Sovereign state

Is IT too much to hope for a rational debate about independence for Scotland? Danny Alexander opposes it (your report, 2 September) because of the debt Scotland might have inherited in 2008. What has that to do with the price of fish?

The independence decision must be based on fundamentals, and take a long view. A sovereign Scotland would have the opportunity to start afresh, to free itself from the influence, good and bad, of its dominant neighbour.

It’s impossible to say if it would be more prosperous than had it remained part of the UK, but it would of course have the opportunity to make the distribution of its wealth much more equal. That’s not a great concern for the CBI, a lobbying group which cannot claim to represent the public interest.

Murdo Fraser presumably does make that claim, and is entitled to want to “kill independence, and break the SNP”. However, I wonder if it has occurred to him that the best way to “break” the SNP would be for Scotland to become independent.

After all, once it had achieved its goal, there would be no need for it to continue in existence, whatever its leading figures might decide to do.

Andrew Anderson

Granton Road

Edinburgh

On THE day that newspapers report Danny Alexander’s inaccurate ramblings about the state of the Scottish economy after independence, it seems at least the Electoral Commission has got it right. After it released the figures on how much each party spent during the Scottish elections, the Lib Dems are now categorised as one of the smaller parties – along with the SSP, Monster Raving Loonies etc.

It looks as if under the leadership of Danny Alexander and co, the Lib Dems are being further marginalised in Scottish politics.

Kenny MacLaren

Avondale Drive

Paisley