Readers’ Letters: Why Brexit is not the disaster that was forecast

According to the Organisation for Economic Development and Cooperation (OECD), cumulative GDP growth since Brexit has been 12.9 per cent in the UK, comfortably beating France at 12.5 per cent, Italy at 10.3 per cent, and Germany's anaemic 6.3 per cent, but beaten by Canada and the US at 21.9 per cent and 26.6 per cent respectively.

The change in exports has been greater. The UK’s exports since 2016 have grown 45.2 per cent, beating the US at 42.9 per cent, Italy at 42.4 per cent, France at 37.6 per cent and Germany at 37.6 per cent.

Brexit definitely has had downsides in bureaucracy for exporters (who have managed to do so well to grow our exports), and travellers, but the facts show it is not the disaster that was forecast.

Ten years on, we need to stop beating ourselves up about what might have been, and focus our energy on cutting employment costs, and cutting energy costs so that the economy can continue to grow and people can have jobs instead of being reliant on benefits.

Brian Barbour, Haddington, East Lothian

Time to rejoin

Brian Monteith (Perspective, 9 June) fails to mention that the annual cost of rejoining the EU (£31 million) would be offset by the boost in trade with the EU, which prior to Brexit represented 45 per cent of the UK’s export market (reduced to 41 per cent after Brexit). Some 14 per cent of firms (mostly medium to small businesses) that had previously exported to the EU stopped doing so after Brexit, a loss of some £27m in 2022. Brexit has reduced the UK’s GNP by an estimated six to eight per cent.

The “cost” of rejoining also does not take into account the structural fund subsidies economically disadvantaged areas of the UK enjoyed before Brexit and which would presumably be reinstated. Other economic benefits of rejoining include joint procurement of medicines, equipment and other resources. As part of a powerful bloc, the UK would have greater weight in negotiating trade deals and responding to climate change and security threats.

The latest YouGov opinion poll (26 May) shows 56 per cent support for rejoining the EU and 35 per cent opposed, including 22 per cent of former “leave” supporters. Support for Brexit in the 2016 referendum was largely a reaction to years of austerity in the UK’s “left behind” communities, which Brexit and the loss of EU structural funding simply aggravated.

Graham Atherton, Edinburgh

Nuclear option

Tim Flinn (Letters, 9 June) is opposed to nuclear power and supports “renewables”. Mr Flinn should study Professor Sir Dieter Helm’s website where he explains in numerous articles the problems of intermittent weather-dependent power.

Energy expert Kathryn Porter in a speech to the Aberdeen and Grampian Chamber of Commerce (available on YouTube) explains why Torness nuclear power station is so vital to Scotland’s energy system because it provides synchronous power and stability to the grid. Torness is scheduled to close at the very latest by 2032, leaving only Peterhead gas-fired power station struggling to provide stability – if it is repowered before then. As Ms Porter says: “Net zero is the problem, nuclear is the answer.”

There are 436 reactors across the globe working safely and another 76 being built. Torness, has produced 290 terawatt hours of failsafe power for 37 years, and modern nuclear plants are even more efficient. France, Japan, Sweden and Canada all plan to triple their nuclear capacity by 2050. France has been producing 62GW of safe reliable electricity through its 19 nuclear power plants and 56 reactors for decades – including supplying Britain, ironically the country which built the world’s first nuclear reactor.

If we want stability in the Scottish power grid Torness must be replaced. As far as environmental worries are concerned, just get out into the Scottish uplands and see the damage done to our pristine countryside by thousands of towers, tracks, substations, battery yards and millions of tons of concrete.

William Loneskie, Lauder, Scottish Borders

Power of reading

Moyra Forrest (Letters, 8 June) points out that literacy levels have declined since Covid. For some Scots such competence was questionable many years ago. When Professor Pickford of the Psychology Department at Glasgow University used to mention his interest in adult literacy to postgraduates, he spoke of an employee in the Baths Department of Glasgow Corporation who from years of “attention to his duties” was a candidate for promotion. His problem was his inability to read. How would he check incoming supplies or stock lists? The professor set out to help him.

Prof Pickford found that there was a lack of “learning to read” material for adults and he asked for ideas. It was suggested that he make his own – by purchasing tabloid newspapers and cutting up the sports pages to save the headlines, then pasting these into “books”. Suitable material is now available. Being able to read gives access to an intellectual powerhouse and can help transform perceptions.

Dr I A Glen, Airdrie, North Lanarkshire

British sea power

Increased defence funding is necessary, but more will likely be required.

As Keir Starmer and Labour leadership contenders push for closer ties with the EU, they should look at a new way of organising defence that will benefit Europe and Nato and allay the fears of anxious allies.

Defence is too expensive for each of Europe’s major powers to try to do everything at sea, on land and in the air.

As a trading nation, the UK must put Maritime Britain first, both for defence of our islands and British interests worldwide, including the 14 UK Overseas Territories. The UK does not require large land and air forces but, of course, it needs an army and RAF for its own requirements and treaty obligations.

European leaders should agree a plan whereby the UK’s principal contribution to Europe and Nato is maritime – a strong Royal Navy, Royal Marines and Royal Fleet Auxiliary will benefit us and Europe. Admiral Fisher was right when he said in 1899 “The British Navy is the best security for peace in the world” and, complementing the great US Navy and working with allied navies, I’d wager he’s right for today’s world too.

Lester May (Lt Cmmdr, Royal Navy – retired), London

On the cards

I wholeheartedly endorse columnist Zhenya Winter’s promotion of bridge for young people. Bridge is a game that teaches virtues not greatly valued nowadays, such as courtesy and respect for conventions. Above all, it is a a great way of training the memory. In these days when educationists frown on ‘rote learning’ to train the memory, having to try to remember which cards out of 52 in a pack have been played taxes the memory. Will that humble five of clubs be a winner? In no trump, particularly, it certainly can be.

This is an invaluable skill for the aged as well as the young. Elderly people who can’t remember where they left their wallet or keys can often still play a mean game of bridge, affording them social inclusion and a sense of achievement.

Bridge kept some of us sane during Covid. With online bridge programmes we could play remotely and regularly, and thus have the kind of routine that Covid had disrupted.

There is, of course, a tradition of young people playing bridge. How many people spent too much of their student years playing bridge when they should have been studying? At least they were concentrating on something other than a screen.

Jill Stephenson, Edinburgh

Mother’s child

In her column (Scotsman, 8 June), MP Christine Jardine referred to “the Mother of Parliaments”, meaning I suppose: Westminster (House of Commons). This is a mistake.

The phrase was coined by MP John Bright in 1865 when he described England (sic) as “the mother of parliaments” because it gives birth to successive parliaments. In no sense is Westminster the mother of other parliaments; it is the child of the UK state, being born again at each general election. It is the UK that is the “mother”, not Westminster.

Steuart Campbell, Edinburgh

Lost generation

We are on holiday in Lincolnshire and got talking to our waitress. I asked her if she worked full time. Here is her story. She’s just finished a degree in criminology, looking for a career but the police and prison service are cutting back so no vacancies. She is still looking and applying, working more days, living in her student flat, definitely not a NEET living on benefits with no desire to work. I didn't ask how much her student debt was for studying one of the last few years’ useless “go to” degrees such as psychology that virually guarantee no job at the end of them.

She is the product of an education and lifestyle myth started by Tony Blair, untrammeled in 14 years of Tory rule and 20 years of the SNP in Scotland – and now this hapless ideological, benefit-perpetuating Labour government is fiddling while the hopes, dreams and drives of another generation goes up in flames.

Allan Sutherland, Stonehaven, Aberdeenshire

Write to The Scotsman

We welcome your thoughts – NO letters submitted elsewhere, please. Write to [email protected] including name, address and phone number – we won’t print full details. Keep letters under 300 words, and in the body of the email – no attachments – and avoid ‘Letters to the Editor/Readers’ Letters’ or similar in your subject line. If referring to an article, include date, page number and heading. No poems.