THOSE of us who remember the 2014 Scottish referendum debate do not need a lecture by Owen Kelly (Letters, November 19) or from any other SNP supporters on the current ongoing Brexit negotiations when they are blinded by their own obsession on independence at any cost and have learned little from the recent past.

For example, we were told by the SNP that we would only require 18 months to negotiate full independence from our 300-year-old Union (where we conduct around 65 per cent of our trade) and that our financial position would be “healthier than the UK as a whole”. Yet in practice, according to the Institute of Fiscal Studies (with the benefit of hindsight) we would have been £10.7 billion worse off if we had broken away from the UK, plus two other analyses warned that on “independence day” of March 2016 Scotland would have faced “austerity squared” had there been a Yes vote September 2014. Even with the partial recovery in oil prices little has changed (witness the Scottish Growth Commission report) and we would have the worst fiscal deficit of all the 34 OECD countries – with the international money lenders running for cover. Regardless of Brexit it is hardly the time for even the ardent nationalists to say “over to you Nicola Sturgeon” to launch a second independence referendum.

Your also publish a letter from Alan Ritchie cherry-picking some rare EU growth figures to downplay the UK’s GDP growth recovery which has been second only to the US since the Great Recession in 2008; the latest growth figures from the EU make sombre reading. For example, the Eurozone GDP rose only 0.2 per cent in July-September and economists say that the weaker than expected figures could even precede a wider recession especially as Italy’s growth rate fell to zero.

Given that the fragile growth recovery in the EU appears to have already “fizzled out” perhaps some of the arrogance and intransigence displayed by the EU negotiators and critics will be tempered by the thought that a No Deal Brexit in its raw form may not only be undesirable for the UK but could prove equally challenging for a troubled European economy – especially as the EU currently enjoys an £85 billion surplus of trade in goods and receives a net £10bn annually from the UK taxpayers into their unaccountable EU coffers.

Ian Lakin,

Pinelands, Murtle Den Road, Milltimber, Aberdeen.

THERESA May hopes to go and sign an outline document with the EU on a future relationship. Yet, a refined sense of diplomacy and impeccable verbal manners was missing in her speech to the CBI.

She stated that after Brexit EU nationals will no longer jump the queue to enter the UK. As members of the EU UK citizens had freedom of movement within the EU. Many live and work on the Continent. Was that jumping the queue too?

It seems the hidden self-proclaimed nastiness of the Tory Party still surfaces when Mrs May drops her guard.

The CBI responded well. It statedthat the migration plans outlined by Mrs May will still cause labour shortage.No doubt the 27 will have noted the xenophobic tone of Theresa May’s gutter remarks about the EU nationals living and working here just now. The PM is pandering to baser instincts.

John Edgar,

1a Langmuir Quadrant, Kilmaurs.

THERESA May is currently desperately trying to sell the draft Brexit withdrawal agreement, in an attempt to get it through the House of Commons next month. She is facing stiff opposition to this from many in her own party, and with the DUP, the SNP (surprise, surprise) and others also promising to vote it down.

The main problem identified in the proposed deal, of course, concerns the Northern Ireland backstop which many fear will leave the UK permanently tied to the EU and with no easy way out.

The Prime Minister, however, can hardly be surprised at the level of opposition she is getting, as she herself was of the same opinion only last month.

In the House of Commons on October 15 she said: “I need to be able to look the British people in the eye and say that this backstop is a temporary solution. People are rightly concerned that what is only meant to be temporary could become a permanent limbo, with no new relationship between the UK and the EU ever agreed.”

Perhaps if she could explain away this apparent contradictory thinking she might stand a chance of getting the withdrawal agreement passed.

Thomas Masson,

15 Langton Place, Newton Mearns.

HAS Nicola Sturgeon truly considered the consequences of her actions (“Sturgeon in alliance bid with Corbyn to prevent Brexit chaos”, The Herald, November 19)? Ms Sturgeon has spent her whole political career lambasting Labour. Not only that, but Jeremy Corbyn is well known for being less than enthusiastic about the European Union. Ms Sturgeon is simply throwing caution to the wind as she seizes upon an opportunity to promote her independence agenda by reversing her long-held distaste for Labour. In a time of national crisis, it is perfectly acceptable to cast aside differences for the common good. In this case it would appear supporting Theresa May might have actually avoided the hard Brexit Ms Sturgeon is always warning of but supporting Mr Corbyn’s unclear position instead seems far more risky.

Ms Sturgeon obviously dislikes the Tories far more than Labour and is prepared to plunge the country into an even bigger crisis to make this point. Grievance politics at its worst?

Dr Gerald Edwards,

Broom Road, Glasgow.

THE First Minister regards Brexit as manna from Heaven. Perhaps she determines a credible opportunity to lower the profile of the performance of NHS, education and police in Scotland, with her crystal ball revealing a General Election and perhaps another independence referendum. She will lose both if NHS, education and police remain high-profile issues; as all three ought to do.

William Durward,

20 South Erskine Park, Bearsden.

ARE our elected representatives totally unaware of the damage being done to our society by their inability to resolve the Brexit issue? Don’t they understand that the resulting feelings of helplessness and insecurity can only lead to two outcomes? Mounting discord and schism or an enervating apathy on either of which the populist forces at work can feed?

So where do we, the people, apparently of whom a majority now wish to remain in Europe, take it from here if we are to be denied a second vote on the outcome of the negotiations?

John Milne,

9 Ardgowan Drive, Uddingston.