Just imagine what an extra 20-30 pro-Yes MSPs could achieve

Firstly, his reference to divide-and-conquer tactics being a Unionist ploy is simply ridiculous. How many times have we seen members of so-called Scottish Unionist parties suggest their members should vote for other parties? Kezia Dugdale comes to mind, when she stated that Labour voters should vote Conservative in areas where Labour were not likely to win!

READ MORE: Don’t dismiss plans to Max the Yes without doing the arithmetic

There are even online pages you can visit that tell Unionist voters who to vote for in their particular area. I am afraid the only people in my opinion using tactics to stop the Yes movement from having a voice in the Scottish parliament are people like Mr Morrison.

The Yes movement is a very broad church. Many members of smaller parties and those of no party allegiance have got behind the SNP thus far to fight for the one single objective that they all agree on, and that is nothing more than independence itself.

Secondly, it does matter how many MSPs we have in the Scottish Parliament because let’s face the facts here: every Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrat MSP in the chamber will ALWAYS vote against Scotland’s best interests. Even when it comes to the SNP’s allies, even they force their policies through in order to get the budget done each year.

READ MORE: Our aim is to increase the Yes vote, not the number of Yes MSPs

Imagine what an additional 20-30 independence-minded MSPs in that chamber could do in regards to pushing through what is best for Scotland while fighting for our independence. We have three confirmed Unionist parties, why should we not have two dedicated independence parties? Having all these extra independence MSPs and fewer Unionist MSPs would also mean that the various committees would also be pro-independence and would be working on strategies that would benefit the people of Scotland, not ones that would hinder them. Remember the recent attempted take-over by the Conservatives of one of the Holyrood committees?

Thirdly, I agree that we should be spending our time converting soft No’s to Yes, So now imagine how much easier this might be with all those additional independence MSPs speaking to constituents and telling them that they can have a better life and that a better future is possible. As opposed to the constant bleak and gloomy words uttered to them constantly by Unionists who care not a jot about their fellow Scots, many of whom would see Scotland as a vassal state of Westminster, useful only for the tax revenue, oil and gas, electricity and water among other resources that they take from us while charging us for the privilege.

Finally, there are very few people in the Yes movement who believe we are only around the 50% mark for independence. Most believe that in reality we are a good bit higher. Let’s face the facts here as well: starting at even 50% before any campaigning takes place will do for me. Either way though, an Alliance for Independence can take that number and greatly increase it, simply by having independence-supporting MSPs who actually give people hope and belief in themselves and in this country of ours.

Jim Manclark
Ardrossan

HAVING read Neil Morison’s letter I was confused by his logic, or the lack of it. He says it is important to get a high Yes vote – well most of us in the Yes movement will agree with that. Surely Neil recognises that the present electoral system for the Scottish Parliament has not done that very well, and we need to look carefully at it to see how we can achieve that objective.

Now Neil will know, as we all do, that the SNP will do very well on the constituency section and if all Yes supporters vote SNP and for no other party they will do exceptionally well, perhaps even get more than 50% of the votes on that section of the ballot alone.

But if the SNP do not get 50%, let’s say 48%, it will be a good showing for one party, but it will not be the over 50% which Neil is looking for. However, the good news for Neil is that if we use our regional vote wisely we can easily rectify that and get well over 50% in the total ballot and a clear majority of Yes-supporting MSPs in the new parliament getting rid of Tories, Liberals and Labour members in the process.

All we need to do to achieve this is vote for SNP with our first vote, but not do so with our second or regional vote, because if we vote for SNP with both votes most of the second votes will be discounted and this will help Tory, Liberal and Labour candidates.

If a substantial number of us vote on the regional list for Yes-supporting candidates, then a significant number of them will get elected.

This will not only ensure that we get well over the 50% voting for Yes candidates, but will ensure we get a Scottish Parliament with a substantial Yes majority. Think about it Neil, I’m sure you will see the sense in it.

Andy Anderson
Saltcoats

I WRITE in response to John C Hutchison (Letters, March 11). I am very sure that there can be a much more productive way of using the second vote, perhaps a pact between SNP and Greens, in fact I think a pact would perhaps show the SNP in a good light, that they are willing to work with others towards independence, and may even increase their first vote. I would be very wary of introducing new parties.

But the simple arithmetic is that at the 2016 election, 47.1% of voters voted for independence parties. No matter how much you play with the numbers, they are still short.

I think if folk are keen to find a way towards independence, that is tremendous, but they should be made aware that maximising the number of indy MSPs may not yield the result that they are hoping for.

Neil Morison
Kyle of Lochalsh