Honestly puzzled
As she starts another independence campaign, Nicola Sturgeon tells her core supporters that she wants a more honest approach, and then explains that they must convince the people of Scotland that what they are proposing will not damage the Scottish economy.
Yet, following the 2016 EU referendum, the First Minister told us time and again how disastrous leaving the EU will prove to be for our economy.
Common sense tells us that the impact of separating from the much closer, deeper and longer lasting union of the UK will surely be much worse, so what is the SNP leadership proposing? Is it to be an honest case for independence, or to claim an economically trouble-free departure from the UK? You cannot have both.
KEITH HOWELL West Linton, Peeblesshire
With all the hype surrounding the SNP’S call for Indyref 2 there is something missing. It is the stark message that independence is a true leap in the dark.
The SNP is not actually promising anything, only surmising that if it got its way, Scotland would be a better place. This is mere conjecture, with a background of less than stellar results from the SNP’S devolved policies to date.
Given this track record, no politician should be promising jam today, tomorrow or anytime soon when it has not proved its credentials so far.
Independence is something not to be trivialised but the
SNP seem to be treating it as a game. What happens next if it wins the game but cannot deliver what it promised? Chess players always think many moves ahead. Does the SNP have any Grandmasters? (DR) GERALD EDWARDS
Broom Road, Glasgow
Despite having produced as much oil and gas as Norway, the fact that Scotland has a sizable deficit (Elizabeth Marshall, Letters 30 April) merely proves Westminster’s control of our economy doesn’t work for us or for the regions of England outside London and the South East.
Self-government is normal and Scotland will continue to use the pound on independence day. Only when it is sensible to do so will the pound be phased out and a new currency phased in over time if the Scottish Parliament, which might be Labour or Conservative run, decides it is in our best interests.
Most of the scare stories can be easily answered by looking at situations elsewhere in the world. The NZ pound was the currency of New Zealand until 1967, when it was replaced by the dollar. Under the new currency, no mortgages or pensions were lost, no one noticed the change, things carried on as usual. Over 75 per cent of Canada’s trade is with the USA, yet the Canadian dollar floats freely with the US dollar without any problems.
A Scottish currency does not equal higher mortgage rates, when comparing the UK with other European nations.
The need for currency reserves should be covered by Scotland’s share of UK reserves. Those opposed to Scotland’s self-government fail to admit Scotland will be legally entitled to a pro rata share of UK assets and who knows what sterling will be worth in five years time after the UK crashes out of the EU.
MARY THOMAS Watson Crescent, Edinburgh