Letters to the Editor

Well, now we have the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Nicola Sturgeon was not a member of any Whatsapp groups – apart from a very small number, the use of which was extremely limited.

Nor did she ever use these Whatsapp groups to discuss matters relating to decisionmaking – except maybe, for example, if she hadn't had a good night's sleep.

Nor did the issue of independence ever enter her head during the years when the pandemic, lest we forget, was advancing at an alarming rate – except maybe on the odd occasion when, for instance, she was provoked by a UK politician.

Anyway, all the information the Covid Inquiry needs to see in relation to the decision-making process is contained in the minutes of the Cabinet which are detailed, full and accurate – unless they contain entries stating that a pandemic issue was to be discussed under “any other competent business” or pointing to agreements that consideration was to be given to restarting the case for independence in light of the experience of the pandemic.

So even if the documentation available to the Inquiry may raise the suspicion that there is something to see here, there is nothing to suggest that any extraneous issues had any bearing whatsoever on the Scottish Government's handling of the Covid crisis.

When Ms Sturgeon promised publicly to hand over all communications including Whatsapp chats when she knew she had already deleted a number of them she was in political mode and may have slightly misrepresented her position. But now when she professes that nothing was further from her mind than independence and that her entire focus was only on keeping us all safe, surely we can take her word for it.

Colin Hamilton

What were Nicola Sturgeon's tears about at the Covid Inquiry? Scotland's Covid deaths? Or for herself? Is Alister Jack's scepticism warranted? Sturgeon, who had once almost achieved celebrity status, was heckled and booed as she arrived at and left the

The Scotsman welcomes letters for publication – 300 words maximum – from all sides of public debate. Include date and page when referring to an article, avoid ‘Letters to the Editor’ in e-mail subject line. No attachments. We reserve the right to edit letters. Send submissions, with full address and phone number, to:

“Teflon Nicola” Sturgeon seems to have come out of the Covid Inquiry not too badly, at least in terms of having used the pandemic for party purposes. However, some of us have long memories.

The last Holyrood elections, in 2021, coincided with the epidemic, during which Nicola asked us not to judge the SNP on the constitution but on their competence on handling the disease. The SNP did well, then two days after polling day, Nicola claimed that the good result was a mandate for constitutional change. She was playing politics!

William Ballantine

Isn't hindsight a wonderful thing? Couldn’t we all have done better in the past if only we had had more knowledge at the time? Could Nicola Sturgeon have done better? I don't think so. She did the best she could with the information she had at the time. Would fewer people have died if she

The UK Covid Inquiry certainly had for a wee while the attention of Scotland as it came to town. But, there were some glaring anomalies and politicians who were nothing short of offensive in their evidence. Many in government through the pandemic were called to give evidence and were questioned for hours: the previous first minister, Nicola Sturgeon, was questioned for approximately five hours, the then Health Secretary Jeane Freeman was questioned for 2.5 hours – quite extensive, I would suggest, and very emotional for those concerned to be reliving the pandemic.

During the pandemic, those of us living in Scotland were kept up to date as Ms Sturgeon, along with members of the Cabinet and health experts, gave the country daily updates. It must have been taxing for all concerned to face the country each day.

But the offensive comments came from the Conservative Secretary of State for Scotland Alister Jack who, incidentally, was only questioned under oath for one hour, 20 minutes.