I WAS so pleased to find, a few months late in 2014, a hand-knitted jumper with a huge Yes. I wore it with some pride last week at the Holyrood rally.

Then I read the Robin McAlpine article (Sep 18) about why we have to ditch the Yes and have a different rallying call. His list of reasons are I realised spot-on if we want to move on with the necessary movement to get polls into their regular 60%-plus range to consider it respectful to the people of Scotland to then demand a referendum. As to what that call should be, I do not know, but Yes may not even be the answer to the question.

READ MORE: Robin McAlpine: ‘Yes’ should no longer be the word for our movement

Saying “Still Yes” holds us back in our selective club where we are stuck on 50/50. Making it Yes for Indy is immediately more inclusive and inviting. Especially when we have the clear answers to the questions many felt were not answered last time.

I will stop wearing my Yes jumper, or customise it with added-value aspiring words.

Lesley Riddoch in her rallying speech was correct in saying Yes is a powerful word, but for the challenge before us going forward Yes is not enough. Maybe the person who made it in 2014 understood that, like Robin M, when they took it to the charity shop.

Tony Martin
Gullane, East Lothian

THE bumper edition of The National on September 18 was excellent. Robin McAlpine is one of our very good thinkers in our indy movement and I totally agree with the content of his article.

With reference to his opinion about the Yes word, h is correct that basically it is an answer to a question put in 2014 and to a young person who wasn’t of voting age then, but is now, it would in essence have no meaning.

READ MORE: It's time for independence supporters to work with global partners

Personally, I never now refer to our campaign as the Yes movement but always as the independence movement or the movement for self-determination.

But returning to Robin’s opinion, the fact is that the word is so ingrained in our struggle and so widely used that any young indy supporter would understand its source, use and meaning.

When the future referendum arrives, perhaps even before it, probably a new word or slogan will be required or the word Yes included or added to which would make it relevant to the campaign.

Bobby Brennan
Glasgow

MAGGIE Chetty’s letter of Wednesday September 18 should ring a few bells, particularly pertaining to the Treaty/Act of Union which in itself raises a few questions. One issue that arises is that seemingly England can pull out whenever it feels like it ... and Scotland can’t. Maggie asked why Scottish lawyers who have pursued this and raised valid issues are apparently not listened to by the Scottish Government.

Would it not be a good idea to publish the said Treaty/Acts in layman’s language in The National so that all can see what is delineated therein?

READ MORE: This mechanism can let the Scottish people decide their own future

The English population has no idea of what the situation is between Scotland and England other than the steady misinformation fed by their media outlets. If the Act was published, it would give the general public some idea of what the situation really is.

For instance, it would appear that England dominates and Scotland should be grateful! This could be clarified – as with lots of other issues – and interested lawyers (and hopefully the government) could and should pursue these.

Scots then would be able to see just what is supposed to be binding them to the Union.

At the moment, we’re constantly told it’s tied to Section 30 or a referendum or a mandate or whatever the current reason is for NOT allowing independence. It’s time to cut the waffle and refuse to accept justifications for NON-action. Flag-waving will raise morale, but only a positive step to freedom from the myth of “better together” and stopping the drain on Scottish resources will satisfy the people’s right to be an independent nation.

J Ahern (93 and losing patience)
East Kilbride

WHY don’t we hold a referendum on rejoining the EU?

We aren’t allowed to hold a referendum on Scottish independence due to the UK Supreme Court ruling we aren’t a sovereign country, when in fact the people are sovereign in Scotland.

The reason young people voted against independence in 2014 is because they were told they would be thrown out of the EU.

I believe Scots would vote overwhelmingly for rejoining the EU. Around the 65% mark and hopefully higher.

READ MORE: Give UK Government new indyref powers to break stalemate, report says

This would put pressure on both our governments to enact the wishes of the people, culminating in the SNP running on rejoining the EU for the 2026 election. A majority at Holyrood represents immediate negotiations to rejoin.

The pitfalls are the border issue and the EU only entering negotiations with sovereign states.

The border issue can be resolved with the Hotel California clause. You can check out anytime you want from the Union but you can never leave. We can have an arrangement like Northern Ireland, but negotiations will be conducted by experts from across multiple disciplines rather than a buffoon. It would clear up the Irish Sea border issue at the same time for the UK Government.

The EU sovereign state rule can be overcome because the people of Scotland are sovereign, they have spoken and chosen to become EU members again.

Democracy is politically difficult to ignore. We lack the 60% number for independence due to underlying issues unrelated to Scottish sovereignty.

Thus, take away the polarising issue of independence and just ask them if they would prefer to be part of an insular anglo-centric Britain or be part of the EU.

Ben Hutton
via email