I WISH to rebut some of the claims made by Iain AD Mann (Letters, November 16). He seems to have missed the fact that many aspects of our society has made enormous strides in the last quarter of a century. For example we now have record numbers in employment; more jobs; more people taken out of paying income tax, benefiting the low-paid; gay marriage; record spending on the NHS and mixed sex wards in hospitals all but disappeared. We have had the rebalancing of public versus private sector employment to the benefit of the latter with consequential reduction in public spending and of course the economic uplift following years of abysmal failure in this area by the Labour Party – contrary to Mr Mann’s assertion that the Conservatives are “making a mess” of the economy.

In terms of Brexit nobody, save perhaps Mr Mann, thinks that the Government believes it can “demand” a good deal on leaving the EU, especially as the other 27 members “hold all the cards”; his words. In addition there is no way that these other countries really want us to leave with a no-deal scenario, especially France and Germany who want and need a free trade arrangement with the UK just as much as we do and to suggest that we might resort to “special pleading” is tantamount to insulting our negotiating team.

In the current age of 24-hour news reporting and social media it is inevitable that the means is scrutinised minutely before the end results are achieved and in this respect we all should have a little more faith in our current Government and leave the carping until the final deal is known. This also applies to the roll-out of Universal Credit which will turn out to be very successful in the long term.

I cannot believe that Mr Mann, an ardent SNP supporter, really wants the current Government to fall on its sword, to be replaced inevitably by a Jeremy Corbyn-led centre-left administration which will drag us back a quarter of a century and beyond.

Christopher H Jones,

25 Ruthven Avenue, Giffnock.

ASTONISHING. For the second year in succession, Scottish Conservative Party leader Ruth Davidson has been voted Herald Scottish Politician of the Year.

The available evidence hardly supports that. To have 12 MPs at Westminster, out of 59, pushing a bedraggled Labour Party into third place, is a doubtful achievement. Lok at it this way: had the SNP gone from one seat to 12, the Conservatives would have been decrying that as a dismal failure – but the SNP still has an overall majority of Scottish Westminster seats. And Conservative supporters must wait a further five years for the opportunity for meaningful success.

The election campaign that Ms Davidson masterminded was a policy-free zone. Her pamphlets carried 20-plus derogatory references to “independence” or “separatism”, but not a squeak about her policies, or her vision for Scotland.

She rode the punches coming from the Conservative Government at Westminster in the shape of issues such as the bedroom tax and the so-called rape clause regarding child benefit. Her remarks to First Minister Nicola Sturgeon challenging her to introduce counter-measures at Holyrood, using the newly devolved welfare powers were sheer impertinence. She failed to recognise that the savings from these issues accrued to Westminster with zero coming here, and she failed to identify whether the cost should be met from savings from another programme, or from increased tax, yet she wades in with an incongruous attack alleging subterfuge by the SNP regarding the potential for the use of the new tax powers, completely ignoring the marked change in circumstances since the election.

A picture of a glorious future for Ms Davidson as a candidate for UK premiership is being painted – we wish her well.

I demand a recount.

Douglas R Mayer,

76 Thomson Crescent, Currie.

I WOULD like to know how Ruth Davidson managed to win the Herald Scottish Politician of the Year Award ("Davidson wins for second year in a row after reviving Tory fortunes", The Herald, November 17). She certainly got people to vote Conservative, on a single issue, "to save the Union", but that was all she spouted during the General Election. What new, exciting or even old and revamped policies did she mouth? None, Nada.

Nobody would have objected to her save the Union mantra if it had been a referendum on independence. But a General Election has to be about issues and policies, and right now no-one seems to know what her policies on various things are, apart from Brexit, and she switched sides on that extremely quickly. Does she have policies? Or is she just going to blindly follow what her leader (who ever that is going to be) in Westminster says?

To be in Opposition your job is to provide stiff scrutiny of Government policy, and to produce workable alternatives to that of the Government, So far on that front, nothing, not even constructive criticism. How many keynote speeches has she delivered? How many international dignitaries has she addressed? How much constituency work has she undertaken, how many surgeries has she held?

The Politician of the Year Award should for the hard-working politician who contributes to their constituency and electorate, not a politician that stands up once a week and nags at the Government.

Jackie Baillie, Ivan McKee, Jeanne Freeman, Neil Bibby or George Adams – for his enthusiasm for Paisley's City of Culture 2021 bid – would have been better choices as they all fight on local as well as national issues.

Robert McCaw,

6 Hamilton Crescent, Renfrew.

DID I detect a problem with British democracy during Prime Minister’s Question Time this week, as reported on the BBC News?

Ian Blackford, the SNP leader, asked once again a question about VAT being levied on Scotland’s emergency services (“Emergency plea over VAT”, The Herald, November 16).

The Prime Minister’s response suggested the subject might form part of next week’s budget, but could not resist her well-rehearsed comment that the Scottish Government had been warned that setting up these national bodies would incur VAT.

However, what really struck me was that, having done that, she adopted what I could only say was a sneering attitude and referred to the fact that her Scottish MPs, sitting behind her, had lobbied her on the subject. This apparently carried much more weight than the arguments of the majority of Scottish MPs.

Does that confirm that it is necessary to be part of the ruling party to have any chance of success in having any policy, no matter how worthy, adopted?

A sad day for democracy.

Alexander Farr,

21 Caplethill Road, Barrhead.