Herald letter: “No agreement equals no referendum”

THERE is an assumption built into Ian W Thomson’s letter (January 23) which cannot go unchallenged. This is that an SNP majority in the Scottish Parliament after next year’s elections will constitute a mandate for another independence referendum.

As Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP acknowledge, the power to hold such a referendum is reserved to Westminster, and it requires the agreement of Scotland’s UK Government for it to be transferred to Holyrood. Unless and until this power is transferred, a Holyrood election can only mandate the incoming Scottish Government to request a referendum. Conversely, it would be an absurd proposition to suggest that a Scotland-only election can in any way mandate our UK-wide legislature.

It is always possible that Westminster could choose to transfer referendum powers to Holyrood – as David Cameron did. However, Boris Johnson has made it very clear that he is not minded to repeat that process and that any request to do so is going to be refused.

No agreement equals no referendum: that is the long and the short of it. We should all be aware of that reality before people run away with the false impression that a vote for the SNP can of itself be a vote for another referendum.

Peter A Russell, Glasgow G13.

Herald letter: “What is all the fuss about?”

THE fury and confusion of the SNP at the refusal of the Prime Minister to transfer powers to hold referendums to Holyrood is predictable but misplaced.

In doing so, Scotland’s UK Government is doing no more than upholding its mandate (gained only last month) within its reserved powers under the current devolution settlement. And the Nationalists appear to have forgotten that they signed up to the report of the Smith Commission, which did not recommend such a transfer of powers.

What is all the fuss about?

Peter A Russell, Glasgow G13.