Indy answers

David Mill ar( Letters ,10 November) believes it is invalid to say that the Scottish electorate rejected plans by the Conservatives to stop Indyref2 because there are “Bigger UK matters to consider when deciding how to vote” but fails to mention that stopping Indyref2 was the flagship of the Conservatives’ campaign in Scotland, infatuated to this commitment to a point where they forgot to list their own MPS on their flyers.

All Mr Millar has shown is that the Conservatives were not trusted by the Scottish electorate with “UK matters” in 2019. If he believes this is insufficient evidence, I challenge him to find a general election result in the last 65 years to contradict this view.

Putting polls regarding the restoration of Scottish in dependence aside, he believes he has put every independence support erin their place by asking them how it would be paid for, perhaps in anticipation of the myth regarding Scotland’ s deficit or the constraints Scotland faces, having control over less than a third of taxes raised in Scotland. An independent Scotland would not have this issue and would have full control over revenue and taxation.

Counter intuitively, S cottish MPS can only dream of an increase in control over Scottish finances, such as their attempt to include full fiscal autonomy within the Scotland Act only to be voted down.

Despite having a mandate, with another scheduled for May 2021, he accuses the First Minister of “consigning democracy to the waste bin”. I ask him, is it the same one in which the will of the people of Scotland has been consigned to, which saw full fiscal autonomy rejected and the end of Scotland’ s EU membership against its will?

NIKITA ROMANOVS Harvesters Way, Edinburgh