HAVING read the contents of the letter written to the Prime Minister by Nicola Sturgeon our First Minister (“May accused of ignoring foundations of devolution”, The Herald, April 1), I realise that at last the SNP has cut away all remaining pretences and has hoist its true flag.

The letter reveals a most brutal form of nationalism not been seen on the world stage for many decades. The SNP has finally shown to the Scottish public that it is not obliged to fulfil a meaningful responsibility to its people. The process of the Brexit issue has become an opportunistic issue, morphed as an obstruction, blocking the pathway of the SNP’s obsession with independence. The vote by the majority of Scots in 2014 is also dismissed during the unseemly rush towards that selfish goal.

I would have deigned to feel some mild understanding of its position if the letter had displayed honest statesmanship. The SNP could have suggested this by stating that it was awaiting the full working outcomes of the Brexit negotiations some years hence. It could wait to ascertain accurately if Scotland was going in the future to be better or worse off after such agreements with the EU. Tragically, the potential pluses and minuses for us of Brexit are treated as irrelevant in the stampede for a second independence referendum

I expect such rational and logical thoughts of realistic timescales and hard facts have no place in the SNP plans when the gaming table of another referendum beckons for some of our wishful Holyrood croupiers; perhaps, ridiculously, as soon as one year from September.

Bill Brown,

46 Breadie Drive,

Milngavie.

WHO on earth allowed our First Minister to pose on that sofa, in that manner, supposedly signing the Brexit epistle to Theresas May? Given that semiotics explores the study of signs and symbols as a significant part of communications, that photo must have first-year students of the discipline giggling into their lunchtime cornflakes and serious political commentators wondering if the overuse of the personal pronoun ‘I’ in the majority of her recent declamations has rendered her a tad precious.

Come on, Nicola Sturgeon, get back to the serious business of Scottish politics and leave the egotistical posturing to those who should, but, sadly, don’t, know any better.

G McCulloch,

Moffat Wynd,

Saltcoats.

QUESTIONS for Dr Gerald Edwards (Letters, April 1): Why should the SNP take any heed of Theresa May’s “now is not the time” statement? Would that not represent the ultimate surrender to a Westminster Government decisively not voted for in Scotland?

Who exactly does Dr Edwards think would do a better job of governing Scotland than the SNP?

Does he not agree that the 2014 referendum was won on a false premise and with empty and unfulfilled promises?

Whether in Holyrood or Westminster, when are any party’s manifesto commitments agreed to by more than 50 per cent of the voters? Never, I suspect.

The SNP exists to achieve independence for Scotland. Need I say more?

Ian M. Baillie,

1 Tudhope Crescent,

Alexandria.

IN her section 30 letter to Theresa May, Nicola Sturgeon comments in support of her wish that her referendum should be held in the window between Autumn 2018 and Spring 2019 by saying: “The choice must be an informed one. That means that both the terms of Brexit and the implications and opportunities of independence must be clear in advance of the referendum.”

Whilst the choice in a future independence referendum must be an informed one, under her proposal it cannot possibly be so. Following the negotiations with the EU, by her window the terms for Brexit may well be clear.

However, the same cannot be said about the terms of independence as there will not have been any meaningful negotiations on independence between Holyrood and Westminster by then.

Alan Fitzpatrick,

10 Solomon’s View,

Dunlop.

AS members of the House of Commons sought to table amendments to Brexit negotiations, Lord Forsyth complained bitterly: “These amendments are trying to tie down the Prime Minister – tie her down by her arms, her legs – in every conceivable way!”

That theme of bondage is rather appropriate, as Scotland has been tied to an imperious London parliament that’s been stringing us along for years. “We have catched Scotland and will bind her fast” was the prescient remark of an English MP in 1707.

Isn’t it time these bonds were loosened?

James Stevenson,

5 Drummond Avenue,

Auchterarder.

WE are told by Nicola Sturgeon that her letter to the Prime Minister is about “self determination”, but of course she uses a particular SNP meaning for such wording.

Primarily we have got to this point on the back of the SNP’s misrepresentation of the EU referendum result being about Scotland specifically rather than the UK as a whole.

It is blatant misappropriation of Remain votes in Scotland for the purposes of proposing separation from the UK, and a continued reluctance to consider the lack of preparedness of the Scottish economy to exist apart from the UK and to meet EU joining criteria.

The kind of “self determination” that our First Minister proposes is one in which we unthinkingly follow her lead without a care for what we are giving up or what the future might bring.

Keith Howell,

White Moss, West Linton,

Peeblesshire.

BORIS Johnson’s comments to the effect that Gibraltar is not for sale and cannot be traded must not go unchallenged.

Gibraltar is one of several “Crown Dependencies”, yet it is the only one whose citizens were granted the right to vote in the EU referendum; much to the annoyance of the citizens of Guernsey, Jersey and the Isle of Man.

As Anthony D C Webber put it in his written evidence to the House of Lords European Union Committee (19th Report of Session 2016 – 17; Brexit: the Crown Dependencies), “it was a denial of democracy to the citizens of the three Crown Dependencies”. He is a democrat but he sees no irony whatsoever, as a Brexiter, in wishing that all citizens of crown dependencies should have had the right to vote in the EU referendum but not EU nationals living and working in the UK or British emigrants on the continent who had lived and worked there for more than 15 years.

If one purports to be a democrat, and all Brexiters make that claim, then it has to be absolute – and not based on half-baked rules made up on the spur of the moment to suit a bunch of British political fundamentalists, parvenus and arrivists.

Now, either all citizens of the Crown Dependencies should have had the right to vote in the EU referendum or none. In my view it should have been the latter, because they cannot want to be in the EU and, at the same time, be treated differently, or indeed favourably; for example be tax exempt in the UK – and in Spain in the case of Gibraltarians. But given that Gibraltar voted overwhelmingly to remain in the EU, as did Scotland and Northern Ireland, is the Foreign Secretarn going to stick his brass neck out for Scotland or Northern Ireland as he is proposing to do for Gibraltar?

He also says that “Gibraltar will not be bargained away”, but he is perfectly happy to treat three-million odd EU nationals in the UK as “bargaining chips”; talk about double standard.

Mr Johnson then reminds us that “The status of Gibraltar has been unchanged since 1713”. He, of all people, being the author of a biography of Winston Churchill, should know that empires come and go – and Gibraltar, like Scotland and Northern Ireland, has quite a few centuries yet before Winston Churchill’s thousand years of British Empire and Commonwealth are up.

Patrice Fabien,

41 Kingsborough Gardens, Glasgow.

THE SNP is trying to tell us that it will be a hard Brexit in order to pursue an unwanted second referendum. Yet in the same sentence it tells us that there will not be border posts, visa and passport requirements between Scotland and England.

It can’t have it both ways. Either a hard Brexit means Scotland will leave the UK single market, the pound currency and have trade barriers and borders put in place or it is not hard Brexit.

Scotland’s economic growth has collapsed since the oil price fell by half. We desperately rely on trade with the rest of the UK. Putting up more barriers would be a disaster.

Michelle Smythe,

Dalry Road, Edinburgh.

I AGREE with the Herald View that Nicola Sturgeon is right in her claim that there is no rational reason for the UK Government to stand in the way of the Scottish people over Brexit and a referendum ( “Battle lines drawn but deals required”, The Herald, April 1 ).

And I believe there are many in England who voted in the EU referendum, whether to leave or stay, now increasingly irked by the grievance, the huffing and puffing and demand that goes on and on for a second independence referendum, who would be tempted to vote to leave the Union and be shot of their unhappy neighbour if given the opportunity in a referendum of their own.

It also seems likely that support from Westminster for Scotland to remain part of the Union will be less in a second referendum when it comes than there was in 2014.

Could it be “heads you win, tails they lose,” Ms Sturgeon?

Happy days I don’t think.

R Russell Smith,

96 Milton Road, Kilbirnie.

HOW will Nicola Sturgeon’s trip to the United States improve the Scottish Government’s performance in its domestic remit? Or is it for the benefit of TV cameras back home showing students at Stamford applauding her?

Will the First Minister pass more than a few minutes, every now again, focused on the day job of managing Scotland’s public services such as education, the NHS and the police? Sadly, I suspect we all know the answer.

Martin Redfern,

4 Royal Circus, Edinburgh.