THE two articles by Hamish Morrison and Laura Pollock “Indyref2 cash diverted to help vulnerable pay energy bills” and “Yes activists and experts have their say on budget plans” in The National on Friday reveal that the majority of activists, experts and Scots (with the exception of Alba) understand the significance of John Swinney’s highly publicised yet largely symbolic switch of £20m from planning the referendum to supporting those who are suffering most from Tory energy policies.

If the Scottish Government had not made a public announcement that it had stopped funding a team of civil servants working on the independence referendum, it would only have been a matter of time before Unionists raised a court action on the subject. This would have been based on the Supreme Court ruling that the Scottish Government does not have the power to hold an independence referendum as that is a reserved matter for Westminster.

READ MORE: Support for Scottish independence continues in sixth Yes-backing poll

The Scottish Government would almost certainly have lost such a case, with possibly serious implications for any additional funding on reserved matters by the Scottish Government in future. The rollout of broadband in Scotland is an example of how the Scottish Government and local authorities have added millions to extend the UK Government’s reserved rollout programme to areas outwith the main centres of population in Scotland.

Given the attitude and policies of the UK Government that have wrecked the UK economy, John Swinney presented a fair and balanced budget and a masterclass in using the opposition parties’ own actions to demolish their speakers during the following question-and-answer session.

John Jamieson
South Queensferry

I READ your story “How independence activists feel about indyref2 cash being reallocated” (Dec 15). I must say I was “spitting feathers” at the Scottish Green reaction comment that the Alba Party would be spitting feathers over the Scottish Government decision to cut the funding allocated for an independence referendum next year.

Every year since 2016 Nicola Sturgeon has promised that a referendum was just around the corner. However, before last year’s Scottish Parliament election we were told there would be a referendum if we gave both our votes to the SNP. This was the reason that I decided to stick with the SNP even though I was bitterly disappointed that the party many of us had stood by for decades was no longer recognisable.

The commitment to an independence referendum on October 19 2023 was set in stone. This was promised to us by the First Minister and senior members of the SNP “no ifs, no buts”.

READ MORE: Mhairi Black says SNP must explain why they want Scottish independence

John Swinney’s decision to remove the funding for the referendum next year is a betrayal of the Yes movement. Millions of households will be in fuel poverty next year so the wheeze that this money will help tackle fuel poverty is a fallacy. With independence we can have power over our vast resources. Instead of Scots being hammered with massive energy bills of thousands of pounds, with independence we can ensure that hard-pressed Scots benefit from the fact that Scotland is self-sufficient in oil and gas – and we generate enough electricity from renewables to power every house in Scotland.

Instead of cutting the referendum budget to appease the Tories, attacks from the UK Government and Unionist pressure groups, the Scottish Government should have made the case for why fuel poverty is the economic imperative that makes the constitutional settlement the prevailing political necessity.

The Scottish Government has now capitulated to the UK Government and accepted there won’t be an independence referendum: not now, not next year, nor the year after.

If the Scottish Greens aren’t also spitting feathers over the biggest setback to the national cause since the 1979 Tory General Election win, then they are clearly not interested in delivering independence for Scotland as an urgent priority.

Frank Wood
Port Glasgow

I THINK it disingenuous of Alex Salmond to accuse John Swinney of waving the surrender flag when announcing his Budget. Salmond does not state to whom he is surrendering to either.

Presumably, Alex Salmond does not support the SNP Budget, thereby laying the lie to his acceptance of joining with SNP MPs' leader, Stephen Flynn, and his offer of a united independence front.

John Swinney’s withdrawal of the £20m independence budget in favour of helping to heat the homes of Scotland’s less well-off appeased some of the Holyrood opposition, but not the Alba Party’s leader. Hence his accusation of the SNP deputy leader waving a white flag.

The SNP is the engine that drives the independence campaign and always has been. Does not Alex Salmond remember when he led the SNP government, and what it was like to govern the country in addition to trying to lead the independence campaign at the same time? There are obviously some issues that will, from time to time, override independence issues.

So, far be it from me to spell out these, which are very obvious as I write. And far be it from me to also think that hatchets still lie unburied where the Holyrood leadership is concerned, as compared to rubbing shoulders with the Westminster SNP leadership.

It’s time Alex Salmond stopped using his Alba party as an alternative route to independence. Alba has no elected political parliamentary standing. It is a useful mouthpiece with ideas that appeal. Its recent gathering in the city of Perth proved this. If he wants to link arms with the Westminster SNP MPs then he should do the same with the Scottish Government.

Alan Magnus-Bennett
Fife

I AM greatly disappointed to note that the Scottish Budget has reallocated the £20m which was to be used for an independence referendum. Whilst I understand the need for gesture politics, there has never been a time of greater need for us to escape from this malfunctioning Union.

Donald MacKay
Crossford, Fife