First Minister has misread the popular view over Scottish immigration

While I agree in part with Nicola Sturgeon that Scotland needs immigration to overcome a growing demographic issue, I do think she has misread the views of the voting public in Scotland, thanks to the bubble she has operated in since 2014.

The ultra liberal progressives who dominated the Yes campaign and the groups which sprung up in the aftermath seem to have convinced her that Scots would welcome unlimited numbers of immigrants from wherever, as they are fundamentally different from the inherently racist Eng- lish. The recent polling by Sir John Curtice, however, shows that attitudes to immigration in Scotland are not very different from those in England and a majority of Scots want to control the number of people coming here and the reasons why.

She may also have been deceived by the Brexit vote in Scotland being different from England.

Like it or not (in my case not) a million votes to leave the EU cannot be ignored, especially for the First Minister when a large part of those were SNP voters.

We must also consider that another half million voters cared so much less about staying in the EU than staying or leaving the UK that they voted in one referendum but not the other.

I would suggest there were also many more SNP voters who, like Mhairi Black, ‘held their nose’ while voting to stay in the EU as they took Sturgeon’s suggestion that Scotland and England voting different ways would be an indyref2 trigger.

It is these sort of SNP supporters who treat any negative on independence as an accusation of Scotland being “too wee, too poor, too stupid”.

I wonder what they think of Nicola Sturgeon adding “too empty” to their list?

After all, immigration is a choice and what the First Minister is effectively saying is that there are not enough Scots to make Scotland work.

DR SJ CLARK Easter Road, Edinburgh The 13 Conservative MPS from Scotland are not so much “tim’rous beasties” for saying they were unhappy with the Westminster power grab of devolved powers under Clause 11 of the EU Withdrawal Bill, but more “a parcel of rogues in a nation” by then voting to reverse the principle of the Scottish devolution settlement and pass control to the unelected House of Lords.

David Mundell promised a “power bonanza” and that the House of Commons would debate his proposed amendments.

But after 18 months the UK Government still can’t bring these forward or, unlike the Scottish Government, publish any analysis of Brexit’s costs to Scotland.

Their excuse that negotiations are ongoing between the UK and Scottish Governments does not hold water as the House of Commons is meant to scrutinise UK Government policy.

The Scottish Government is right to be working on possible stand-alone deals with the European Union after Brexit in key devolved areas (Scotsman 17 January), as we can’t trust a hard right-wing Westminstergovernment we didn’ t vote for to look after our distinctive interests in the event of quitting the EU.

MARY THOMAS Watson Crescent , Edinburgh