Scottish independence would deprive the UK Labour Party of their Scottish MPs, compromising Labour's ability to win a Westminster General Election, which explains why Scotland's Labour apparatchiks have such a visceral hatred of it.

However, I think a No vote in September will achieve exactly the same outcome, though by different means and over a longer timescale.

I cite three factors in support of my contention: the West Lothian Question; the review of Westminster constituency boundaries; and the financial aspects of Labour's ongoing divorce from the trade union movement.

Addressing the West Lothian Question (the anomaly by which Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish MPs vote on "England only" issues, but not the reverse) has been so fraught with difficulties that it has been safely relegated to the political back burner. However, should independence be rejected, English voters might be so fed up listening to us Scots endlessly bleating about our constitutional concerns that they could decide that enough is enough, and demand that this anomaly be ended. Significantly, the Coalition Government had undertaken to bring forward by autumn last year, proposals to deal with this issue. A new fourth reading for English Bills, on which only English MPs could vote, was a favoured option at that time. However, and perhaps wisely given the implications, this issue was postponed until after the Scottish referendum.

And the implications are clear: if only English MPs could vote on "English" legislation, it follows that a future Labour government, shorn of the votes of its Scottish MPs, might well be unable to get its flagship England-only policies through the House of Commons. This will inevitably corrode Labour support south of the Border, doubtless helped by the Tories campaigning under the slogan "a Labour vote is a wasted vote". Who would want to vote for a party that can win a General Election (with its Scottish MPs), but cannot implement in England its manifesto promises in such vital areas as health, education, policing and so on?

Then there is the review of Westminster constituency boundaries, put back to 2018. This will almost certainly recommend a reorganisation of constituencies giving the Conservatives an automatic 20-seat advantage over the present arrangement. If this were not enough, Labour's ability to fight election campaigns will be threatened as the trade unions withdraw financial support as a result of Labour's policy of distancing itself from its traditional paymasters.

Not only does a Conservative hegemony in the UK seem to be a distinct possibility, but Scots might not be able to do anything about it in future. We are often told - most recently by national treasure JK Rowling - that independence is for ever. I think the same applies to the Union, if Scots vote to stay within it.

The only reason that David Cameron agreed to recognise the result of the referendum is that he thought he would win it easily, only to be reduced to panic over the growth of the Yes vote. Can the Westminster Unionist elite ever again risk losing a Scotland that will host the UK's nuclear deterrent until at least the mid-21st century, not to mention the UK's only shipyards capable of building complex warships?

Tom Logue,

Villa Marina,

Shore Road,

Kilcreggan,

Dunbartonshire.

Johann Lamont, leader of the Labour Party in Scotland, makes an impassioned plea for co-operation across borders and a spirit of internationalism ("Hillary Clinton is right: We should firmly reject the politics of identity", Herald Agenda, June 14). I can only fully concur with such laudable aims. However, she fails to make the case as to why Scotland by virtue of being an independent state couldn't seek to work with neighbours and allies.

The fact is that borders exist. I presume that Ms Lamont isn't seeking to abolish the UK's borders, embrace a United States of Europe or officially join in union with the US as the 51st state. Nor is the co-operation she rightly commends voided by such current borders. Thus the spirit of co-operation and internationalism is a mindset and attitude to be embraced, not one based on creating one world country and government. The question therefore is not does an independent Scotland make such collaboration impossible but will its people and political leaders embrace the mindset required? Evidence suggests a definite yes.

Michael Rossi,

66 Canalside Gardens,

Southall,

Middlesex