IN my view, the current plan to hold a de facto referendum at the next election risks everything for little gain. Here are six reasons why, and an alternative solution:

1. Making a General Election about a single issue is extremely difficult. The Yes movement will struggle to get the message out and the election will instead be framed as Starmer vs Sunak with the de facto referendum a second order issue, leaving voters confused and unclear about the question.

2. A large proportion of both the SNP and wider Yes movement do not agree on this strategy or even on what the result of any de facto referendum would mean. The result is that it will be nearly impossible to motivate the Yes movement, let alone the wider public, to treat the next General Election as a de facto referendum.

READ MORE: Clear majority blames Westminster for crisis in Scottish NHS, poll finds

3. A General Election would reduce the franchise by preventing EU nationals or 16- and 17-year-olds – two parts of the electorate that favour independence – from voting. Turnout is also generally low in General Elections, with only 67% of those eligible voting in 2019, compared to 84.6% turning out for the independence referendum.

4. Many people who support independence don’t support the SNP. By making the “referendum” an election between political parties – where voting for independence means voting for the SNP – we would be alienating voters and most likely losing Yes votes.

5. Even if all these obstacles were overcome, it would still be extremely likely that the UK Government would ignore the result.

6. On the contrary, if we fail to hit 50% it would be presented as another failed referendum and we would likely not see another in our lifetimes.

READ MORE: SNP MP's perfect response as Ann Widdecombe says Scotland should be 'put aside'

What if, instead of taking this route, we use the next election to secure a mandate to proceed with a referendum without UK Government consent. What if, to paraphrase Kenyon Wright, we see their “state says no” and raise them a “people say yes”. This option would replace legal challenges with a democratic mandate that I believe would trump the ruling of the Supreme Court in the eyes of both the national and international public.

It also throws down the gauntlet to the incoming Labour government to either agree to a Section 30 or face a full-blown constitutional crisis. It puts the ball in our court and we can then proceed on our terms, knowing we have the people behind us.

With SNP conference fast approaching in March, this option is surely at least worth considering.

Ewan Ritchie
Haddington

THERE is considerable public debate concerning incomes and the tax that some people may or may not pay. This is especially important when governments plead they are too poor to pay proper wages to public-sector workers such as those in health and education. As is often the case, it is worth noting the Scandinavian examples.

Every October, the annual tax returns of Norwegian citizens are posted online on the Norwegian Tax Administration’s official website, and anyone can go and have a look.

READ MORE: Tories scorched with Burns' Night 'parcel of rogues' burn over Zahawi tax row

While individual incomes may not be published, the tax paid is publicly recorded on government websites so everyone can see that everyone else is contributing to public welfare.

This has been the case for more than a hundred years, so long before Norway had North Sea oil.

Tax offices in Sweden and Finland have variations along similar lines.

Norman Lockhart
Innerleithen

THE penny has yet to drop that the collapse of the NHS, our rail service, our post office, our public services and our pensions are not the fallout from being dragged out of Europe against our wishes: they are the deliberate design of the Tories and Brexit was merely the enabler.

The Tories want to dismantle every aspect of the welfare state and privatise every vestige of service run for public good to rake in private profit. They could not do so while European legislation was in place to protect workers’ rights. This is the mountain of legislation they set out to abandon. As for Northern Ireland, I doubt if many hedge fund managers have ever been there – they are more interested in the Cayman Islands.

Ian Richmond
Springfield

WOULD you believe it! Nadhim Zahawi accidentally forgot to pay the piddling amount of £5 million of tax. Every MP, especially those in government, should have a lie detector attached which lights up the forehead every time they tell a porky. Just think of the saving on Westminster’s electricity bill.

My recollection of past MPs who were accused of committing some misdeed is that they immediately resigned to save the party and the PM embarrassment. Today, the response is likely to be “I’m going to tough this out” and the PM’s response is an “independent” inquiry to kick the problem into the long grass until it’s forgotten.

Mike Underwood
Linlithgow

ACCORDING to Richard Sharp, he had nothing to do with arranging a loan for the Prime Minister (MPs to quiz Sharp, Jan 25). When requested he simply introduced a long-term business friend to one of the most senior government officials in the UK, apparently without even asking details about what was expected of his friend.

Surely natural curiosity is the one of the key attributes of the head of the largest news-gathering agency in the country.

John Jamieson
South Queensferry