For a proper understanding of what he terms the “realities", he needs to explain why they did not seek asylum in France, or in any of the other countries they have had to travel through before reaching the Channel? Or should we not even attempt to differentiate between economic migrants and asylum seekers?

Alan Fitzpatrick, Dunlop.

Read more: Holyrood is our best hope of living in a country to be proud of, not ashamed of