I WAS struck by a leaflet from the Scottish Conservatives

that popped through the door. This noted that they were the only party able to stop the SNP gaining a majority of seats at the forthcoming Scottish Parliament elections, thereby preventing the holding of another independence referendum.

Clearly for those independence supporters there is welcome acknowledgement here that should the SNP win a majority, there will be another referendum, which is pleasing to note.

READ MORE: Scottish Tory leaflet says SNP majority at May vote WILL result in indyref2

It is, however, disappointing that beyond this the Tories have nothing to say on key issues such as education, health and employment.

Given this, it would more than a little hypocritical that should the SNP gain a majority, the Scottish Tories given these statements then turn round and oppose the holding of such a vote.

Alex Orr
Edinburgh

THE postman has just delivered the latest leaflet from the “Scottish Conservatives” and not, as I expected, from the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party. It would appear that the Unionist tag has been dropped – why? Perhaps because it is hanging like a political albatross round their necks.

In the leaflet there is no mention of policies in relation to Scotland, therefore it could be assumed that if hell freezes over and the Conservatives perform better than expected, the control of Scotland would be surrendered to PM Boris Johnson and his incompetent colleagues in Westminster. It would mean that Westminster could then press ahead with the privatisation of the Scottish National Health Service, the reintroduction of university tuition fees and the cutting back of Scotland’s public services – return to austerity!

In May the people of Scotland will have their opportunity to pass judgement on the performance of the Scottish Government and the anti-Scottish Unionist opposition parties. The choice is clear: either vote for the SNP, who have been in power for more than ten years, or one of the opposition parties who want to close down Holyrood and return the devolved powers to Westminster.

This would mean surrendering power to PM Boris Johnson, Matt Hancock, Michael Gove and Jacob Rees-Mogg to rule Scotland.

If this is what the people of Scotland want then they have the chance to vote for it. Or they can vote to flush the anti-Scottish Unionists down the political toilet – that is democracy.

Thomas L Inglis
Fintry

IT’S been well documented that Holyrood’s approach to the pandemic has been better received by the general public than Westminster’s. One could argue that Nicola and her team are just better with the job in hand. Boris and his team and advisers were more inept (especially in the early days). But there could have been a safeguard to Westminster’s stuttering performance.

A voting system that allows one party to have 100% of the power clearly is outdated. Without this, Boris put a spin on things and was slow to act decisively. Facing a national disaster, he still could have invited Labour, the SNP, and representatives from all four countries into forming a Pandemic Cabinet. This would have proved invaluable and ensured all sang from the same hymn book. But he didn’t.

READ MORE: Nicola Sturgeon: Boris Johnson 'making up' dates on lifting of Covid lockdown

Boris, despite his learned rhetoric and soundbites, clearly isn’t a unifying figure. He decided to ignore the different regions and devolved countries (as he did with Brexit) and listen more to his cronies, his backbenchers and donors. This is why the UK Parliament needs to earnestly look at changing the voting system and how the country is run. But has he learned from his mistakes? It would appear not. Fuelled by big business and backbenchers, optimistic and upbeat, on Monday he mentioned four stages and all restrictions to be removed by June the 21st!

By contrast Nicola was far more cautious. Her progressive road to recovery is slower getting back to normality, and avoided giving specific dates. She clearly doesn’t want a third wave of the virus

and is acting accordingly. I know whose approach I prefer. To avoid the same mess re-occuring from Westminster, to champion real democracy, we have two options: massively reform the UK Parliament (there is no definite proposals or timetable for this!) or vote accordingly in May to go it alone. I know what I’m doing!!

Robin MacLean
Fort Augustus

I DESPAIRED when I read the letter of Jo Fry (February 22), whose mathematics led her/him to forecast 50% of list seats for the SNP with a vote of about 43.5%. My worry is that some people will believe and share this misinformation.

Firstly, it is obvious that the number of constituency seats won has been omitted in this calculation and, secondly, this type of forecast is not possible without the knowledge of the votes gained by other parties.

Could The National perhaps publish a guide to the the D’Hondt system as applied in Scotland, together with some examples of how the number of constituency seats affects the additional member calculation? People could then make up their own minds whether a tactical vote in the list would secure a large majority of “independence seats” in Holyrood.

The D’Hondt system was introduced to guard against one party gaining a majority in the parliament and the 2011 result, to my mind, was a bit of a fluke.

George Wilson
Fochabers

I HAD fully intended to give both votes to the SNP in May. Vital for the march to independence. But if Salmond and Sturgeon do not stop their increasingly bitter squabble, I may just not bother to vote at all. Anyone else agree?

Alasdair MacDiarmid
Appin