Westminster finds itself in a dilemma over the SNP's opposition to its energy policy. It is quite obvious that the SNP is using devolved planning powers to undermine Westminster's UK-wide nuclear plan.
Many will accuse the party, probably rightly, of behaving in a rather underhand manner. This does not, however, mean these actions are illegal or unconstitutional. If planning policy in Scotland is a devolved issue, surely Westminster should not be a
llowed to move the goalposts merely to suit its own ends.
The SNP is quite entitled to implement devolved policy even if its reasons for doing so may seem disingenuous. For others to try to "invalidate" this entitlement or circumvent the whole issue of policy implementation in Scotland, as Westminster is seeking to do, is questionable. I am far from being an SNP supporter. However, as things stand in Scotland now – for better or worse – a policy is either a devolved one or it isn't. Westminster cannot have it both ways.
It seems to me that Alex Salmond and his colleagues are simply being a bit sleekit, a word with which Gordon Brown should be more than familiar.
GEORGE WILSON
Seaforth Drive
Edinburgh In response to Alexander McKay's diversionary request for an unequivocal statement by the SNP on the sourcing of future power requirements (Letters,12 November), it would be naive of First Minister Alex Salmond, or any other politician, to make guarantees over outcomes he cannot control.
However, putting aside the technical complexities of practically tracing the source of electricity delivered to millions of users across Europe via a common electricity grid, another question Mr McKay might consider posing is why the UK government appears reluctant to support Mr Salmond's efforts to establish a North Sea supergrid for Western Europe, which would, over time, probably ensure that even in a "national emergency" Scotland never needed to import nuclear-generated power.
STAN GRODYNSKI
Cairnsmore
Longniddry, East LothianAlexander McKay's idea that the SNP "could state unequivocally that no future Nationalist administration would ever import nuclear-generated power from the UK grid into Scotland" implies that he sees such energy as being somehow labelled with the Union Jack. If he believes in this as an acceptable practical policy, his best plan would be to join the SNP and table a motion to that effect at the party's annual conference.
The SNP's opposition to the construction of nuclear power stations in Scotland is not based on the absurd belief that they could now be eradicated in England, where there is now no alternative to their presence without addressing the problem of massive overpopulation.
(DR) DAVID PURVES
Strathalmond Road
EdinburghSue Doughty (Letters, 12 November) discusses whether or not Scotland should have more nuclear power stations. She suggests that "what works in Sweden can work in Scotland", implying that Sweden is dominated by hydro power.
This is far from the truth.
The Swedish nuclear industry has an installed capacity of 9000MW(e), from ten reactors, at three sites.
In 2006, 47 per cent of the total Swedish electricity generation was nuclear, and a similar amount, 43 per cent, was hydro.
DAVID HOWIE
Clerkington Road
Haddington, East LothianThe full article contains 539 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
