Let us put away our differences and concentrate on partnership

We, the people of Scotland, are being asked to make what could turn out to be one of the most important single decisions of our lives on September 18. It would be pleasing to think our collective decision could be made based on hard facts, but I now realise this will not be possible. If experts cannot agree on so many fundamental issues, what chance does the ordinary citizen have? So we must accept, albeit reluctantly, that there are no easy or certain answers.

Scotland could, of course, be a successful stand-alone nation. Of that I have no doubt. My own lifelong experiences and activities in entrepreneurship and enterprise as well as in public service convince me of this. What concerns me most is that a vote for separation will create many years of reduced certainty during which living and business costs are bound to rise and wealth creation suffer. A consequence of this would be greater government borrowing (inevitably, at higher interest rates), higher taxation (almost certainly) and/or curtailed public services. And I haven't even mentioned the pound, the euro, loss of defence work or companies relocating to England.

True, we would eventually return to a more stable economic environ­ment, perhaps even an improved one, but how many of us can afford to take that risk and wait perhaps 10, 15 or 20 years?

For wealth creators running their own businesses, for employees in companies both large and small, for those in the public and service sectors adding value by the services they provide and the taxes they pay, almost all are likely to be worse off in the foreseeable future. And the inevitable and negative impact overall on the needy, the dis­­advantaged - even on pensioners - will be unavoidable.

But the economic arguments are only part of the story. I am very fond and proud of my Scottish heritage but I am equally proud to be part of a United Kingdom which strives to do, and has done, so much good in a turbulent and violent world. Of course, we all make mistakes. That won't change. But it's nice to be able to play up one's Scottishness when it suits. To be able to do that with the strength of a larger UK family around you is all the more reassuring and satisfying. It is also eminently sensible.

I was an outspoken advocate for devolution many years ago when it was considered to be undesirable in the business circles in which I then moved. I continue to support devolution - for Scotland and the rest of the UK - and I feel very strongly that this should remain the way forward.

The break-up of what has probably been the most successful and enduring political partnership in the world would, I believe, be bad for Scotland but a tragedy for the UK and for a world which is crying out for stability, peace and harmony.

Our time has, indeed, come. It's time to put aside petty differences and to demonstrate maturity and leadership. Partnerships can and do work. Even when there are differences. Indeed, therein lie strengths.

Ron Lander,

Highmuir House,

Kilmacolm.

IAIN AD Mann (Letters, August 29) is correct in highlighting the parlous debt-ridden state in which the UK finds itself. His conclusion is that Scotland should exit from the United Kingdom. The only problem would be that Scotland would take a proportionate share of both the debts and liabilities of the UK and would therefore be burdened with that same proportionate level of crippling debt. We might be able to sell surplus assets, such as our share in Trident, and reduce our debt accordingly, but the effect would be minimal.

A far safer exit strategy is for Scotland to secure full fiscal autonomy and borrowing powers by extending the devolved powers. Scotland could then start taking on its own debt and control it accordingly with appropriate taxation to fund the debt. We could also create our own Scottish Export Credits Guarantee Department in order to rid ourselves of any future toxic overseas debt owed to us so that we can match our liabilities with sound assets. Scotland would then control its own balance of payments and could put them in a far better state of affairs in preparation for independence at a future date when the conditions are right.

Sandy Gemmill,

40 Warriston Gardens,

Edinburgh.

ALEX Salmond made much of his so-called Northern European Arc of Prosperity. After what happened to Iceland and Ireland, he now prefers to discuss Norway.

Combined national and municipal income tax in Norway is 28 per cent, to which is added a social security contribution of 7.8per cent. Higher-rate taxpayers pay up to 12% more.

And the price of a pint is about £6.

David Miller,

80 Prestonfield,

Milngavie.

I AM surprised that Catherine MacLeod thinks we have not been given answers to the issues of the currency, the pound or Scotland's future economic prospects ("How Scots can enjoy the best of both worlds", The Herald, August 28). I think the White Paper and the public statements by the Scottish Government since its publication map out a general direction of possibilities.

It can do no more than that, because the Scottish National Party may not form the Government after the next election.

Ms MacLeod makes several references to the views of the "nationalist camp" with reference to the Yes campaign. I think it only fair to reiterate that the campaign is made up of people of different political views who share much of what the current Scottish Government proposes but may have different views on currency, the monarchy and attitudes to business in the future. But what the Yes campaigners understand very well is that they are mobilising the electorate to answer a single question on an independent Scotland with a cross in the Yes or No box.

I think what is confusing for some undecided people is the difference between political campaigning and serious negotiations. Once decisions are made politically, then negoti­ating teams get down to business.

It is important to keep track politically. If the Governor of the Bank of England indicates a willingness to negotiate over the currency arrangements that will do for me. Alistair Darling, in the last TV debate, was forced to concede that it is Scotland's pound too.

The million signatures for Yes announced recently indicates a level of political engagement that is very refreshing to an old campaigner like me.

We have been presented with many sets of statistics and facts and ultimately people have to use their judgment, knowledge and experience to make choices .

Maggie Chetty,

36 Woodend Drive,

Glasgow.

HERE'S a thought for Archie MacPherson to ponder following his heart-felt oration in support of the Union in Dundee's Caird Hall this week ("Pundit Macpherson scores for No", The Herald, August 28).

Should the No vote carry in the forthcoming referendum, it might just hasten the day when Fifa decrees the four home football associations must play under an all-British banner ("No vote could be threat to Scots football team's future", The Herald, August 29). Posterity, in that event, would be left to view Archie as the celebrated football commentator who helped bring about the demise of the team he spent his career following.

Rarely, then, would the law of unintended consequences have resulted in such a calamitous own goal.

Brian Scott,

20 Hawthorn Avenue,

Lenzie.

THE photograph of Aberdeen harbour you published todayshows a number of oil supply ships ("Granit City seeks six of the very best", The Herald, August 29). Readers might be interested to learn that these vessels are all foreign-owned and foreign-built.

During the referendum campaign there has been a lot of talk about shipbuilding. The fact is that of the hundreds of ships engaged in North Sea oil operations, not one has been built in Scotland. This is different to the Norwegians, who build and own many oil vessels and tankers.

Donald J MacLeod,

49 Woodcroft Avenue,

Bridge of Don, Aberdeen.

REGARDLESS of whether the No vote wins the referendum, it is clear from the upwellimg of discourse across the country that afterwards Scotland will be a very different place, politically, from the almost moribund state it inhabited before this debate began. It is exhilarating to see so many people (not politicians) involved in the issues that truly matter and not sitting back allowing professional politicians to dumb down the debate to a few soundbites or discreetly censored "facts" .

The complaint from some that the referendum campaign has been never-ending exhibits a mindset that, perhap, is happy with a safe, comfortable status quo and feels threatened by too much light being shone on the present political system which is failing so many, particularly the poor .

Thankfully, I believe that these are a minority and that as more people are politically engaged (look at the numbers of newly-registered voters), then that can only be good for our society .

James Mills,

29 Armour Square,

Johnstone.