Letters: Scotland owes so much to the strength of this precious Union

The Union created the greatest empire the world has ever known and, whatever may be your views about that empire, it undoubtedly led to the creation of the Commonwealth of Nations, the positive value of which cannot be denied.

The Union led European resistance against and was ultimately instrumental in the defeat of Nazism and has now led the European resistance to Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.

The BBC is a product of the Union and is a world leader in the broadcast of news and entertainment and the promotion of international freedom of expression.

The Union maintains a key element in Nato’s nuclear defence profile which is now, more clearly than ever, seen as essential to protect the free world against the monstrous and corrupt but powerful totalitarian forces which rule much of the globe and would extend that rule.

The Union will maintain the existing free movement of people, goods and services throughout Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the obstruction of which, for example, by the insertion of a border with the EU, would make the catastrophic consequences of Brexit look like a tea party.

The Union will continue to provide Scotland with access to operational banking services and a real, not merely token, currency, neither of which would currently be available in a separated Scotland.

The Union can combine resources to provide a greater National Health Service and more efficient and uniform benefit, taxation and motor vehicle registration systems than can be achieved in any separate part of the United Kingdom.

The employers, employees and customers within the United Kingdom all stand to benefit from uniform commercial and financial regulation and practice throughout the existing United Kingdom.

The Union will avoid Scotland’s exposure to the adverse consequences identified in the Scottish Government’s own papers on independence, likely to arise from the commencement of Scottish separation until the non-guaranteed achievement of the advantages to follow from that separation.

There is much more in the value of our Union than can be adequately described in this short letter.

Michael Sheridan, Glasgow.

Read more: Can anyone tell me what's so precious about this Union?

Early chance for Hepburn

I WAS interested to see Jamie Hepburn appointed to the post of Minister for Independence in the Scottish Government.

He should bring some clear vision to the debate as his career appears to have been unencumbered by a real job, having moved smoothly from a university degree in politics to government minister.

He can now concentrate on convincing Scots to support secession by explaining the SNP currency plan and how they would reduce the current crippling Scottish fiscal and trade deficits. All this without increasing taxes, cutting public spending and slashing local government services. (They may have sneakily started this already.) His opportunity has arrived earlier than expected. The imminent Rutherglen and Hamilton West by-election will provide the ideal platform for Mr Hepburn and his nationalist pals to set out their independence plans for Scotland’s economy.

I’m sure the voters in Hamilton and Rutherglen can’t wait.

James Quinn, Lanark.

Constitution really matters

WE hear constant complaints in the print and broadcast media about the SNP's "obsession with the constitution". This betrays a worrying ignorance of the meaning and nature of a constitution.

There can be nothing more important to the life of the nation than the constitution. The constitution gives us what freedoms we have. It gives us protection from arbitrary rule. It gives us our rights. It gives us our institutions and, therefore, our public services.

The nature of the constitution is all-important. Apartheid South Africa had a constitution that permitted imprisonment without trial. It allowed only a small section of the population to vote. It enshrined racism. Were the o[ponents of Apartheid wrong to "obsess about the constitution"?

The nature of the constitution determines what sort of country we have. It is absurd to say that we should forget about the constitution and concentrate on bread and butter issues. The most important gift of a constitution is the gift of self-determination. Everything else flows from that.

David Currie, Tarland.

The sad rise in acrimony

THERE is one thing in her period in office which the previous First Minister can say with certainty she increased, in fact almost exponentially. It is the bitter division of the country into those who want to break up the UK and those would prefer to leave things constitutionally as they are.

In place of the old sectarian dividing lines in Scotland, we now have the equally, if not more, corrosive division of nationalist and non-nationalist politics. I am an old man and can remember clearly the old Tory-Labour divide of past years, but then it concerned policies and never, ever came close to the naked hatred and downright nastiness of the present divide. And the truth is, the longer the SNP has remained in power, the worse it has become.

Opponents of nationalism are no longer simply fellow Scots with a different idea of what is the best way forward for our country. They are the "enemy".

Unfortunately, with the new FM I see little if any change, and that a time when a new and fresh direction is urgently required.

Alexander McKay, Edinburgh.

Read more: So now we know: it really is the same old, same old

SNP has had many successes

WALTER Paul (Letters, April 1) complains that I spent more than 50 per cent of my letter "talking about the Tories and Labour", but Mr Paul spent 100% of his letter talking about the SNP and me. And while there are certainly challenges ahead for all governments, I don't recognise Mr Paul's description of Scotland as a "crumbling mess".

I could list the SNP's many successes in government, such as the Scottish Child Payment, the baby boxes, building thousands of council houses, new or refurbished schools, and no university tuition fees; but I suspect that Mr Paul would find fault with that too.

Ruth Marr, Stirling.

Time SNP dumped the Greens

WOULDN'T it be great if the SNP were to decouple from the Greens, and with it their hair-brained expensive Deposit Return Scheme, which is causing no end of problems, not only with large companies but also with smaller outlets?

I think that if we had Kate Forbes as our new First Minister she would have thought the same and kicked the Greens into touch. Humza Yousaf is so weak that he needs all the support he can get .And sadly that means the full support of the Greens and as part of that support having to accept their policies.

Come on, First Minister, show that you have a backbone and that you can manage without the Greens and I'm sure your supporters will think better of you if you cast off that ball and chain.

Neil Stewart, Balfron.

Progressive issue is not simple

IS Scotland a socially "conservative" or socially "progressive" country? This question has exercised columnists and correspondents since the sizeable vote achieved by Kate Forbes in the recent SNP leadership contest ("Scots are not as left wing as we like to believe we are", The Hetald, March 31). One of the dangers of attempting to answer it is that it is posed too simplistically. Individuals may be conservative on some social questions and more progressive on others.

An even bigger danger is a limited understanding of what social questions actually are. Every single question facing our society is a social question: health, education, transport, energy, economic policy, the environment. The list could go on. It is necessary to argue for this given the recent debate on gender reform and same-sex marriage could give rise to a view that social questions are reducible only to matters of of sexuality or gender.

In addition to what might be termed macro issues, questions like assisted dying, abortion, capital punishment are also social questions, that they used to be referred to as matters of conscience does not alter this. There is no doubt that the debate on gender reform divided opinion, however if we want to ask whether we are a socially progressive or socially conservative country our perspective needs to be much broader and more questioning.

Brian Harvey, Hamilton.