Ian Taylor, as chief executive of an oil and gas trading company, presents an informed set of comments (Why I decided to give Better Together £500,000, News, April 7).
It would be useful and informative for voters if Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon could respond to the key points raised in this very interesting article on the risk assessment, forecasting assumptions and business methods employed in the oil and gas industry. Future revenues and profitability of the North Sea oil and gas deposits are of crucial importance to the independence debate.
Ian Cameron
Glasgow
With respect to Ian Taylor's reasons for donating £500,000 to the Better Together campaign, I can readily understand how someone doing so nicely from the status quo would like it to continue. However, he falls back on the old scare-tactic reasons for voting against independence – something might happen in the future or the Scottish Government could do something. But then again, it may not happen.
No-one knows what the future will bring, but I would rather face it in a fair, caring European society instead of one slewed to favour rich, London-oriented people who have no appreciation of proper human values. Oil is a bonus to the Scottish economy, not our only economic wealth. How many small, viable European countries currently doing quite nicely thank you would give their eye teeth to have our resources and economy?
S Rogers
Hamilton
Your in-depth investigation of the pro-UK camp funding was welcome and most interesting. We look forward with interest to the same depth and intent being put into an investigation into the funding of the break-up-the-UK camp.
Alexander McKay
Edinburgh
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article