SNP government must listen to Kerevan's independence economic warning

Both Catriona C Clark and Douglas R Mayer bring out their stock responses when the SNP's economics are challenged, tiresomely and inevitably it is all Westminster's fault (Letters, July 23).

George Kerevan’s admission that independence means further economic decline and austerity for Scotland is to be welcomed, his assertion that everything would be better after five years is fallacious as it would be heavily dependent on the global economy at the time which is increasingly difficult to predict.

The additional powers devolved to the Scottish parliament after the 2014 referendum put Scotland in a unique position in the UK, providing the opportunity to raise taxes to mitigate austerity and invest in job creation, something which the neglected regions of England are denied which may explain their protest Leave vote.

The SNP government, however, seem to have no interest in these powers what­soever, choosing to follow the UK Tory government’s budget and continued austerity measures.

Last week the First Minster seemed more concerned with jobs which were not under threat in the shipyards than the loss of jobs with the folding of the Dunne group or the ongoing industrial disputes on the railways and in the oil and gas industry as well as expending her energies on Brexit and Trident (neither of which are devolved matters and thus should surely be left to Angus Robertson as the party’s leader in Westminster).

Nicola Sturgeon would do be better to remember what her roles and responsibilities as First Minister of Scotland are and act to revitalise the failing economy now instead of agitating for independence which can only do more harm to the prosperity of the people she pretends to represent.

(Dr) Stewart J Clark

Easter Road, Edinburgh

We have now been told by George Kerevan, one of the SNP MPs looking at options for an alternative Scottish currency, that independence could lead to years of painful budget cuts.

Not surprisingly, Ms Sturgeon’s confidants have distanced her from this prediction saying that she had not instigated this review and (more tellingly) she did not agree with its conclusion. No surprise there.

I wonder if Ms Sturgeon agrees with Sir Ian Wood’s view that having another independence referendum would cause serious damage to the Scottish economy?.... a view shared by leading Scottish businessman Jim McColl.

Or does she agree with Professor Jim Gallacher’s opinion that a separate Scottish currency would be risky as it would need large reserves of hard currency to back it up in the currency market?

I think we all know how our First Minister will respond to these measured views.

Jim Houston

Winton Gardens, Edinburgh