It will take time, but Scots can match Norway's achievements

The key word in Robert's letter is, of course, aspiration. The Norwegian model is something we, as indepen­dent Scots, can look at whilst working towards the day when we will also live in an equitable and just country with a strong standing on the world stage. But on the tax question let's look at some of the figures, which are easily found, relating to a country of comparable size and population.

The 30% tax rate mentioned is applied to an average gross wage of £50,651 compared with a Scottish figure of £24,647, which leaves, after tax and NI, figures of £35,456 for Norway and £19,292 for Scotland as part of the UK. So even with higher taxes the average Norwegian is a remarkable 43% better off than the UK equivalent.

This may well account for Norway sitting second in the 2013 World Happiness Report whilst Scotland trails behind in 22nd position. Of course, as the polls continue to show a rapid rise in those who will be voting Yes in September, Scotland might well be pushing Norway for the top spot sooner rather than later.

Dr Graeme Finnie,

Balgillo, Albert Street, Blairgowrie.

THERE appears to be an aspect of the No campaign that is becoming more prominent lately - that being an emphasis on class solidarity with such assertions as " a welder in Glasgow has more in common with a welder in Liverpool than a farmer in Forfar". It is clearly an attempt to undermine the importance of national identity in people's minds by emphasising class divisions.

It is, of course, nonsense. People are extremely complex and cannot simply be defined by the jobs they happen to do. The Glasgow welder and Forfar farmer may both be quiet family men who enjoy rugby and a nice glass of wine while saving for a rainy day. The Liverpool welder may be a hell-raising singleton who loves beer and football while spending his money as quickly as he earns it.

Communities are made up of many people (or few), with different views, occupations and incomes living in relatively close proximity. Not some notional, trans-national, occupation-based construct. Unionists are going to have to come up with a much better idea than the resurrection of the class system if they want to stop the drift of traditional Labour voters towards a Yes vote.

Stuart Allan,

8 Nelson Street, Dundee.

MAY I congratulate Alistair Macrae (Letters, April 16) on the first positive contribution I have read from a No voter. He hits the heart of the matter as far as I'm concerned with his phrase "Newcastle and York are as much part of my country as Stirling or Inverness". He clearly believes his nationality is British and is presum­ably satisfied with the manner of government, accepting the good and the bad and would probably concede that some aspects could be improved.

I am Scottish, and am British in the same sense that a Norwegian or Swede is Scandinavian. I do not feel that Newcastle and York are part of my country, probably because they are not part of my nation. I am Scottish and wish to see Scotland become a self-governing nation again, as I am not satisfied with the current arrangement of government within the British Isles. I believe that independence will reform the manner of government in ways which will benefit all. And as far as economic prosperity is concerned, he must be reading different data from me, as staying with the present arrangement seems to have been quite costly historically.

Roy Kirk,

4 Dumgoyne Avenue,

Milngavie.

JOHN Paul McHugh makes an important point on the importance of solidarity, which surely anyone can agree with ("Co-operation and partnership must prevail over division and grievance", The Herald, April 17). However, he makes the unsubstantiated allegation that supporters of independence seek to put up barriers to solidarity and hinder co-operation. It strikes me as strange, though, that solidarity is dependent on sharing the same passport and being within the borders of one nation.

Is co-operation with our Irish neighbours, our European neighbours and those in the Commonwealth and further afield of less value because we don't share the same passport? Do we not seek to co-operate closely with those of other nationalities on a daily basis, as a country and as individuals? Mr McHugh posits that pro-indepen­dence views are necessarily driven by grievance and division. Perhaps for some. But for a great many others it's driven by a desire to see a better Scotland. One can honestly disagree with the need for independence, but just as those who are pro-indepen­dence need to recognise the sincerity of those who want Scotland to remain within the UK, surely it behoves Mr McHugh and others to recognise the sincerity of Yes supporters and not to simply characterise the "other" and their motivations to make them feel their case is more moral and righteous.

Michael Rossi,

66 Canalside Gardens,

Southall.

AS the months slip by and the referendum becomes rather more than a dot on the horizon, the insistence by the SNP to disallow the devo-max choice in the vote and go for broke looks increasingly ill-advised. The wording, of course, in any referendum is important and the offer of an "independent" Scotland has at first sight quite a noble ring, suggesting it might signify the release from a yoke of some sort.

The yoke in this instance is in the mind and Scotland's role in the United Kingdom is that of a partner, although of course a relatively minor one, inevitable with the imbalance in population. In the face of a raft of views from experts in different fields focusing on the problems ahead in the event of a Yes vote we are invited to back the opinions of our First Minister and look forward to the Shangri-La that awaits us.

The world looks on in amazement that a country the size of Scotland could contemplate removing itself from membership of one of the most powerful groups on the planet with all the advantages to trade and comm­erce that this brings; as a business-minded nation most Scots have an acute awareness of the advantages of scale. We are beginning to look foolish, particularly when you look at the wide range of competences already devolved and for extension of which we could have argued within the existing framework of the Scottish Parliament.

Most small nations would jump at the chance to get into a group such as the UK, not debate on whether to get out. The problems ahead in the event of a Yes vote loom increasingly large and from the debate so far there is little sign that anything like enough homework has been by the proponents of independence.

Perhaps the saddest thing of all is that so much of the debate is centred on material gain rather than goodwill towards our southern neighbours, with whom blood links alone mean that our futures are closely inter­­woven.

Alan Taylor,

43 South Beach Lane, Troon.

I AM a Glaswegian, with Scottish ancestry going back centuries. Having worked and lived around the world, I now live in London.

The office of Alex Salmond did not even have the politeness or professionalism to respond to my email, asking why I should not have a vote about the future of Scotland.

My late father, Ian, who set up an escape organisation in Marseilles in 1940 and my late mother, who worked for the Foreign & Commonwealth Office in Lisbon, both working for the preservation of Great Britain in the Second World War, would be appalled at the thought of Scotland leaving Great Britain.

All I can do now is write to you and your readers expressing my sincere wish that Scotland remains in Great Britain.

Alastair Garrow,

A21B Du Cane Court, Balham High Road, London.