More referendums

Those who would rather the UK was not destroyed are asked by David Stevenson (Letters, 15 December) why they tried to prevent a referendum in the past but now want it as soon as possible.

The answer is very simple. Most who argued against the referendum in the past did so because anyone with the power of reason knew that the morning after the first defeat the SNP would be preparing for the next.

The Quebec-style devastation to the Scottish economy this would bring on appeared not to register with the Nationalist zealots who would not guarantee a 30 or 50-year pledge not to hold another after their first defeat. The damage to Scotland by a series of referendums seemed to be lost in a mist of Nationalist fervour.

Does Mr Stevenson believe, for a nano-second, that if Alex Salmond thought a clear cut yes/no, independently worded and supervised referendum could be won, the legislation would not have already have gone through Holyrood?

The “better-informed” by the wait argument is quite frankly laughable and no-one, surely, can be that naive.

Alexander McKay

New Cut Rigg

Edinburgh