Letters: Supreme Court ruling will be a win-win for the SNP

Moreover, in such circumstances what are the chances of the Conservatives going to the country any time soon? For that matter, if those numbers don’t change, what are the chances Liz Truss will celebrate Christmas at Chequers?

But, let’s suppose Ms Dugdale is correct that Plan A is scuppered by the Supreme Court, for Ms Dugdale’s prognosis to be anywhere near correct does it not require more than a gain of three seats? Moreover, is the Supreme Court case not a “win-win” for the SNP? Either Holyrood is confirmed to have the powers it claims, in which case “it’s game on”. Or, it doesn’t, and it’s still “game on”, because it pretty much does away with any nonsense of a “voluntary union”, because Scotland could only progress its independence by permission of a court outwith Scotland (explicitly excluded by the Act of Union). Less “voluntary” and more a sort of “you can check out any time you like, but you can never leave” Union. Either way, it’s game on.
Alasdair Galloway, Dumbarton

• I ALWAYS enjoy Brian Taylor's articles, but would gently remind him that when Labour “lost” Scotland in 2015, it was against a 3.6% swing to Labour in England. The “bitterly divided UK Labour Party… remote from Westminster power” was for a later period of Labour history ("The fundamental flaw which poses a permanent challenge for all the Unionist leaders", The Herald, October 8). Labour in Scotland by 2015 had lost credibility and traction through decades of indolence and entitlement. The promises made in 2014 and never realised, did not help.

The Labour Party in Scotland has had 15 different periods of leadership in the 15 years since the SNP took power in 2007. The Tories fewer, but neither looks comfortable as a non-autonomous entity. The answer seems obvious, but is powerfully resisted, both inside and outside Scotland.
GR Weir, Ochiltree

Sturgeon's mask has slipped

MAKE no mistake, when Nicola Sturgeon said “I detest the Tories and everything they stand for”, she knew exactly what she was saying and why (“What we do when political ideas get lost in translation”, The Herald, October 10).

On a daily basis the First Minister and her leadership colleagues seek to demonise their opponents and stoke ill-feeling against the UK. On this occasion her language stepped over a line and when called out on it, her attempt to reinterpret her meaning was clearly false.

Those who consider themselves Tories should rest assured, however, that the First Minister’s ire extends to well beyond their party and its supporters. Her many years in the seductive spotlight of power have seen her develop an ever-widening distaste for all who have the temerity to disagree with her, whatever party they align with, including her own.

When the mask slips, the ugly reality of what nationalism can mean reveals itself.
Keith Howell, West Linton

• THE SNP, quite rightly, is very quick to publicly disassociate itself from members of the public who cross the line of free speech and into the territory of anti-English hate, racism and the like.

Am I alone in thinking that Nicola Sturgeon and other persons in public positions of leadership must assiduously avoid language that can be amplified by ordinary people to become hateful language?

Her statements against the Tories last weekend were disgraceful in this regard and tacitly gave people permission to spread hatred. Rather than doubling down she should have the guts to admit she overstepped the mark and she should revoke her comments publicly.

Failure to do so would completely undermine any future criticism she attempts to make of nationalists who go too far in their independence arguments.
Bevin Hill, Peterhead

An orgy of 'if only' dreams

I LAUGHED when I read your lead heading on page 5 today (“Robertson is warned over ‘post-indy traffic jams’ at the Border”, The Herald, October 10). When I read it in the context of the article further down the page, “Swinney hints Government will not follow basic rate tax cut”, it is obvious that in a high-tax regime the traffic in a post-indy Scotland would all be travelling south.

The SNP conference in Aberdeen appears, I feel, as one of those events which acts as if it actually relishes toxic positivity. It seems to represent an orgy of "if only" dreams, reality avoidance and creative accountancy.

I consider that not only has the SNP in power shown consistency in its ineptitude in solving the big issues it has responsibility for, it could not even convince the public that the recent census was important.

The official report reveals that in Glasgow, for example, only 83% made a return. During May of this year they had to send out people to trace the defaulters throughout Scotland. They found that 17% of them didn’t even know there was a national census; 35% even said they were too busy to fill it in.

If only we had a devolved government in Scotland which accepted its assigned role within the UK, Scotland would be more effective in its administration and be a much more attractive investment opportunity on the international scene.
Bill Brown, Milngavie

Still no answer on pensions

I NOTE that the SNP at its conference has been scaremongering that Westminster recklessness could cost us our pensions. It may well be right but fortunately the UK has the Bank of England and other credible financial institutions that prevented such a catastrophe.

Furthermore, this Government can be voted out for another, unlike a vote for independence, which is irreversible. It is hardly credible for the SNP to be critical in this regard as it has singularly failed to explain what will happen to my pensions in an independent Scotland, and will we use sterling, bawbees or groats. Its fairy tales are just as preposterous as those of Liz Truss, but its cult following continues with its three wise monkeys behaviour.
Duncan Sooman, Milngavie

Have faith in the Scots

I FIND it very sad that people like Ian Moir (Letters, October 8) think no further than the propaganda we are fed by the unionists and media and believe that an independent Scotland would either have to suffer permanent austerity or fail the climate change challenge, or both.

They must think that after independence, nothing would change in the decisions and policies of the Scottish Government, so that we would remain in the same parlous state as now in the UK. At the same time, none of those holding these views ever give any reasons why this should be the case, but simply accept it as inevitable.

Mr Moir, therefore, claims that we could have either independence or climate action, followed by a decade of austerity, but not both. What he fails to realise is that, under the Westminster Government plans, we will have neither independence, with the right to make different decisions, nor climate action, but will have yet another decade of austerity anyway, like the one just passed.

That means that without independence, we will not be able to deal properly with the climate issue and make the decisions we believe are necessary to meet that challenge. Meantime, by pursuing fracking, issuing multiple new oil and gas drilling licences, and proposing to spend the next 10 years-plus building new nuclear facilities, the Westminster Government will trash the planet still further, while we suffer a decade of austerity too, supposedly to deal with the cost of living crisis.

Have they no faith in the intelligence and abilities of the people of their own country? After all, many, many Scots were appointed, because of their expertise, to run the administration of the Empire in countries around the world. Are modern-day Scots less capable?
P Davidson, Falkirk

Read more letters: PR would pose very real dangers

Letters should not exceed 500 words. We reserve the right to edit submissions.