IN the 2015 election campaign we have seen a lot of statistics bandied around in newspapers and on TV. Rather than dealing with abstract figures, I’ve got one person in mind when I think about this election. A young mum came to me recently to ask for advice. Although proud to have two TVs, she was extremely upset by the bullying tactics waged by Jim Murphy during the televised Scottish Leaders’ debates. She burst into tears because she couldn’t take any more of Murphy’s shouting, finger pointing, harassment and rudeness. It was heartbreaking for me because I didn’t have all the answers.

I tried to console her uncontrollable sobs by pointing out Murphy merely creates a commotion to deflect attention from the incoherence of his arguments. I explained how he persistently roars out soundbites on “full fiscal autonomy” and the “£7.6bn black hole” to create chaos and make sure no-one can hear a reasoned response. At this point the young mother’s weeping began to abate and I was able to explain how an argument with a degree of technical sophistication cannot be shouted over the voices of three people also yelling.

It calmed the young mother to find full economic powers for the Scottish Government, at this stage hypothetical, would not simply happen overnight but would be phased in over time. She began to listen as I told herhow the Institute for Fiscal Studies figure, which has driven Murphy’sharanguing, is based on deficit predictions for one year and does not take intoaccount predicted growth of Scotland’s onshore revenues by £15bn by 2020.Scotland, which has paid more tax per head than the rest of the UK in the last34 years, has also run at less of a deficit than the UK for two of the last four years.

She thought carefully before asking me how the Scottish Government would use more powers to address any deficit. I told her that Scotland would implement policies to create conditions of employment and use borrowing powers to invest in productivity and transport infrastructure.

It would generate growth through targeted use of businesstax powers and changes to APD. It would also create robust conditions ofemployment by raising the work allowance and helping mothers back to work. By this time the woman’s tears had dried and she was acting in a more balanced way. When she left I felt happy to have helped but I suddenly had a chilling premonitionI might see her again – probably after the next leaders’ debate.

JD MacGregor, Sorn

GIVEN that my politics are decidedly left of centre – I am greenish and a longstanding advocate of independence – I confess my suggestion in your columns today is self-serving. The most able performers on the stump recently have been Nicola (isn’t it interesting that she’s now being accorded the “single name” accolade normally reserved for world famous personalities like Madonna, Cher or Oprah), John Swinney and Patrick Harvie. I am well aware of the words of that great Glasgow philosopher, Lena Martell who offered us the insight “One day at a time, sweet Jesus”, but yet, as the SNP army marches onward to next year’s Scottish elections, might there be merit in Nicola opening a quiet conversation with Patrick Harvie to serve in her cabinet after May 5, 2016? It would bring a real talent to her side in the service of our country, would demonstrate a collegiate approach which the electorate obviously likes, and would offer aunique example of cross-party politics where there is obviously no political requirement to cut any kind of grubby deal based upon political self-interest.It would be viewed as a generous, fraternal and wise move and I commend it to the First Minister.

Brendan Brannigan, Glasgow

BY publicly overriding the “wisdom” of Mr Murphy on the austerity issue, and offering him no support whatsoever, UK Labour has not only given up on him, but has evidently done so to encourage more voters to back the SNP. It’s now absolutely clear to them, at this stage in the game, that theyneed the largest possible number of SNP seats at Westminster in order to breakthe increasingly likely Tory/Labour deadlock in favour of Labour. This is worthmore to them than the very few Labour seats they are likely to get fromScotland.The remaining rump of Scottish Labour supporters should wakeup and see this for what it is – UK Labour have finally and totally sacrificedtheir Scottish Labour branch office for the sake of grabbing more Tory-stylepower.

Dennis White, Lanark

ON Monday, UK Labour confirmed Jim Murphy doesn’t make policy. Wednesday, it’s reported Murphy said: “How the money is spent in Scotland is a decision for the Scottish Labour Party when it comes to these devolved policies like health and education.”Firstly, I’d claim there is no Scottish Labour Party. VisitLabour’s website and try to find it. It’s one party, one manifesto for the whole of the UK.How money is spent on devolved matters surely is a matter for Holyrood and is decided there. Westminster budgets say how much Scotland gets but “Scottish” Labour won’t decide how that is spent unless they win control in the 2016 Scottish Parliamentary election.Or is it me that’s living in cloud cuckoo land?

Catriona Grigg, Embo, Sutherland 

THE article on the Churchill-inspired disaster of Gallipoli reminded me of when my daughter went on a school outing to visit the memorial,erected by Kemal Ataturk (founder of the modern Turkish nation). We lived in Istanbul at the time.The visit brought home to her the horror of that hellish conflict. The following is an inscription, written by Ataturk, honouring all who fought and died there. It still brings a lump to my throat. “Those heroes who shed their blood and lost their lives, you are now lying in the soil of a friendly country. Therefore rest in peace. There is no difference between the Johnnies and the Mehmets to us where they lie side by side in this country of ours. You, the mothers who sent their sons from far away countries wipe away your tears, your sons are now lying in our bosom and are in peace. After having lost their lives on this land they become our sonsas well.”

I wonder if Churchill would have thought anything similar: I doubt it!

George Greenshields, East Kilbride

ONE of the most cherished myths encouraged by the Labour Party, the Tories and LibDems is that the pre-election commitment by the SNP to abolish Trident will be a sure-fire vote loser for Nicola Sturgeon and Co,and an equally sure-fire vote gainer for the Unionists. Proof positive that this is a myth comes from my own personal case.At Easter 1964, the CND organised a massive demo against Polaris at Rosyth Dockyard. I was a constable in the Ministry of Defence Policet asked with physically repelling CND “boarders” who on that Easter weekend tried by various headline-grabbing strategems to pierce the fences and gates of Rosyth submarine base, fences and gates manned 24/7 for a week by my police colleagues and me. 

Back then I was a solid Labour voter but I rejected totally unilateral disarmament because thenas now I think it is naive to rely on the volatile and unreliable goodwill ofpotential enemies, especially those of the terrorist kind.I do not feel any regret over my active anti-CND role at Rosyth Naval base that Easter, but I will be voting for the SNP in the General Election because the SNP’s progressive social policies – abolishing the Bedroom Tax and defending the poor against Iain Duncan Smith’s pogroms – far outweigh in direct humane importance, the whole Trident issue.Consequently, none of the Unionist parties should automatically assume playing the Trident card will automatically guarantee votes for them.Even though on Trident I am more in tune with them than with the SNP they will not receive my vote, which is going to Scotland’s most socially progressive party – the SNP – led by Nicola Sturgeon.

Brian Donald, Kirkcaldy 

AS the industry body representing Scotland’s landlords and agents, I read with interest your article on soaring rents in Glasgow and Edinburgh (New study prompts call for return of rent-control laws, The National, April 15). A recent survey conducted by Scottish Association of Landlords (SAL) found that a significant number chose to rent because of the flexibility the private rented sector (PRS) provides. However, the housing crisis we face began decades ago and is an area politicians are yet to address. The problem will continue until action is taken to provide a mix of housing which encourages investment in the PRS.

SAL has been working with charities such as Shelter and has found a great deal of common ground between ourselves and the Scottish Government on how to ensure the PRS is as effective as possible.However, if a strategic solution is not found, it will make it easier for rogue landlords to enter the market, providing a poor service and damaging the reputation of the vast majority of landlords and letting agents who work to the highest standards.There are almost 330,000 PRS tenants in Scotland and we wantto work with the Scottish Government, the third sector and others to encourageinvestment in order to increase standards and supply.

John Blackwood, Chief Executive, Scottish Association of Landlords Edinburgh

ONE thing I have in common with Al Gore is that Bill Forsyth’s classic Local Hero is also my favourite film. However, in your piece on the sad state of the famous Pennan phone-box, I was dismayed by a glaring omission. Although you name-checked all the key characters (and actors who played them), including Felix Happer (BurtLancaster), Mac (Peter Riegart), Danny Oldsen (Peter Capaldi) and Ben Knox(Fulton Mackay), you neglected to mention the most important character, canny lawyer Gordon Urquhart, played with grace and style by Denis Lawson. So what’s in a name?

Gordon Urquhart, Glasgow