SADLY, B McKenna (Letters, Jan 26) is not correct to say “everyone agrees that one of the purposes of government is to govern, and a major purpose is to bring justice and fairness”. The whole aim of neoliberals is to reduce government to a minimum, and for the most extreme of them to do away with government altogether (the latter are known as anarcho-capitalists). They abhor democracy, demanding instead “economic freedom” by which they mean an absence of regulation and taxes, at least for themselves, so that they have the licence to exploit both people and resources unchecked.

Insofar as government has a role, for them it is to protect “free markets”, property and wealth, and certainly not to attempt redistribution, provide state welfare and public health services. It is up to private corporations to offer any such services at prices they decide and for those who cannot afford them, too bad. We are to become customers, not citizens. Even policing and the courts should be run by the corporations whose first duty is to make profits.

READ MORE: Michael Gove: 'Union stronger and SNP retreating thanks to Tories'

These libertarian ideas have many wealthy and influential supporters, particularly in the USA where many of them have opted to live in gated communities. Ironically, if you live in one of these communities you usually have to abide by strict rules, even down to the colour you paint your house or what you grow in your garden.

Do not imagine that the UK is unaffected by libertarian ideas. William Rees-Mogg, Jacob’s dad, co-authored a book which touted the subversion of technology in order to “destroy the nation state”. Quinn Slobodian, author of Crack-up Capitalism, described the intended result of this as “the emergence of a hypermobile super-class of high-IQ individuals who could remotely coordinate placid low-IQ workforces while stashing their wealth far from the grasping hands of governments”.

READ MORE: Anger as Michael Gove pens secret 'state of Union' report mid-pandemic

It is clear that a bit of this has rubbed off on Jacob, who – along with Liz Truss and right-wing think tanks like the Taxpayers Alliance and the Institute of Economic Affairs – wants the Tories to go even further than they already have. Labour are not entirely unaffected either, as anyone who has listened to the utterances of Wes Streeting and Rachel Reeves can testify.

It is probably true that dictatorship is “more efficient” than democracy in “getting things done”, but long may it continue that most of us would still prefer some inefficiency.

Andrew M Fraser
Inverness

PERHAPS Lords Cameron and Foulkes should remember that they were not elected to their current positions, whereas Humza Yousaf most definitely was, by a more democratic method than any of the UK Government such as James Cleverly.

Humza Yousaf was elected to Holyrood by his constituents and to the post of First Minister by the elected MSPs, and has a duty to represent the people of Scotland and their views. That he is keen to develop friendly relations with representatives of other countries, to share ideas and promote trade and investment for the benefit of Scotland, is part of that duty. Fulfilling this duty has no bearing on the foreign policies of the UK Government, as the number of Scottish MPs is too small ever to have any effect on them. Our FM is more than capable of discussing Scottish affairs and our concerns without a nanny.

READ MORE: 'Keir Starmer's support for Tony Blair should be a warning sign for Scotland'

So why all the fuss? Could it be that he might bring benefit to the Scottish economy from his meetings? Perish the thought! That might highlight the fact that for many years England has always had a balance-of-trade deficit while Scotland has had a surplus and investment in Scotland is proportionally higher than in England. No wonder that they have blocked the Rosyth-to-Dunkirk ferry project lest it bring benefit to Scotland, instead of to UK coffers from our exports having to leave through English ports.

Perhaps these critics need reminded that every year a substantial sum is deducted at source from the Scottish budget to pay for the use of services and facilities abroad, such as embassies etc. If these are withdrawn, can we expect that our contribution will be refunded to our budget?

Keep up the good work, Humza – we stand with you.

P Davidson
Falkirk

LAST week I received a piece of paper from John Lamont. His message is that we should vote for him “to move Scotland forward”. I can only think that means into oblivion. He goes on to say “We first need to beat the SNP here”. Here, I should add, is the Scottish Borders.

There is nothing more important than defeating this waste of space. There is nothing more important than replacing a Tory with an SNP MP. He refers to the LibDems and the Labour party as being hopeless cases. He doesn’t even mention the Greens, or Alba, or any independent candidate.

READ MORE: Embarrassing moment as Tory MP unsure if she voted for major piece of legislation

The man’s arrogance is beyond belief. He has made not a single useful contribution to Westminster in my memory. The great Calum Kerr made it possible to give us broadband in our village. Lamont tried to wrest that achievement from him. Lamont opposed the Waverley line restoration at every turn. Since its success he has recommended an extension to Carlisle.

He always votes with the government. It would appear that his only reason to stay in Westminster is to keep his seat. It would give me such pleasure to see him lose it.

I will never understand why anyone votes for a Tory – or, for that matter, for the Labour Party. Why such reluctance to vote for the SNP? It’s a mystery. No university tuition fees? Free prescriptions? No strikes in the Scottish NHS? Financial support for children?

What have the Tories done? If you hadn’t noticed, John Lamont is a Tory.

Tony Kime
Kelso