I WAS interested to read Andrew Learmonth’s article (Dear Sir, up the Union. Doon the Nats. Yours ever, Scotland in Union, The National, December 29), because I think a similar letter-writing group must exist to flood newspapers’ letters pages with pro-EU propaganda in order to prevent anyone logically thinking through the concept of an independent Scotland being admitted to and having an influence upon the decision-making of the EU.

Firstly, Theresa May has “rejected” the idea of an indyref2, so either she or her government will have a change of heart or Scotland will have to carry it out without her consent – and we all know how Catalonia fared in these circumstances.

Secondly, even if we were to be “permitted” an indyref2, which we won convincingly, the EU would not admit the new Scotland into its Union. Spain would block its application and no other country or member state would support us: see Catalonia.

Thirdly, despite L McGregor’s list of the advantages that would accrue to an independent Scotland in the EU (Letters, December 29), it’s highly probable that EU countries accessing Scottish fishing would be a condition of entry to the EU. Scotland might put forward an excellent case for preserving its waters, but it would be heavily outvoted by the other member states.

Then EU directives: we’d have to obey them. France may have delayed the introduction of the euro but it’s fallen into line now. Any notion that, as an independent member of the EU, Scotland would be able to ignore its laws is pie in the sky. As for the trade deal which the EU took so long to negotiate with Canada, it affords very little protection against multinational companies based in Canada taking us to court because we refuse to implement practises we find unacceptable. Time will tell who is right where this is concerned.

I agree that the UK does not protect Scotland’s interests but neither would the EU. I look forward to the day when Scotland is an independent nation but I do not agree that, when we are, we will be unable to introduce laws which protect good working practises, the implementation of environmentally friendly policies, “Scotland’s Brand”, a free education and national health service, human rights legislation, etc etc. It will be up to us to decide such matters, on our own, without needing the EU to pass laws on our behalf because we are too wee, too gormless etc to do so for ourselves.

Yes, a truly independent Scotland will have to make treaties with other countries in the world, not all of them to our absolute advantage. We will have to compromise from time to time. And, yes, this might take time but, and I’m quoting Burns again, “We shall be free!”

And no, I am not a member of a pro-independence, pro-Brexit letter-writing group.
Lovina Roe

WELL done to Scotland in Union group for having over 5000 letters published in the media in three years and for showing clearly just how biased mainstream media is.

All those who have had pro-independence correspondence rejected and ignored can take heart that it wasn’t their inability to articulate the argument that caused their rejection, rather the opposite, that they did it so well.

Media bias is a difficulty that must be overcome by the force of the independence argument, and social media is just one way to overcome it.

Perhaps those in mainstream media should recognise their naked prejudice and manipulation of news and views could just be the reason why people are switching off and no longer buying their “news”papers?

More power to The National for providing the antidote to the bias we face.
Jim Taylor