SNP must face up to European truths

Jim states: “Today’s EU is not the one we sought independence in over 20 years ago” which is perfectly true, but, it is the EU that was planned over 20 years ago and that is why Independence in Europe was as wrong then as it is now.

I wish Jim Sillars and others been as clear-sighted about the EU 20 years ago, when the crucial debates were being held in the SNP. Had they not assumed that the Scottish people must always need a comfort blanket on the road to independence, 20 years of dissembling on the part of the SNP could have been avoided.

The party’s EU policy could be the biggest barrier to independence. Just as the scare stories about the potential horrors of independence, no longer work – something the Labour Party seems finally to have accepted – so the equally nonsensical “benefits of membership of the EU” are being more closely examined by an electorate with a level of sophistication, for which they are rarely given credit.

The SNP’s European policy is in shreds but before the party can begin to tell the Scottish electorate the truth, it will first have to face the truth itself.

JIM FAIRLIE

St Ninians, Heathcote Road, Crieff, Perthshire

BOTH Jim Sillars and Trevor Salmon make relevant points about Scotland and Europe. The present financial crisis is going to materially affect the European Union, possibly leading to the scrapping of the euro and possibly even some countries leaving the EU.

The inefficiency of the Brussels administration as another possibly unnecessary layer of government and its dire effect on Scottish fishing and on general tax levels makes a convincing case for having only a trading partnership with the countries of Europe.

As for those concerned that Scotland could not stand alone in the world, then the internationally recognised list of countries shows that by population Scotland would stand 116th out of 234 countries – placing Scotland just below Finland but ahead of countries such as New Zealand, Norway, Singapore and Ireland. On other factors such as GDP and potential natural resources, Scotland would rate higher.

An independent currency is just one tool in the economic trade armoury, but it is an important part of a government’s control of the economy. Scotland would, as long as it learned from the mistakes of Gordon Brown’s duration as chancellor, have advantages from its natural resources in various types of energy.

If borrowing was kept under control and only used for some of the capital spending and if annual deficits were offset by planned surpluses in other years, then it could easily compete and trade without the need for membership of the EU or the euro, which might not exist by that time.

BRUCE D SKIVINGTON

Pairc a Ghliob, Strath

Gairloch, Wester Ross

IS THE future of the currency in an independent Scotland a key concern of voters?

Jim Sillars may be overestimating the importance of the matter, but he makes a number of salient points about the SNP’s strategy.

First, it should not underestimate the resilience of Westminster in trying to pick holes, in the run up to a referendum, in the party’s attitude to both Europe and the eurozone. Second, he has highlighted some confusion in the public mind as to what is its approach currently to joining the euro.

In one vital area, however, Mr Sillars is looking too far ahead. How can he possibly know what the approach of a newly-elected government in an independent Scotland would be towards the pound, the euro or any other currency policymakers might dream up? In fact, how can he know whether the SNP in its current form and structure will still exist after independence?

There is a simple solution for First Minister Alex Salmond. He should state as soon as possible that independence is being sought with Scotland as a member of Europe and in the sterling area.

BOB TAYLOR

Shiel Court

Glenrothes, Fife