Sillars is simply wrong on EU

Sir, - I am struck by the argument put forward by Jim Sillars (March 4) that leaving the EU delivers what member status cannot – “real independence” and the “unfettered ability to make our own laws”.

He goes on to define this as sovereignty.

Sovereignty is not like pregnancy, and it is not the case that a state is sovereign or not sovereign.

Mr Sillar’s desire to refuse to pool sovereignty would in fact leave the UK with less sovereignty, as in an interconnected world it would have limited control over trading arrangements, pollution, the cleanliness of its seas, migration or terrorism.

The UK is already subject to some 700 international treaties and a member of international organisations.

As a member of the UN, WTO, Nato and the IMF, for example, we share our sovereignty, infringing on our national self-determina- tion. But through this approach we have influence and maximise our effectiveness.

Using Mr Sillar’s rationale, real independence would see us withdraw from all these organisations, reflecting a sense of sovereignty that last existed in the 19th Century, based on the principles of Westphalian sovereignty.

Many Brexiters see the Norwegian model as one they would like to adopt, but Oslo has to adhere to all the EU’s product standards, financial regulations and employment regulations, enacting 75% of EU legislative acts.

For those wanting true full sovereignty there is only one nation that I can think of that is truly sovereign, and that is North Korea. Alex Orr. 77 Leamington Terrace, Edinburgh.

These negative comments put forward by Ruth Davidson, Kezia Dugdale and Willie Rennie say more about their inability to challenge the SNP. They should take a good look at themselves before engaging in insulting the electorate...