IT was intriguing to note the speech by Mark Carney, Governor of the “independent” Bank of England, on the issue of the UK’s membership of the European Union (“Osborne defends Carney over EU comments”, The Herald, October 23).

Lord Lawson, who heads the Conservatives for Britain Group, which is campaigning for the UK’s exit from the EU, accused the Governor of “wading into a political debate”.

Mr Carney’s comments on the UK and the EU were however a lot less forthright than those he made in the run-up to the Scottish independence referendum, when he questioned the compatibility of a currency union with sovereignty. The tamer approach taken by Mr Carney on the EU issue is clearly intriguing, as the impact of a UK withdrawal from the EU would be more hard-felt in the UK than Scottish independence.

It is also rather strange that Lord Lawson is critical of Mr Carney’s “political” intervention in the EU debate but did not raise his concerns over the intervention of Mr Carney in the Scottish independence referendum.

This latest intervention by Mr Carney raises the issue of the remit of the Bank of England, which is “to maintain price stability" and "support the economic policy of (the government), including its objectives for growth and employment".

Leading on from this there clearly needs to be a broader debate about the “true” independence of the Bank of England and whether it is breaching its remit on entering into political debates such as these.

Alex Orr,

Flat 2, 77 Leamington Terrace, Edinburgh.