This General Election is not about England versus Scotland

THE Conservative Party’s attempts to portray the SNP as a threat to English taxpayers are just more divide and rule tactics (“PM accused of trying to ‘stir up hatred of the Scots’”, The Herald, April 23). These have included trying to turn private sector employees against public sector workers, the employed against the unemployed, and those not on benefits against those who need them.

This election is not about England versus Scotland. It’s about the vast majority against big donors to Conservative Party funds, including banks and hedge funds.

The Conservatives push the false line that public finances work like personal or household finances, talking of the national debt as being “like running up debt on your credit card”. It’s not.

If one person spends less money, their finances may improve. If everyone spends less money, fewer private sector goods and services are sold, leading to growth and employment lower than they otherwise would have been. The results of government spending less money, by cutting welfare payments, public sector wages and public sector jobs, are closer to everyone spending less money. That means less growth and lower tax revenues than the government would have otherwise got, meaning public finances worse than they would otherwise be.

The Coalition Government’s austerity policies may explain the last recession having been the longest since the Great Depression. Without them it may have ended sooner and growth might be higher. That’s why the SNP are right to call for an end to austerity.

Jim Murphy is equally wrong to continue scaremongering about independence or full fiscal autonomy (FFA) being a threat to Scottish pensioners’ pensions (“Murphy makes plea to ‘save the UK state pension’ from SNP fiscal autonomy plan”, The Herald, April 23).

Even the Coalition Government’s Pensions Minister, Steve Webb, said during the referendum campaign that pensions would continue to be paid to people in Scotland who’d paid National Insurance and other taxes for decades, even if Scotland became independent, never mind under FFA.

And the Coalition has already cut pensions for 50,000 Scottish pensioners since 2010 by a £90 million cut in the Savings Credit element of their pensions. Duncan McFarlane, Beanshields, Braidwood, Carluke. DEREK Miller (Letters, April 22) says: “The SNP are trying to force their policies onto the whole country … how heartily sick of us must be the English, Welsh and Northern Irish be starting to feel … we certainly couldn’t blame them for feeling such disdain towards all things Scottish.”

Has Mr Miller not noticed that the process that will hopefully allow the SNP to have a louder than ever voice at Westminster is entirely democratic? Many people in Scotland are tired of having had negative Tory policies forced upon them over a long period of time.

Why should he assume that rUK is sick of us? Does he not know that many people in England and Wales are saying that they wish they could vote for the SNP, after having been introduced to Nicola Sturgeon in recent TV exposure? They too have wakened up to the need for positive change for the good of all, and see the SNP as the only party that really wants to do something about it. Dennis White, 4 Vere Road, Blackwood, South Lanarkshire. IN discussions of what would be the role of the SNP at Westminster if they won most of the Scottish seats, one point seems to be overlooked. If they have a Confidence and Supply Agreement with Labour (neither side wants a coalition), then they are effectively locked in to supporting the Westminster system for the five-year duration of the UK Parliament. This would be even truer if the SNP now intend to vote on non-Scotland issues at Westminster generally, not just on selected issues like the NHS; though this is unclear.

If the SNP are not voting on most non-Scotland issues, then the question becomes from where a Labour or Conservative Government could obtain a majority for particular policies after deducting, say, 50 votes for SNP/Sinn Fein abstainers. Perhaps the LibDems could offer a coalition, which would normally command a majority in the absence of the SNP? Alastair Wallace, 19 Lixmount Avenue, Trinity, Edinburgh. I AM bemused by John McMaster’s suggestion (Letters, April 23) that Glasgow, North Lanarkshire and West Dunbartonshire voted Yes in the referendum because they wanted a city region. Surely they voted Yes because they wanted independence? Ruth Marr, 99 Grampian Road, Stirling. I HAVE listened to the demands for full fiscal autonomy and the assertions of the Scottish Government that it will take several years to attain full fiscal autonomy. I find this somewhat puzzling, given that the very same people, less than a year ago were adamant that full independence would achieved in 18 months, had a yes vote prevailed in the independence referendum.

Perhaps I am missing something, but I would have thought that full independence of a country would have been a longer task than only dealing with the fiscal autonomy aspect being discussed just now. It would be interesting to hear how the argument for the 18 months to independence stands up now. Paul Marshall, 18 Shalloch Park, Ayr. SCOTLAND’S lucky break came in 1603 when there was no direct heir to the English throne. James VI of Scotland filled the gap, and became King of Great Britain, later to become the United Kingdom.

Poverty-stricken Scotland’s poverty started at last to be steadily relieved by membership of the Union; and Scotland, with an arm-lock to England, became a safe and secure country under the protection of the mighty power and wealth of the United Kingdom.

Still today Scotland needs its arm-lock with the rest of the UK. If she ends up with independence she will be on her own again and will become poor again, expensively financed and poorly defended. She will have no Trident, and insignificant armed services; a soft underbelly for attack from the Baltic approaches. The referendum decision to stay put was wise, sensible and prudent.

Nicola Sturgeon’s “hand of friendship” (“SNP ‘not going to London to block budgets’”, The Herald, April 21) is the desperate upraised hand of someone about to drown after throwing away his lifebelt. James Douglas-Menzies, Walwick Grange House, Humshaugh, Hexham, Northumberland.