UK Government is acting quite properly on the matter of Brexit and devolved powers

I DO not share the concern of Professor Mcharg in her Agenda article (“Reasons we should worry about future of devolution”, The Herald, June 19).

The so-called Sewel Convention is set out in a memorandum of understanding dated October 2013 between the UK Government and the devolved administrations.

That agreed memorandum states specifically (Article 14) that the Government at Westminster retains authority to legislate on any issue, whether devolved or not, but tempers that by saying that it will not normally legislate with regard to devolved matters except with the agreement of the relevant devolved legislature.

The use of the qualification “not normally” means that the memorandum envisaged the possibility that abnormal circumstances could arise when the UK Government would exercise its authority to legislate without the agreement of the devolved legislature .

This is what is happening as regards Scotland, which has disagreed with the proposed legislation, but is not happening as regards Wales which has agreed to that legislation.

On any reasonable interpretation, Brexit clearly falls into the category of an abnormal circumstance, so the UK Government is not threatening the future of devolution by acting quite properly in accordance with the agreed terms of the memorandum of understanding.

I understand this is the view expressed by Lord Sewel himself. Alan Fitzpatrick,

10 Solomon’s View,

Dunlop.

IT is absurd that Theresa May should stand her ground against changes in the Brexit Bill on the basis that such a change would “tie her hands” and weaken Britain’s negotiating position (“May faces new threat as Brexit vote goes to the wire”, The Herald, June 20).

My experience has been that it is an advantage to go into negotiations with clear instructions. Anyone who is negotiating without a clear mandate is always at risk of being persuaded to agree to an unacceptable compromise.

When the Scottish people voted on independence in 2014 there was a clear plan as to what that would entail.

There was no guarantee that these objectives would be achieved and, in the case of remaining in the pound currency union, there was a clear indication from George Osborne that this was not an option.

In this case the Scottish negotiation position would have been strengthened by having its hands tied to the currency union as the preferred option.

It is the lack of clarity that is leading to the problems with the Brexit negotiations. There might well be strong and stable government but, if so, there is certainly no clarity as to what that government is trying to achieve. Sandy Gemmill,

40 Warriston Gardens,

Edinburgh.

ALTHOUGH the source of

Theresa May’s Birthday Funding for the NHS is uncertain, the fact that the Government are giving it to NHS England means that Scotland will receive approximately £1.8 billion via the Barnett Formula (“Sturgeon is urged to spend extra £2bn on healthcare” & Letters, June 20).

This gives Scotland a unique opportunity to pour the funds into Social and Primary Care necessary to return to the Dewar (1912) and Bevan (1948) principles that the universal healthcare system is based upon primary, community services as the gatekeepers to control the flow into the more specialised (and expensive) secondary care.

At present we spend less (about 7%) of the burgeoning healthcare budget than at any time since the Highlands and Islands medical service came into being in 1913.

If primary care were functioning efficiently, the pressures would be reduced on secondary care and that would then function more efficiently, allowing people to be returned safely and efficiently to their communities. This would require primary care to take on these responsibilities, mainly by trusting health care professionals to deliver without being hampered by unending bureaucracy and red tape.

If this windfall is squandered among health boards like stardust perhaps the last chance to re-organise and revitalise our cherished health service will be lost.

Kenneth Robinson as minister of health did it in 1965 and the health service revitalised itself . Now is the time to repeat that and learn from history.

Dr Iain Mcnicol,

Dunvegan,

Port Appin,

Argyll.

RATHER than ceaselessly complaining about 24 powers that will come to Holyrood over the next seven years, it would be more interesting if Nicola Sturgeon outlined for us how she plans to transfer and implement efficiently and effectively the 134 new legislative areas that will arrive in Scotland on day one.

Judging by the costly problems and delays the First Minister has had administering EU farm payments and establishing a Scottish social security agency, I fear it’s not going to be a walk in the park for the SNP.

Martin Redfern,

Woodcroft Road,

Edinburgh.