THE British state, aided by its supportive press and broadcasters, is adept at shrouding itself in myths. The myth of an ethical foreign policy based on benign goodwill towards the world is a particularly grotesque parody. This, though deeply unpleasant, may have little direct impact on the general public. But there is another myth that most certainly does.

This is the myth that the British state pension, which seemed to carry such weight with older No voters in 2014, is one of the best in the developed world. This is a complete fantasy. For example, the United States, much reviled as providing little or no social security, in reality pays a Federal pension significantly better than the British version.

I know this because each month I receive from Uncle Sam a top-up payment to bring my British state pension up to US levels. Incidentally, the fact that I now live in a foreign country does not prevent the US Government transferring this money to me.

How many older Scottish voters now realise the cruel deceptions that were practised on them about pensions at the first independence referendum? They should be told.

Peter Craigie, Edinburgh

WHEN Suzanne Evans of UKIP enthusiastically welcomed Theresa May’s Brexit speech on the Daily Politics show on Tuesday it was clear, if it was ever in doubt, that the Tory-led Westminster Government is intent on fulfilling UKIP’s dreams.

So where does that leave people in Scotland, and in particular those who have any semblance of a social conscience?

While no doubt the chameleon that is the leader of the Conservative Party in Scotland will now find arguments why Scotland should no longer be a member (directly or indirectly) of the EU single market – in spite of the economic turmoil this will bring to Scotland, according to her own previous analysis – others with more principles should seriously assess what values they consider important for the country in which they wish to live along with their children and grandchildren.

Should the First Minister offer voters who inhabit Scotland the opportunity to pursue self-determination through a second Scottish referendum, along with an SNP commitment on independence to participate in the European internal market, either directly through the EU or through Efta, then it will also be clear that Scotland can pursue a different path to that advocated by Ukip and the Tories.

It might require a further referendum to determine whether any terms offered by the EU for Scotland to succeed the UK in sustaining membership of the EU meet the aspirations of the Scottish people. But surely this would be a small price to pay in progressing the fair and cohesive society on which we wish to build Scotland’s future prosperity.

Stan Grodynski, Longniddry, East Lothian

READING in your pages about the angst over the prospects of a Scottish referendum, it struck me that there is more than one kind of referendum that can win independence. An obvious scenario is where the SNP Government realise that no matter what Scotland thinks, it will be dragged out of Europe on a hard Brexit. A fond farewell to the Speaker could be made as the SNP Westminster MPs resign en masse to force a Scottish General Election, effectively forcing a referendum on a first-past-the post electoral format.

Such an election would not be able to be prevented by a Tory Westminster and they could hardly object to it being unrepresentative as it is the means by which the UK normally votes to choose how it is to be governed. A Scottish General Election would provide an excellent opportunity to vote to remain in Europe as an independent country or to float off into the Atlantic with the rest of the UK. There would be no doubt as to what such a Scottish General Election would be about – independence or staying as a UK region.

Holding a Scottish General Election would also be a battle of the unions: the EU versus UK. We would then find out which kind of unionist we would want to be: to remain in Europe as an independent member of that much larger economic union, or to be part of a much smaller UK union drifting off in the general direction of America. Elections are the preferred means of deciding how we are to be governed, let’s have one!

Paul Millar, Glasgow

I’M sure I’m not alone in suspecting that Theresa May’s choice of a tartan outfit in which to announce her hard Brexit decision was a calculated goad directed at the Scots in general and Nicola Sturgeon in particular. But what should we expect? In 2014, given the choice of independence we voted for dependence. Little wonder that we are regarded as an English possession and dismissed with contempt.

Unionists no doubt regard talk of a second independence referendum as an empty threat. They’d probably welcome one on the complacent assumption that they would win again and that would be the end of independence blethers for at least another generation, if not forever.

We have to prove them so wrong, and we don’t have a lot of time left to do it. The world is watching us. Let’s find a bit of self-respect and take that leap of faith. The alternative is just too humiliating to contemplate.

Billy Scobie Alexandria, West Dunbartonshire MRS May’s speech claims there will be no blow-by-blow account in which case why the speech other than to release information for perceived political advantage? There seems to be a continuing underlying context of a potential for tariffs and trade barriers at odds with the initial Brexit claims of opening the doors to free trade.

The Tories have identified controls over immigration to be a priority yet why is their failure of management here likely to improve in the future or to be any better in other areas of government, going forward? The speech which referred to regional and Scottish development in only broad terms appeared to be more for internal than international consumption.

Peter Gorrie, Edinburgh

AS a descendant of Caribbean slaves, I found head girl Theresa May’s Empire-mentality speech mesmeric, bizarre, hugely ironic and repulsive all at the same time.

Listening this morning to the braying in a Parliament of Brexiters – many of whom will not be around in 3-4 decades when the chickens really come home to roost – was just depressing.

Amanda Baker, Edinburgh