Borders debate bordering on the bizarre

His whole argument is based on the false premise that an independent Scotland would have to accede to the European Union, and therefore as a new entrant be forced to join the Schengen area and the euro.

However, on independence, as supported by a plethora of European and legal experts, Scotland would still remain a member of the European Union, as would the rest of the UK.

And, indeed, as it was the UK which joined what was then the EEC in 1973, if Scotland were not allowed to remain a member, neither would England as the UK would have ceased to exist.

One had hoped this scaremongering talk of border controls was a thing of the past and New Labour had matured beyond this, but it appears there is no end to the depths they will plunge in order to denigrate Scottish independence.

ALEX ORR

Bryson Road

Edinburgh

According to the SNP, with (Scottish) independence England will get rid of a "surly lodger" and gain a friendly neighbour.

It is an inexact analogy, but it's good enough.

That being the case, the party's determination to refute Chris Bryant's claim that independence will lead to border controls looks inconsistent and undignified.

Traditionally, departing lodgers, surly or not, return their keys and give up their automatic access to the kitchen, the bathroom and the best seat in front of the telly, as well as to their room.

Any Scottish lodger unwilling to accept this really shouldn't vote for the SNP or independence.

JAMES MATTHEWS

Great North Road

London N2