Andy Maciver clearly thinks that giving tax-raising powers to Holyrood (Perspective, 13 December) is the answer to SNP triumphalism. Give the SNP what they wanted all along and they will be beaten. An interesting, if somewhat bizarre, idea.
The reason why the SNP are bouncing around, patting each other on the back and giving each other high-fives is because they closely resemble chickens, clucking, laying eggs and using very little brain power.
Just as chickens can run around energetically when they have had their heads chopped off, the SNP are happily rendering themselves unelectable by producing laws to deprive parents of the right to have responsibility for their own children.
They are going to reduce their income from property sales overnight when their Tartan Property Tax comes into effect in April and then wonder where the money has gone.
They gambled on oil providing never-ending riches, only to see the price sinking to almost half what it was earlier this year. And these are the people to whom Mr Maciver would entrust tax-raising powers?
These are not people we need to buy off with tax- raising powers. That is like giving an alcoholic a licence to run a pub. They would drink all the profits.
The only sensible course of action is to give us a referendum on more powers/status quo/fewer powers.
We have decided that we are staying in the UK. What matters is how we do so without throwing the baby out with the bath water and making the UK ungovernable.
Andrew HN Gray
Andy Maciver claimed that the Smith Commission’s proposals, which involved Scotland raising 40 per cent of what it spends (some say it’s 50 per cent) do not amount to either home rule or federalism (Perspective, 13 December).
In fact, no component of a federal state anywhere in the world raises more than 40 per cent of its income; most raise far less.
The highest proportion (40 per cent) is raised by the Canadian provinces.
So what exactly is a “federal” sub-state if it is not one that raises 40 per cent of its income?