LIKE Alex Saville I deeply resent the imposition of Trident at Faslane on moral, financial and strategic grounds (Letters, The National, July 17). However, unlike him I cannot feel anything other than admiration and gratitude for those who are prepared to continue to, peacefully and with dignity, demonstrate against this obscenity.

Ken MacColl
Oban

ALEX Saville, I agree with you that Trident is not welcome in Scotland. But what you call “anarchy” is civil disobedience for the common good. If people had never done such things, you most likely wouldn’t have a vote, and I certainly wouldn’t. And your issue with Faslane peace camp is that it’s an “eyesore”? Dry those tears Mr Saville: with weapons such as Trident in the world, it won’t take much for there to be very little to see at all – if you’re spared your sight, that is. Folk such as Brian Quail and Angie Zelter, currently imprisoned after they formed a human road block by Coulport (1000 call for anti-Trident pair’s release, The National, July 17), are heroes. To protest against mass killing is not wrong.

Loading article content

Lynn Palmer
Glasgow

IT was interesting to read the economic forecasts from the experts at Deloitte’s and EY in today’s National (Economy warning as spending slows, The National, July 17). However, it is as well to remember that economists do not have a good record at prophecy. For example they failed completely to anticipate the 2008 economic recession, the biggest and longest for a generation. Nor are they much nearer to understanding its causes today.

The fundamental reason for their failure is that most of them are still thirled to a defective economic model that imagines economies as machines, with a number of levers neatly labelled interest rates, taxation and currency, that can be finely adjusted by wise government to create just the right results.

The reality, as Adam Smith saw 200 years ago, is that economies are complex self-regulating social organisms comprising millions upon millions of individuals, all striving to do the best they can for themselves, their families and their communities. It is for this reason that national economies can recover surprisingly quickly even from gross errors of government – witness the recovery of the Republic of Ireland and Iceland from the 2008 debacle.

To encourage economic growth, governments need to concentrate on the input side of the economy, focusing on infrastructure such as education and training, communications and transport. Certainly much remains to be done, but I am reasonably encouraged by the Scottish Government’s efforts in this regard, particularly given the restricted powers they are allowed by the UK.

This is why I support Scottish independence and have done since 1962, when I realised the economic cul-de-sac into which Scotland had been led.

Peter Craigie
Edinburgh

FINALLY, Chris Patten, former Tory chairman, has commented on what we have known all along, namely, the Tory Party is in all but name an English national party.

His comments are also directed at the two English Tory leaders Cameron and May, who have got us into this mess trying to contain the uncontainable, the English nationalist wing of the Tory right.

It is also, surprisingly, not new. The advent of EVEL, promoted by Cameron before his political demise, is an indication of where the true locus of the (English) Tory party lies. Its satraps from north of the Tweed are merely place men and women in Holyrood, House of Commons and in the non-elected House of Lords to fall into line with whatever diktats emanate from No. 10. Given the contradictory noise from different Cabinet members over the media, it must be hard for the satraps to determine the direction they must “obey”.

With Brexit, not only are there no fixed positions as yet on detailed outcomes for the exit phase, there now seems to be a vacuum on outline planning for internal policy on how the country will manage, develop and oversee “repatriated” powers from the EU after March 29, 2019.The Labour Brexiteer Jeremy Corbyn – and he is one with May on this, lest we forget – has no detailed thought either, except soundbites on the need to preserve jobs and frictionless access to the single market. Both Unionist parties have not scoped out the required internal policy-making procedures or new administrative requirements to be in place the day after we exit. The fabled UK “broad shoulders”, a phrase much used by Gordon Brown, are slouched these days!

And the clock is ticking. The great irony is that the EU do not need to meet No 10 wants and demands. The UK has left de facto. The UK has to meet EU requirements if it wants a form of continued access, let alone “transitional” arrangements, after exit. All the aces are in the hands of the EU and the EU Parliament.

John Edgar
Blackford

ARTICLE XXV of the Articles of Union (1707) states: “All Laws and Statutes in either Kingdom, so far as they are contrary to, or inconsistent with the Terms of these Articles, or any of them, shall, from and after the Union, cease and become void, and shall be so declared to be, by the respective Parliaments of the said Kingdoms”.

Does this not mean that any backsliding to the 16th Century and its laws are void also? If Mrs May is so wedded to Henry VIII-type “laws” perhaps she should look out.

Richard Easson
Dornoch

RUTH Davidson is being urged by the leader of the TSSA union ‘’to use her influence over UK Tory ministers’’ to block the amalgamation of Police Scotland and British Transport Police (Scotland). This call for the UK Government to overrule the democratically elected government of Scotland is worrying, particularly at this time, as the Tories are beginning their power grab through their Brexit Repeal Bill in order to weaken the devolved legislatures of Scotland and Wales.

On the plus side, this call from the TSSA union has been rejected by the Scottish Tories as they rightly point out that this legislation has been passed by the Scottish Parliament and they will abide by its decision.Would that they had shown the same acceptance of its vote to call for another independence referendum instead of refusing to accept this democratic decision at every turn.

Ruth Davidson has as much leverage with the PM and her ministers as she has with Arlene Foster and her DUP colleagues in getting them to change their anachronistic social attitudes to LGBT issues, abortion, creationism, religious tolerance or bonfires.

James Mills
Johnstone