DAVID Torrance (“The SNP don’t really want to make nice with wicked Tories”, The Herald, February 26) seems to be both perturbed and not a little surprised that the SNP is in favour of Scottish independence. He quotes the late John Mackintosh as saying in 1979 that “anything the Unionist parties suggested would “always be inadequate”. How surprised should we be about this, since it fell short of its eventual aim of full independence for Scotland?

Perhaps it is also why the SNP makes an “unconvincing defender of a Scottish Parliament”, since for the SNP a devolved Parliament is not the accomplishment of its aims? As Canon Kenyon Wright wrote to Gordon Brown and David Cameron, devolution “would always be power tentatively handed down by grace and favour, not of right. It goes deeper. Devolution of any degree, leaves the UK’s system of parliamentary sovereignty fundamentally unreformed and unchanged.”

Mr Torrance’s unwillingness to recognise this leads him to speak of the SNP’s opposition to Clause 11 of the European Withdrawal Bill as “posturing”. However, David Lidington was quoted at the weekend that Westminster would become involved in devolved matters “to protect the UK internal market” and meet international obligations which “need a pause to give the governments time to design and put in place a UK-wide framework”. This underscores Michael Settle’s recent report that the Westminster government will “put in appropriate safeguards to protect the internal market as and when they are required”, and that this was “of fundamental importance”. Where does this leave devolution?

Here is the fundamental difference of devolution and independence laid bare. Under the former, even if a matter is devolved, Westminster is still capable of imposing its own legislation, contrary to the wishes of the devolved administrations.

Mr Torrance last week quoted with approval Willie Rennie’s proposition of a federal solution to the governance of Britain. This, though, is a Liberal Democrat (or Liberal) hardy annual, which can be traced back to Gladstone, with little response by the UK state. In 1983 Jo Grimond wrote: “Once we accept that the Scots and the Welsh are nations, then we must accord them parliaments which have all the normal powers of government, except for those that they delegate to the United Kingdom government or the EEC”. That would be the sort of reform Kenyon Wright referred to, but in today’s political context, with the present Government’s direction of travel on Brexit, how likely is such a fundamental reversal of political authority in the contemporary UK?

While Mr Torrance is more scathing of the SNP position, he does recognise, albeit grudgingly, that at Westminster the devolved administrations are perceived with “a degree of frustration mingled with incomprehension”. Might it be, perhaps, that Westminster is actually quite pleased with its own system of government, seeing no need to change, and considering devolution to be a, hopefully temporary, peculiarity?

Even in 1974, Professor Mackintosh realised that, to successfully resist independence, Unionism had to develop “an alternative proposition”. More than 40 years later, how likely does it seem that there could be a contemporary alternative proposition for reform and change?

Alasdair Galloway,

14 Silverton Avenue, Dumbarton.

THE SNP Government needs to think of the unexpected consequences of its latest legislation. Has it thought of the effects the changes in income tax will have on for instance the M74?

The initial convoys of tax refugees driving Audis, Jags and BMWs heading south will be bad enough, but they will only be on a reconnaissance mission. What about all the heavy removal vans which will surely follow them?

At least they will only head south once. Once the 50 pence on drink ("Ministers 'bottled it' on 50p minumum alcohol price", The Herald, February 27) becomes too hard to swallow the swarm of cars, lorries, and maybe even chartered buses making to and from Carlisle, will cause severe extra damage to the motorway.

Has extra cash been reserved? Or will those two pieces of legislation result in more potholes like the one on the A82 in which you could have a bath ("My car went into a pothole big enough for me to take a bath in on a main road, says motorist", The Herald, February 23)?

George Smith,

21 Birny Hill Court, Clydebank.

SO I will be forced to hand over an extra £2.50 to a German discount store for the bottle of wine for the family's Sunday lunch. For others their weekly tipple within the safe drinking guidelines could triple in price.

The SNP claims that boosting retailers' profits will save 60 lives a year but then it doesn’t understand strategic behavioural analysis as evidenced by it making Scotland the least economically competitive and highest taxed part of the UK.

Even if the claim were true wouldn't it be more sensible if that money went to the common good instead of retailers' profits? A Minimum Unit Duty is a more sensible basis for the experiment. However, the Scottish Parliament has too much time on its hands to adopt simple but effective solutions.

In the political bubble, work expands to time available. In the real world there is the internet and no borders.

James Robb,

Redclyffe Gardens, Helensburgh.