IT was very interesting to read David Torrance’s article on Gibraltar’s attitude to Brexit following his interview with Chief Minister Fabian Picardo (“Unlike the SNP, Gibraltar has learned to stop fearing Brexit”, The Herald, March 5).

It would be difficult to challenge the main fact that the dependency of Gibraltar lies on an economic model dominated by financial services but one should not forget that the future position of financial services in mainland UK, the City of London as an example, has yet to be agreed in forthcoming Brexit trade talks.

What the Chief Minister appears not to make mention of is that, should the gates at La Linea, the Spanish municipality, be closed on a permanent basis, access to a workforce from Spain, some of whom are employed in the lucrative financial services, would be severely depleted, due to the ending of free movement.

Furthermore, other goods and services would be greatly affected, as would air services to and from the Rock.

The financial stability of Gibraltar walks a fine line and is dependent on support from the UK Treasury.

The economy may be buoyant at present while Britain remains in the EU but this, in all probability, will not be the case if the Prime Minister’s mantra of Brexit meaning Brexit causes Gibraltar, its politicians and citizens to be more dependent on the UK.

This dependency was once described to me by a senior UK political figure as being not dissimilar to that of a suckling calf.

Mike Dooley,

52 Auchendoon Crescent,

Seafield,

Ayr.

KEITH Howell writes that “the First Minister’s stance on Brexit has demonstrated from the start a determination to use the process to undermine the UK” (Letters, March 6)). Nicola Sturgeon has been battling for long enough to persuade the UK Government to stay in the single market, for the good of the UK as well as of Scotland, but Mr Howell chooses to ignore this in his crusade against Scottish independence.

He says “many will suspect” that the First Minister is taking a stand against the Brexit power-grab in the interests of the SNP and ot those of Scotland. Yet the UK Government’s analysis, which also agrees with that of one commissioned by the Scottish Government, would mean that a hard Brexit would hit Scottish economic growth by 9%.

By what figment of the imagination does Mr Howell believe that taking a strong stance against this act of madness is not in the interests of Scotland?

Dennis White, 4 Vere Road, Blackwood, Lanark.

KEITH Howell accuses Nicola Sturgeon of all kinds of perfidy while suggesting that the Tory Government is all reason and light (Letters, March 6).

Our First Minister is right to mistrust Theresa May and the cohort of English nationalists she has around her (how ironic that two of the hardest of the hardliners are of Scots birth).

The Tories have reneged on undertakings after a solemn vow made to Scotland and expect and demand that Ms Sturgeon meekly accepts their word that they are negotiating with our interests at the forefront of their minds. The leopard doesn’t change its spots; nor do the Tories at Westminster or for that matter Holyrood look out for any interests other than those of the wealthy elites that fund their thinly numbered party.

David C Purdie,

12 Mayburn Vale,

Loanhead,

Midlothian.

JUDGING by the reaction to Theresa May’s speech on the EU last week and her lucid, confident interviews, she may well have succeeded in creating a wider middle ground with her MPs, those in opposition and the public than had previously existed.

She spelled out the “hard facts” of the complex negotiations ahead and the certainty that very few will achieve exactly what they want. She also described a vision of the UK with an opportunity to maintain and expand trade with the EU and the rest of the world, and made it clear that this will come at a financial cost.

It is a vision close to that of Winston Churchill, who promoted the idea of a united Europe of which the UK was not a member but a full partner. EU officials seem keen to dismantle the British position, even though there is support among individual governments, so the UK now needs a common front behind the Brexit team.

I hope Jeremy Corbyn resolves his differences with Mrs May rather than provide negotiating leverage for Michel Barnier; perhaps a free vote is the right way forward. Unfortunately I have no such hopes for the SNP, for which the word “vision” starts and stops at independence and whose leaders spend more time sifting through the Brexit components for “material-change-in-circumstance” candidates to stoke the grievance fires than constructively working to play Scotland’s part in creating a solid platform for our people and businesses.

Alan Sutherland,

1 Willow Row,

Stonehaven.

RESPONDING to the concerns of SNP Westminster leader Ian Blackford about a Westminster power grab, Theresa May declared that Scotland wasn’t an independent country; as if Mr Blackford or anyone else needed a reminder.

Perhaps Mrs May needs to be reminded that Scotland didn’t elect her as Prime Minister; didn’t elect the previous Tory government nor the coalition government before that; and that, despite Scotland voting overwhelmingly to remain in the EU and being told that the only way we could secure our place in Europe was by remaining within the UK, Scotland faces being dragged out of the EU and suffering the dire consequences of Mrs May’s hard Brexit. And all because, as Mrs May points out, Scotland is not an independent country. Ruth Marr, 99 Grampian Road, Stirling.

THERESA May is fond of telling us that the UK is a precious union, so let her now demonstrate the value of that union by gathering all four equal partners around the table to agree common frameworks on issues such as agriculture, fishing and environmental protection.

This would show that Brexit is not being run by a cabinet committee of MPs solely from the Westminster Parliament and that the Union can be restored to one of four equal partners.

John S Jamieson,

37 Echline Place,

South Queensferry.