Second Scottish referendum should not be decided on majority of less than 60%

Time will tell but I suspect that history will not be too kind to David Cameron, whose political career was over before he reached age 50.

Sadly, he made a complete hash of negotiations with Alex Salmond in respect of the first independence vote. Salmond got everything in his favour – the wording of the question, the timing and the reduced voting age – and still could not win.

I n my o p i n i o n a r e f e r e n - dum on such a vitally important matter should be decided on a pass mark of much higher than 50.1 per cent. At least 60 per cent should be the pass mark which would give a clear majority. Imagine the impact on S cottish societ y if Salmond had won with 50.1 per cent! Here we are about to face more uncer taint y as Nicola Sturgeon appeases an element within her party.

I just hope that whoever is the Prime Minister at the time is firm and tells her to go forth and do the job that she is very well paid for – run the country far better than it has been now for years and sort out the many problems that exist for all to see and experience.

It must surely be apparent that the likelihood of there being another independence referendum in S cotland depends o n t wo i m p o r t a n t f a c t o r s . Firstly, permission to hold a lawful referendum must be obtained under statute, the S cotland Act 1998, by which legislation a formal request can be made to the UK Government at Westminster. Secondly, if such authority is granted, the outcome will only alter if the electorate of Scotland have had a marked change of mind since the ver y clear result of the 2014 referendum.

To date a ll we, the major - i t y o f t h e e l e c t o r a t e , h a v e o b s e r ve d i s t h e c o n t i n u i n g bluster of a radical political p a r t y w i t h i t s f l a g - wav i n g , t a r t a n c l a d , wo a d - p a i n t e d suppor ters at rallies and on marches. Such events have absolutely no effect on those of us who generally make voting decisions on a broader, less emotional, political basis.

Competence in Government, a strong economy and rational debate about current affairs are the criteria by which most o f t h e e l e c t o r a t e ma k e t h e decision about which political party they will vote for at elections. There is certainly no room for historical sentiment, or 300- year old grudges.

Sir John Cur tice, the notable expert on electoral polls, has indicated that there is no sign that support for Scottish independence has increased; indeed it is thought to have fallen to below 40 per cent.

Various aspects of the SNP’S p l a n s f o r a n i n d e p e n d e n t S c o t l a n d h ave c o me u n d e r scrutiny recently.

T h e y h a v e b e e n w a r n e d that selling the idea of a new c u r r e n c y a s p a r t o f t h e i r “demand” for a second inde - pendence referendum would b e a “substantial task”. In a p oll by Progress S cotland a S cottish currency was only favoured by 6 per cent of those interviewed. In any case, how credible would a new currency be with Scotland’s current £13 billion deficit – equating to circa 8 per cent of GDP.

What I b elieve the major - i t y o f S c o t s v o t e r s r e a l l y w a n t i s g o o d g o v e r n m e n t at Westminster, and also on regional matters at Holyrood. They fully believe that there is a need for both, but obviously with different duties and responsibilities. It is complete madness for the SNP to think that Scotland, with a population of just over 5 million, can afford to have its own central bank, currency, foreign office, armed forces etc.

T h e c u r r e n t p o s i t i o n a t H o l y r o o d i s u n a c c e p t a b l e , with a minorit y SNP administration, backed by a largely unelected Green Party, when it is to their advantage.

The so oner the electorate o f S c o t l a n d m a k e s m o v e s to change this p osition, the better for all.