Pensioners need have no concerns about voting Yes, says Iain AD Mann (Letters, September 15) because the UK Treasury and Department of Work and Pensions have announced that it will continue to pay pensions in Scotland.

The official position of the DWP, as stated in September 2013, is : "What is absolutely clear is that it will be the responsibility of an independent Scottish Government, not the UK Government, to make arrangements for pensions for citizens of an independent Scotland." In May 2014, Steve Webb, as the relevant minister, was questioned by a Westminster committee under the chairmanship of Ian Davidson. Though he confirmed that individuals had the legal right to a state pension, he did not confirm that the UK would pay them. The actual words he used were: "The question is, who is paying for it, and how that [cost] is split." Mr Davidson asked: "So that would be a matter of 'haggling and process' in the event of a Yes vote?" Mr Webb replied: "Yes". So we do not have a guarantee from the DWP. All we have is yet another item for negotiation with no certainty as to the outcome.

To their credit, both the UK Government and the Scottish Government have said that individuals will not be deprived of pensions in the event of a Yes vote. But, as Mr Mann points out, state pensions are paid out of current taxation income, not from some accumulated fund. So which country's current taxation income will be used in the event of independence and how will pensioners stand if there is an impasse in negotiations on this subject?

The issue is not restricted to state pensions. EU rules require that private funded schemes, such as company pensions, have to be independently viable in each country. Given that Scotland has only eight per cent of the UK population, there is a risk that some private pension schemes may be unviable here if split. In addition, there are "unfunded" public sector pension schemes, such as the teachers' scheme, which operate on the same basis as state pensions-that is, they are funded out of current taxation income and we do not know which government will pay in the event of a Yes vote. In 1922, the Irish Free State took over responsibility for paying ex-UK public sector pensions in Ireland. Can we guarantee the same arrangement here?

There is also a critical difference between people receiving pensions now and those who have not yet reached retirement age. Individuals currently receiving pensions might be given a no-loss guarantee, but what of the pension expectations of those retiring in the future? Another point of uncertainty.

It seems that the No campaign have been so anxious to avoid the charge of "granny scaring" that they have been less than candid about the effect of a Yes vote on pensions. The Yes campaign, on the other hand, have offered generalised assurances that everything will be all right and pensioners have no need to worry. Both campaigns have failed pensioners in openness and candour. As far as Mr Mann's assertion that pensioners need have no concerns, I think that not true - there are massive concerns that have not yet been properly addressed by either campaign.

Russell Vallance,

4 West Douglas Drive,

Helensburgh.

I AM becoming rather tired at the No campaign leaders saying old-age pensions are under threat and Iain AD Mann is correct when he states that pensions will be paid across national boundaries.

In April this year I received the following email from the Pensions Service at Wolverhampton and the following extract is of specific interest: "Thank you for contacting the International, Future & Specialist Pension Centre with your email dated 12th April 2014.

"As the UK state pension is an entitlement, not a benefit, it continues to be paid wherever you decide to live."

Alan McKinney,

10 Beauchamp Road,

Edinburgh.

AS a pensioner, I have considerable sympathy for the relatively high proportion of older people who appear to oppose independence. Some will see their interests and security threatened, others, to the left of centre, may distrust any association with nationalism, particularly if it is associated with the SNP and its demonised leader. Also, people may genuinely value Scotland's links with the UK, especially those related to the Second World War, the welfare state, the NHS and family links. Though these concerns are obviously real, and accepting that there are certainly risks associated with voting for independence, I have decided to vote Yes - and not because it's a nicer word.

Having tried to assess the value of the respective claims and campaigns I have, as a previous Labour supporter, been struck by the lack of acceptance in Labour No circles of the disastrous impact of the Westminster Coalition on the lives of the majority of citizens in the UK - and the relevance of this to the referendum outcome. In my view, in little more than four years, the Tory/LibDem Government has shown a complete unwillingness to counter the abuses of the rich and powerful, who caused the recession, while ruthlessly attacking the wellbeing of much of the working population, unemployed people, those on benefits, and particularly women and children. Ideologically and in practice, they have bent the knee to the markets while depriving many people of the basic elements of human dignity and security. Simultaneously, the regime has pursued a 1930s-style economic policy which leaves the UK as dependent as ever on banking speculation and low wages, while denying necessary finance to manufacturing and infrastructure.

Those No voters who are relying on a UK Labour victory in 2015 to sort all this out are sadly being unrealistic. In its unreformed condition, a UK political party may form a majority government with less than 40 per cent of votes cast. Should Labour be capable of achieving this (current polls give it around 35 per cent),they will face an electorate of whom 60 per cent at least are further to the right, including a possible Tory-Ukip alliance, a very hostile London press and continuing pressure to leave the EU. In such circumstances, isn't it likely that Labour will again move to the right and view Scottish requirements as peripheral? "Extra powers" short of decisive control over taxation and foreign policy will not enable Scotland to avoid the consequences.

As an older person, my experience no longer gives me confidence in a centralised, unrepresentative, constitutionally archaic Westminster government. Regretfully, I can't see the UK Labour Party offering me less risk in my old age, or greater wellbeing for my children and their descen­dants. Should more of us vote Yes than No I shall work for a reinvigorated Scottish social democratic grouping, with the determination to enhance Scottish people's interests and capabilities. Additionally, I imagine that, in some other regions of the UK, democratic movements will be encouraged to develop similar but distinctive approaches, offering Scotland allies and associates within these islands as well a beyond them.

Alan Bell,

East Newhall Cottage, Kinross.