ANAS Sarwar alleges that we “have seen a real neglect of the city of Glasgow” since the SNP won control of the council in 2017 (“Labour leader accuses Aitken of putting SNP before Glasgow's interests”, The Herald, March 3). That’s a bit rich coming from the leader of a party that neglected Glasgow for decades before, a period when the proverbial donkey in a red jacket could have won elections for Labour. A key reason for my quitting Labour was what I saw in large areas of the city a few years ago: decline, decay, poverty and despair, presided over by longstanding Labour councillors secure in their fiefdoms and unable or unwilling to turn things around.

It will take years to make up for Labour’s neglect of Glasgow, but at least Susan Aitken and her administration have made a start. Meanwhile Labour, apparently flush with cash from unknown donors, has adopted the classic “lipstick on a pig” strategy of changing its logo. As Mark Smith points out ("Labour's thistle is not a symbol of my Scotland", The Herald, March 3), it’s not exactly inspiring; bland and dated would be a fair description. What’s Scottish Labour’s next step? Buying new deckchairs for their Titanic of a party?

Mr Sarwar comes across as a personable character, and I have a residual affection for the party to which I donated so many hours of my time in elections past. However, if Labour is to rise again from the ashes, it’s going to have to come forward with some credible long-term policies that would actually improve the lives of those they ask to vote for them. As a start, I suggest they consider the possibility that a self-governing Scotland could make a better fist of things if it wasn’t dependent on the whims of dysfunctional Westminster.

Doug Maughan, Dunblane.

RUSSIA WOULD RELISH UK SPLIT

IT is no surprise that the likes of Michelle Thompson and Michael Russell are attempting to leech on the tragedy of war in Ukraine for their own purpose of the pursuit of Scottish independence.

However, it is extraordinary for Mr Russell (no relation, I am pleased to say) to suggest that Russia had influenced the 2014 referendum in favour of a No vote. In fact, we know that it was self-appointed Russian "observers" who sought to cast doubt on the conduct of the vote – claims which were roundly dismissed by the Electoral Commission. Likewise, it does not need a lot of thought to conclude which result would have suited the Kremlin better: an intact UK secure within Nato or a fractured UK polity, with Nato disrupted by doubts about the future location (or existence) of a major arm of its nuclear deterrent forces?

When you add in the predominance of pro-Yes coverage by Russian news media during the campaign and RT's recruitment of ex-SNP luminaries Alex Salmond and Tasmina Sheikh Ahmad, you have to wonder what planet Michael Russell is living on. There is no doubt at all which outcome Vladimir Putin and his goons would have favoured – and it is not No.

Peter A Russell, Glasgow.

WE WOULD STAY IN ALLIANCE

RICHARD Allison (Letters, March 4) is of the opinion that independence would probably mean Scotland being outside of Nato. It is not clear why he thinks this given the SNP, and for that matter the Conservatives or Labour who might possibly gain power with independence, all favour Nato membership.

A glance at a school atlas will reveal to Mr Allison Scotland’s strategic location where the Atlantic Ocean and the North Sea converge, a location which Nato would definitely want within its sphere of influence – nuclear bombs or not on the Clyde.

Alan M Morris, Blanefield.

THE BEST OF BOTH WORLDS

ADAM Tomkins has hit the nail on the head ("Independence is not in itself a bad idea, it is just that it is unnecessary", The Herald, March 2). In many ways, we now have the best of both worlds, we are both British and Scottish. Why then be forced to choose between them?

Scots used to be famous for being canny; they knew when they were on to a good thing. We have the British navy and the RAF and army to protect our islands (and we now realise how much we need them, and to be part of Nato). We have the security and reputation of the pound for our currency. For most other things, we have our own politicians in Holyrood, and we elected them democratically.

As many columnists have noted, independence for the SNP is a matter of the heart not the head. Wordsworth would have voted for it in his youth when he was enraptured by the French Revolution ("Bliss was it in that dawn to be alive..."). When it comes to details, the nationalists resort to vague promises and obfuscation, as Sir Tom Hunter has just noted ("a long wish list with no magic wand..."). Don't be taken in, be canny.

Peter Gray, Aberdeen.

FLUIDITY OF THE CENSUS

LENNY Hill (Letters, March 3) wonders how many people, including his daughter, will not appear on either the Scottish or UK censuses as a result of relocating to another part of the UK during the one-year gap between the two censuses.

In the days following the completion of the Census and in the weeks, months and years to come, 10 years to be precise, many people will relocate to other parts of the UK. People will die and babies will be born. People will move away from the UK and people will come to the UK. None of them will appear on the Census.

His daughter’s absence will not be a big deal in the great scheme of things. There will be many like her.

David Clark, Tarbolton.

NOTES ON A CROSSWORD CLUE

THE Wee Stinker clue "G-GAG" mentioned by Thelma Edwards (Letters, March 3) was considered by some to be verging on the unfair. No musician myself, I believe that the answer "Happy Birthday" is played in the key of G, and that the song ends by playing piano keys G, A and G.

I trust that this helps Mrs Edwards concentrate on a successful moving of house.

David Miller, Milngavie.

MY WORD...

RECENT letters (February 26 & March 1 & 2) lead me to ponder why abbreviation is such a long word.

R Russell Smith, Largs.

Read more: Nicola Sturgeon is letting down her own people with Ukraine donation