Herald letter: Permanent Infantilism

SIR Tom Devine tells us that independence is an especially continuing threat because it is favoured by many of the young.

At the same time, he and your readers should appreciate two other factors.

The first is that most young people have some barmy ideas, but most of them grow out of it. The second is that as you grow older you realise that although you might want something, you cannot have it unless you can afford it.

Unless a large number of Scots are stuck in a permanent state of infantilism, both of these factors apply to Scottish Nationalism, which is both stupid and unaffordable, as the current GERS figures demonstrate.

Peter A Russell, Glasgow.

Herald letter: A CONSTITUTIONAL PROJECT FOR LABOUR

IT is no surprise that Sir Keir Starmer, as leader of the party that believes above all else that “we achieve more by our common endeavour than we achieve alone”, does not support a deal with the SNP which would lead to Scottish independence. Likewise, it is a matter of historical fact that no CLP or affiliate has brought a proposal for such a deal to Labour Party conference at either a UK or a Scottish level: in other words, the party membership does not want it.

However, it is also worth heeding the words of Dan Jarvis, the directly elected mayor of South Yorkshire, who recently said about immigration that “if we do not talk about a subject, our opponents will dominate the debate”. This has very much been the case with Labour and the constitution, with successive leaders since Gordon Brown having nothing worthwhile to say: Ed Miliband was negligent in the extreme in not confronting the dangers of 2014 , and Jeremy Corbyn was not interested full stop.

It is essential that Labour must have a strong case to argue on the constitution so as to be able to seize the initiative back from the tired old arguments of the SNP and the Tories. The only logical place to start is where we are, and the project should therefore be based on a New Act of Union, setting out the benefits of UK membership to its citizens, and also define under what circumstances secession from the Union might come about. Such an act could also define relationships between the nations and regions of the UK, the role and composition of a replacement for the House of Lords, all underpinned by electoral reform at Westminster.

Such an act would catch the imagination of the majority in Scotland who reject independence, and of those who support a radical new political settlement for the whole UK. It would in short, be a vote winner.

Peter A Russell, Glasgow.