WHEN it is generally recognised that the currency question cost us dearly in 2014, I cannot understand why the problem was not solved years ago. So I understand George Kerevan’s frustration, and share it (Entering the debate on currency without transparency is courting disaster, Oct 31).

In the 2001 General Election, Tory leader William Hague’s only policy was “keep the pound, reject the euro”. The mantra worked with some folk, because a working woman I discussed the election with said she was voting Tory – because she wanted to keep the pound!

Hague lost anyway.

READ MORE: FACT CHECK: Would Scotland be blocked from the EU if it doesn't join the euro?

Now, the SNP will have done its research so its caution is understandable; but unforgivable. Why? Because the SNP could have plumped for the Pound Scots and said it would track Sterling. Using the same coinage and notes, but of a Scottish design, the Pound Scots would be familiar and not confuse some people as decimalisation did. The SNP could have been publicising it for years, as the UK did before decimalisation, and even produced facsimiles for sale.

Examples of countries gaining their independence and adopting a new currency quickly are legion. Many of the countries, a lot of them former British colonies, started independence is a very poor financial state. But to my knowledge none reverted to the old currency. Scotland is different because it is a very wealthy country, and its currency would soon become much respected round the world. Can we just be bold for a change?

Richard Walthew

THERE is a simple solution as to what we call our new currency: I suggest the Scottish Quid. If someone asked you, “how much was that?”, Scots wouldn’t say £20 (unless it was someone posh) they would say 20 quid. We already have half a quid, 50p – surely we can’t be treading on anyone ‘s toes if we keep the pence? Laughably, many English business people from cab drivers to shopkeepers do not accept Scottish notes at the moment.

Chic O’Connor
via email

READ MORE: What are the knowns and unknowns of an independent Scottish currency?

REGARDING all the latest argument regarding using the the pound Sterling after independence, everyone seems to ignore the fact that at the moment I believe the pound is considered to be a petro currency supported by oil revenues. After independence and not supported by oil revenues it would in my opinion tank. Who in their right mind would want to be associated with Sterling in this instance? It is of course merely my opinion, perhaps some one with currency expertise might explain why this scenario would or would not occur.

Allan Jaap
via email

AFTER reading several currency articles (the last one being from George Kerevan) I wondered why the Channel Islands seem to have NO PROBLEM accepting euros, English notes, Scottish notes etc.

I don’t see a problem with shops and service providers displaying prices in euros, Pound Scots, Pound Sterling. Eire didn’t seem to have major problems with the transition from Sterling to punt to euro. If the economy has a sound base (which ours has), it seems to me the currency can be “mixed and matched” as required.

Barry Stewart

SO the Tory party concept of a “compassionate country” has resulted in the UK falling, on a population basis, to 19 in the list of European countries receiving asylum applications.

The “sixth-wealthiest country” in the world has probably benefitted most financially from the exploitation of the natural resources of countries from which the asylum seekers have fled and from arms sales into war-ravaged regions where many of them have lost their homes and family members. The boast claimed to offset this dereliction of humanitarian responsibility, that the UK is one of the largest contributors of “foreign aid” (seventh in Europe per capita in 2019), has also been blown apart in recent times with the near 30% reduction (relative to Gross National Income) in this aid below the UN target, and the revelation that more than half of the remaining “foreign aid” budget is actually being spent in the UK.

READ MORE: As a former asylum seeker, I'm terrified by this ever-more-cruel UK Government

While personally I find it difficult to comprehend why some still think that a Westminster government will better further the overall interests of the people of Scotland than an independent Holyrood government, I am dismayed that the current “constitutional arrangements” those persons wish to sustain enable successive UK Governments, with seemingly heartless Home Secretaries such as Priti Patel and Suella Braverman, to represent my view on the treatment of fellow human beings desperately seeking refuge. These arrogantly self-centred people do not represent my values nor the ambitions for the future society I wish my children to inhabit and I am confident that together the citizens of an independent Scotland can build a prosperous, egalitarian and compassionate country of which we can all be proud.

Stan Grodynski
Longniddry, East Lothian