Blueprint promises exciting but challenging future for our young

STANDING out from everything else in the Growth Commission report first and foremost, is a future (“Independent Scotland ‘can rise above Brexit-style row’’’, The Herald, May 26). A future for our young people of optimism, excitement, pragmatism, could do, roll up the sleeves challenge, a future with undoubted difficulty but in our own hands and to paraphrase Brexit “taking back control” and connecting directly with the world in every sense rather than through the prism of Westminster. A future where people want to return home to Scotland.

The alternative as shown in today’s Letters Pages (May 26) from the Unionists is quite the opposite and depressing for many who are stuck in poverty with no way out. The usual doom and gloom merchants are telling us how awful everything is going to be if Scotland became independent and uniquely in the world, only the Scots cannot run an independent country. An alternative where the unknowns of Brexit cannot be predicted but will certainly be a lot worse for Scotland on the periphery of Europe. A country like Scotland blessed with so many natural resources faces at best a future of austerity under the UK and a continuing decline with businesses and industry closing and heading south on a regular basis, a narrowing of outlook as Brexit voting England withdraws into itself, unfortunately taking Remain voting Scotland with it, which is bad for the future of our children.

The Unionists are right to be worried. In 2012 support for independence stood at around 23 per cent and the actual referendum vote was 45% for independence and support now stands around 46%. We hear much about the overwhelming vote to remain in the UK but looking at actual figures instead of percentages, had 191,969 people voted the other way, Yes would have won; overwhelming, I think not.

A new independence campaign starts from a much higher base and the UK is in a considerably weaker situation on many fronts. I would not bet on the same result next time round.

Alan M Morris,

20 Kirkhouse Road,

Blanefield, near Glasgow.

I WELCOME the report recently supplied by Andrew Wilson. It is a document based on reality rather than one based on either fear or romanticism. It is a realisation that the journey to a fairer, just Scotland will be long and will also be difficult.

As a councillor I used to get frustrated when officers would look at some failing policy or other and come up with a strategy that would seemingly take us immediately from a negative situation to a positive one, ignoring any transition period. My questioning of how this could be achieved was usually branded as being negative. We never seemed to bother when these strategies failed or why. We just moved on to the next one in a similar manner. If a car is in reverse gear it cannot be put immediately into top gear without doing harm to the engine. This is therefore how I view the Wilson report, as one taking us on a journey rather than establishing the destination.

At the age of 73 I have to be realistic and say the probability is I will never live long enough to enjoy the benefits of knowing an independent Scotland. However for me the important thing is to realise we are on that journey and that future generations in Scotland will enjoy the fruits of living in a country that will play its part in being a force for good amongst the nations of the world.

George Kay,

25 Kirkbank Road,

Burntisland, Fife.

THE latest commissioned SNP report asserts that the additional austerity in Scotland required by the conscious uncoupling from the UK will be bearable because the UK will continue to pay the mortgage but Scotland keeps the house and makes a token goodwill payment each year. It is a standard SNP tactic to set up a specious grievance clause and the idea that an independent Scotland will have no moral or legal obligation for its share of the current UK debt is it.

The UK Government has to take responsibility for its issued debt instruments to avoid chaos in the gilt markets. In the real world, as Brexit negotiations have shown, that doesn’t mean an independent Scotland would not have to pay up. Even on favourable market rates the cost of repaying Scotland’s share of the UK debt over the 10-year transition period would be around £12 billion per annum. Add in the £2.3bn “common charges” payments suggested in the report and that triples the new austerity required.

The £5.3bn offer is portrayed as magnanimous but nobody of importance in the SNP or on the commission can seriously believe it is a mutually acceptable solution. The report explicitly states it is an opening gambit subject to negotiation with the UK Government of the day.

The SNP could have its proposed sterling zone without independence by buying one of the licences to print notes from RBS, HBOS or CYBG then let the presses roll. If the SNP can buy an airport, why not a licence to print Scottish bank notes?

The commission’s report is a tiny step closer to reality but it won’t convert agnostics or those who have lost their faith that an independent Scotland is possible under Nicola Sturgeon’s leadership.

James Robb,

Redclyffe Gardens,

Helensburgh.

● Have your say:

The Editor, The Herald, 200 Renfield Street, Glasgow, G2 3QB; e-mail: letters@theherald.co.uk

THE Growth Commission report produced for the SNP makes interesting reading, particularly in respect of the currency issue. The SNP has again failed to address this matter. That is not surprising as it is its Achilles heel. Alex Salmond’s proposed currency union was always doomed to fail. The Growth Commission proposal is nothing more than a fudge, yet the SNP will use it to draw spurious comparisons with other small countries. While Finland uses the euro, New Zealand has its own dollar and Denmark has it’s own krone. Comparisons with a country whose monetary policy is dictated by a foreign country are therefore, in my view, meaningless. Robin Mather,

23f Eskside West,

Musselburgh.

FIRST – a confession. I haven’t read the SNP’S latest blueprint for an independent Scotland but I have listened to TV comments and read the articles in The Herald. I do not understand the SNP’S proposed plans for a currency. They apparently say we should use the pound for up to 10 years and then have a unique Scottish currency before perhaps changing to the euro to facilitate our application to join the EU.

Would there be a hard Customs border between Scotland and England if we were accepted into the EU? Perhaps these questions are to be left to yet another blueprint.

What would be the cost of all these changes to businesses and the economy as a whole?

Anne Kegg,

12 Holmwood Avenue,

Uddingston.