YOUR correspondent Iain AD Mann has provided some valuable commentary on the referendum previously, and his latest contribution (Letters, August 11) is a splendid summary of the essential weakness in the Yes campaign, "merely responding", as he says, to each and every negative propounded by the Better Together side, only to have such responses condemned as bluff and bluster (which they sometimes had to be as nobody can guess the future).

If only the SNP Government had not published the White Paper asserting what an independent government would, rather than could, do; if only Mr Salmond in the recent TV debate had spoken frankly rather than conforming to the advice of a presumably well-paid guru and blinkered advisers.

If only the Yes campaign right from the start had taken a more general, less specific, line that the democratically-elected government of an independent country confronts and deals with problems as they arise in the light of the prevailing circumstances (a comparatively easy task for a Scotland governed by Scots for Scots, with access to all our natural resources, and funded by all our taxes pouring directly into a Scottish Exchequer), we would not now be contemplating those sad words "what might have been".

The failure of the campaign will not stop those of us who have been informed by your Yes-supporting journalists, such as Ian Bell, your doughty Yes-supporting readers and others from voting for independence, but for the wider populace all of these have been swamped by a biased UK media defending the English and Anglo-Scottish establishment. If the Yes campaign cannot change direction within the next few days the announcement to be made on September 19 can now be awaited only with pessimism.

W Neilson,

1 East Clapperfield, Edinburgh.

I HAVE long argued that the real "basket case" economy is the UK's and not Scotland's. Richard Mowbray (Letters, August 11) confirms everything I have said, with HM Treasury data recently confirming that the national debt is now £1.4 trillion and hurtling higher with each month that passes.

This is a direct consequence of the unbalanced nature of the rest of the UK's economy caused by its London-centric focus, and with the Chan­cellor's ingenuous attempts to drive recovery and improve the feel-good factor ahead of the next election through another south of England property bubble.

Scotland, on the other hand, has a balanced economy comprising oil, renewables, tourism, food and drink, financial services, manufacturing and so on, all of which are ripe for further development and growth, and which if Scotland gains independence and control of the economic levers will ensure Scotland's wellbeing for decades.

Bizarrely, Mr Mowbray's solution is that Scotland should remain wedded to the Union, because if we leave the political implosion of the UK would devastate the global economy. Presumably he intends that we in Scotland should simply wait for the next financial crash - which he also predicts in his letter - and go down, presumably with a whimper and without protest.

I don't think so. Mr Mowbray's letter confirms why a Yes vote on September 18 is the only way forward for Scotland. A Yes vote will allow us to exit the unequal society that the UK has become and allow us to secure a long-term future for succeeding generations, generations with ample opportunities to make a life and succeed, and be part of the fairer, happier and more motivated country that Scotland can become.

John Jones,

16 Ballantine Drive, Ayr.

THIRD Sector Yes consists of hundreds of experts drawn from Scotland's voluntary sector, including past or present leaders of many of Scotland's best-known charities. We feel compelled to challenge Johann Lamont's claims that independence would be detrimental to the most vulnerable in society ("Currency plan costs 'would hit poor the hardest'", The Herald, August 11).

Our members work with the most vulnerable in society on a daily basis. As inequality and poverty increase, as more of our friends become unable to meet even their basic needs, it is clear that the UK is failing many vulnerable people.

Our experience since the creation of the Scottish Parliament tells us that when decisions are taken in Scotland (by various political parties) instead of Westminster, they are almost always more sympathetic to the needs of the people with whom we work.

Yet many of the crucial decisions remain in London: issues such as welfare, tax policies, minimum wage and so on. Without the real levers, we can do little more than tinker at the edges of a political system in which successive Westminster govern­ments have turned the UK into one of the most unequal developed countries in the world.

Independence is simply the means by which Scotland's people can be given the means to address Scotland's challenges. It is an opportunity that we must not miss.

Jill Wood (on behalf of Third Sector Yes),

1/2 122 Oran Street, Glasgow.

HOW refreshing to read some common sense on the issue of post-independence currency in the form of David Torrance's column ("Plan B is not as simple an issue as some might think", The Herald, August 11).

Am I the only one who is perplexed by Alex Salmond's unshakeable desire to keep the pound, a currency whose value is set by the UK through the offices of the Bank of England? How does that relate to an indepen­dent Scotland?

I remember some years ago chatting to an American in a bar in Edinburgh. I offered to buy him a drink and produced a Bank of Scotland £10 note. He took it from me, held it up and declared it to be the best currency in the world - "backed by oil and booze".

Of course he was making a joke, but there's many a true word spoken in jest. I have often recalled that chance encounter and reflected on the truth contained in what he had said. Scotland can only be truly independent if it has its own currency whose value reflects its own economic performance. I had already been planning to vote No and I remain wholly unimpressed by the Yes campaign's half-hearted offer of quasi-independence based on UK currency.

Robin Mather,

23f Eskside West, Musselburgh.

IAN Bell's article ("Yes vote akin to preventative medicine for health service", The Herald, August 9) repeats the biggest lie so far in the referendum campaign. In it he repeats the claim that the appalling privatisation in England means privatisation of the NHS in Scotland will follow. It won't and here is why:

l The NHS is fully devolved and only the Scottish Parliament could privatise it - there is no chance of that happening since no party that I know of has a policy of privatising Scotland's NHS. Any party that did would be rightfully and deservedly destroyed at the polls.

l Whether money in England is spent on the public sector or private sector it is still public money, so Scotland gets its share of the full spend.

l As Mr Bell acknowledges, spending on private sector health always ends up costing more than public sector spend, so the argument that private is cheaper and cuts the Barnett Formula simply does not add up.

l Audit Scotland has confirmed that under the current Scottish Government spending on private sector health increased by 23 per cent in the last year.

The Scottish Parliament information service (SPICE) has confirmed these facts. Maybe Mr Bell should examine the facts rather than engage in scaremongering.

Neil Findlay, Labour MSP,

Shadow Cabinet Secretary for Health and Well-being,

Scottish Parliament, Holyrood, Edinburgh.

WITH reference to Dr Graeme Finnie's comment on the debate between Mr Salmond and Mr Darling (Letters, August 9), it is as well to remember that the referendum asks us to consider one question only. The single question is whether Scotland should be an independent country, not whether Scotland could be an independent country.

Anyone could agree or admit that Scotland could be an independent country, but that is not what we are being asked. The referendum question needs much more thought, and those who positively value the Union for whatever considered reasons will vote No.

Asking them the other question is pointless, should not be part of the debate, and certainly not used to avoid dealing with other points by advocates for the Yes campaign.

Fraser Gold,

56 Crawford Road, Milngavie.