It may not come as a surprise to John Milne (Letters, March 20) that I am what is often referred to as a natural Labour voter.

My father was a Highland railwayman all his life, as were his father, grandfather and great grandfather before him. They were all lifelong trade unionists, some holding senior positions within the NUR/ RMT. My father was a Labour Party member, councillor and activist. I have been a trade unionist all my life and, for a period, a shop steward. I was a Labour member and activist for some years. My whole family are voting Yes, for independence - that is six former Labour voters.

I am not a nationalist but I am a Scotsman. Scotland is a nation and I am an internationalist. I feel no affinity with the political and commercial construct that is the British state, and particularly those who run it. I have no love for those who represent Better Together, especially Alistair Darling. Mr Darling is a career politician who stands to lose much if Scotland becomes independent.

His motivations are selfish but he is not alone in that regard. He has little credibility, in my eyes, having been in charge of the banking regulation that facilitated the recent collapse. Supposedly we are all paying for it and will be for decades to come. Unionist politicians are keen to tell us we're part of the most successful political union in history; we're better together.

The Union is currently run by Tories, the state is massively in debt, wages are stagnant, the cost of living is increasing by the week, services are being cut annually, the bankers are paying themselves obscene bonuses again, energy prices are pushing increasing numbers into fuel poverty, there has been an almost exponential rise in the number of food banks and the gap between rich and poor continues to increase, with Scottish child poverty standing at about 25%.

Believe me when I say that the only reason the No vote seems "complacent" is because much of that component simply doesn't believe the Better Together message. That someone says they'll vote No doesn't speak of their conviction - it speaks of their fear and uncertainty of change. Scots wanted "Devo-Max" as a voting option, not because they see that as an end in itself, it is simply the desire of a cautious and confidence-lacking people; a stepping stone on the path to full independence. Polling shows that Scots would prefer independence, but in their own time. The pace has quickened and the time scale changed. Our only option is to vote Yes.

Roddie MacLennan,

57 Dochfour Drive,

Inverness.

Catherine MacLeod ("New powers should be priority, not upheaval", The Herald, March 20) gives the impression of a woman doing her best to make a loveless marriage work, even as one partner walks out the door while she holds it open .

Because the unionist parties have finally identified some powers that might (at some undisclosed future date) be devolved to Scotland, in her view this means the referendum argument is no longer a case of "change versus the status quo".

Ms MacLeod overlooks the crucial factor that these "changes" have been wrung out of the Labour and Conservative parties in the manner of a shotgun wedding; neither party wanted to offer anything, but circumstances have forced them to compromise.

She claims "it is not inconceivable" the Conservatives will go further than Labour in their devolving of tax-raising powers. That will be the Conservatives who opposed devolution initially, whose Scottish leader drew a line in the sand on devolved powers, and whose London leader could not commit himself to say "will" rather than "can" when discussing more devolution powers .

Ms MacLeod cites George Osborne's and Danny Alexander's commitments to "no currency union" as proof positive that politicians do not change their minds on big issues so can be trusted to keep their word on devolved powers. Really?

Before the last General Election, Mr Osborne "had no plans to raise VAT" while Mr Alexander signed a commitment not to raise tuition fees.

Only the gullible would take a politician's promise at face vale and I am sure you are not that, Ms MacLeod.

James Mills,

29 Armour Square,

Johnstone.

Catherine MacLeod claims Nicola Sturgeon is wrong to say there is no guarantee any new powers would be delivered to Scotland after a No vote.

So where is this guarantee, Ms MacLeod? Is there an official document that legally binds Westminster MPs to deliver extra powers to Scotland after a No vote? Of course there isn't.

Every promise the pro-Westminster parties make to Scotland is one Westminster MPs - the vast majority of whom are not even accountable to Scotland's voters - are under no legal obligation to keep.

Or perhaps Ms MacLeod thinks the guarantee exists simply because pro-Westminster politicians are promising it? Because everyone knows a politician's word is their bond, right? How nice it must be to live in such a blissfully naïve world.

Back here on planet Earth, Scotland's voters are not daft. We know Westminster has only ever transferred significant extra powers to Scotland when it was forced to by a Yes vote in a referendum. We know Westminster could transfer significant extra powers to Scotland even now, before the referendum, if it was really serious about doing so. We know being told by Westminster "you have to vote No before we can do it" is just an insult to our intelligence.

Scotland faces a deeply uncertain future if we vote No. There is no guarantee Westminster will transfer extra powers to Scotland afterwards. There is also no guarantee Westminster will not drastically cut Scotland's budget while simultaneously increasing its taxes on Scotland's wealth. There is not even any guarantee Westminster will not take back some of the existing powers of the Scottish Parliament after getting the No vote it wants.

From currency-barrier threats to extra powers sweet-talk, Westminster and its Better Together supporters will say absolutely anything to get us to vote No. It doesn't make any of it true.

Fortunately, we do not need to gamble on a No future, in which we put our trust in Westminster politicians and just hope for the best. We can choose a Yes future, guarantee our own Scottish Parliament is fully empowered and guarantee we, the people of Scotland, are fully-empowered to always get the governments we vote for.

In short, why would we trust Westminster to do it for us when we can just do it ourselves?

Angus Coull,

248 High Street,

Prestonpans,

East Lothian.