JIM Sillars (Letters, October 19) makes much of the “erosion” of veto powers of EU member states, suggesting that our position would be better in the European Free Trade Association (Efta), along with Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein.

He describes as a “canard” the description of Norway’s position of as a member of Efta as “fax democracy”, and it is certainly true that the Articles in the European Economic Area Agreement Mr Sillars refers to (99 and 100) do require the involvement of the three EFTA members, who are part of the European Economic Area (EEA), in the development of drafting new EU legislation. Their representatives contribute to the powerful sector-specific committees that scrutinise and amend regulation.

Likewise, as Mr Sillars points out, members of Efta are not bound by the Common Agricultural or Common Fisheries policies, and can make their own trade deals by not being members of the Customs Union, as Iceland demonstrated in 2013 with China.

All of this is true, but it remains important to take a balanced view of Efta members regarding the EU.

First, the European Economic Area Agreement sets out in Parts II and III how the Four Freedoms that are the foundation of the Single Market will operate in countries subject to that agreement. These are givens for the European Union, and, as David Davis is discovering, not negotiable.

Secondly, Mr Sillars claims the European Economic Area Agreement creates “institutional safeguards and rights for the Efta states on the development and implementation of EU policies”. However, these safeguards are limited to information and consultation as legislation makes its way through EU processes. EEA states have no vote. It is this which is the foundation of Stoltenberg’s, albeit exaggerated, “fax democracy” claim. It is all very well to be informed, even to be consulted, but there is no role for any of the EEA states when the decisions are taken, and if their opinions are ignored or undervalued at that point either a state must just go along with it, or, as the UK proposes to do, exit.

Mr Sillars's conclusion, though, is that “Efta membership was a far better aim for Scotland than an EU in which our qualified voting strength would be around one per cent”. However, perhaps one per cent is better than nothing at all, particularly when you must live with the decision because you have no vote? Is it not possible to act in concert with other, perhaps similarly sized, countries whose interests are allied to our own and achieve our ends in that way?

There are reasons to be critical of the EU, not least their supine response to Spanish aggression toward their own citizens in Catalonia, as well as lack of democracy. Which though is the better course? Is it to stand outside, but still subject to many EU decisions on which you have no vote? Or is to remain in membership and with like-minded others, work to reform the EU and rescue the European project from neo-liberalism and a European political elite?

Alasdair Galloway,

14 Silveron Avenue, Dumbarton.

ON what factual basis are some of your correspondents rushing to their doom-laden Project Fear predictions of the UK post-Brexit without any terms of our departure settled? Whilst everyone is entitled to their opinion, are not many of these the same ones who forecast wrongly in your columns in 2014 how strong the economic case was for an independent Scotland and who would have led us into the disaster we now know it would have been ?

As regards the ongoing Brexit negotiations, the EU has made it clear that nothing can be settled until everything is settled and unsurprisingly it has adopted a robust negotiating stance to try to make the UK pay over the odds for leaving and also to send a message to the remaining 27 countries to discourage them from following the UK out of the door. I believe that what we are seeing is normal negotiating posturing and that in due course a settlement involving compromises on both sides will emerge, determined by the overwhelming economic interests of the EU countries as much as the UK . Only then can a realistic judgment be made as to the success or otherwise of Brexit.

Alan Fitzpatrick,

10 Solomon’s View, Dunlop.

IT is becoming clearer by the day that politicians at Westminster see Brexit as a heaven-sent opportunity to keep to themselves most of the powers due to be returned from the EU when Britain leaves. Many of these powers, however, relate to issues that are already devolved to the Scottish Parliament and to the Welsh Assembly. People in Scotland should be concerned about this naked power grab, and should be helping to prepare the ground for this country to become independent. Only in this way can we hope to remain in the EU – as was the wish of a majority of Scots in the EU referendum – and retain the benefits of EU membership including all the powers that brings to the Scottish Parliament.

Peter Swain,

Tyme Cottage, Innerwick, Dunbar.

IT is customary practice, upon completing the consumption of a meal in a restaurant to be presented with an itemised bill for payment, prior to exiting the restaurant. This bill details which items you are being asked to pay for and how much you are being asked to pay in respect of each of them, together with a statement of the total amount you are being asked to pay.

This sensible approach allows any queries in respect of any individual item in terms of its validity and/or amount due to be paid for it to be dealt with quickly, amicably and transparently. I may have missed it, however I am not aware of any such detailed bill having been presented by the proprietors of Restaurant EU to the UK Government for payment prior to exit.

Surely the provision of such a detailed bill, would at the very least, be a sensible place to start, in terms of reaching an agreement as to the total amount due? Supplies of smoke and mirrors not to mention patience are diminishing daily.

Alastair Patrick,

3 Pentland Crescent, Paisley.

HOW would the British separatists feel if the EU treated them the way Scotland was treated by Westminster in 2014? Threats of no trade, hard borders, and a constant stream of no, no, no.

Bill Kerr,

56 Sandyknowes Road, Cumbernauld.