A plea for Portugal

IT is good to see Iain Macwhirter injecting some realism into his discussion of the prospects for Scottish independence (Does Sturgeon want independence? Well, some in the SNP are so sure, July 12). Accepting subsequent “tight spending for perhaps a decade” and “a flight of funds out of the country” if a new currency were introduced quickly, and the fact that “some people might get hurt, at least financially” is a step in the right direction.

He is, however, mistaken is claiming that, in 2014, Scotland could have remained in a currency union with rUK, and that that remains a possibility. Chancellor candidates Osborne, Balls and Alexander all ruled that out categorically in 2014, and the Bank of England has produced compelling reasons for it not being a possibility. Then, as now, Scotland’s only choice would have been and would now be using the pound informally, leaving Scotland with no lender of last resort and no control over its own monetary policy.

Contrary to what Mr Macwhirter says about member countries of the EU being “supposed to have their own currencies and to seek to join the euro … [which is] honoured more in the breach than the observance”, using the pound as the currency of a separate Scotland would disqualify Scotland from EU membership. The EU does not permit its members to use a third country’s currency, and that is a red line. Further, the EU insists that member states have control over their own monetary policy.

It is worse than irresponsible to give the false impression that the currency issue can be easily solved or that EU rules can be fudged by a new supplicant. Jill Stephenson Edinburgh

A PANELBASE survey has predicted that Nicola Sturgeon is set to win 74 seats at the next Holyrood election, up from 61 at present. The same poll revealed that 54% of Scots are now backing separation. The Panelbase poll contacted 1,026 voters in Scotland over four days. There are four million people who are eligible to vote in Scotland, so was the selection of this minuscule 1,026 representative?

Regardless of the result of next year’s Scottish elections the vocal SNP supporters will demand another referendum on independence. I say give it to them, but with a precondition that there is a trial run to feel what independence would be like. All funds given by Westminster to Scotland are stopped and all funds given by Scotland to Westminster are stopped, including North Sea oil since this is what would happen on independence. No Barnett Formula, no extra per head of population to Scotland. After a two-year trial I suspect the desire for independence will have waned.

Clark Cross Linlithgow

ON hearing that the Scottish Government has been able to make its own decisions about requiring travellers from Spain to quarantine, I wonder whether it could also make its own decisions regarding Portugal, and allow Portuguese visitors and holidaymakers arriving home to avoid quarantine?

According to all accounts I have read, Portugal is a much safer country than the UK in terms of coronavirus, which makes the Westminster Government’s decision seem absurd. Portugal has been one of the most successful countries in Europe at controlling the virus, partly because of its cautious approach in imposing lockdown much sooner in the disease’s trajectory than neighbouring Spain (it looked at its European neighbours and learned, unlike the UK Government). Another reason has been its record on testing – it has consistently tested a much higher proportion of its population than most other European countries, having decided early on that Portugal would produce its own tests, rather than relying on imports, and state and private laboratories collaborated with the government from the start.

This could give an appearance of higher incidence of the virus than in some countries where there has been less testing. Moreover, the opposition parties supported the government, avoiding making the crisis a political football as has happened elsewhere. And the tourism sector has gone to great lengths to make everywhere that tourists might go as safe as possible. No Bournemouth beach scenes there.

I have started to wonder whether Westminster has made this decision for political reasons. Portugal has a successful socialist government which managed to reverse austerity measures while still reducing its debt, and which was re-elected in September. I realise this may feel like a conspiracy theory, but would it be so surprising if Boris Johnson’s government wanted to damage the economy of a socialist country? Given the extent to which Portugal depends on UK tourists, it certainly would cause damage.