Time for us to take responsibility and stop blaming Westminster

So, have I suffered buyer's remorse? Not one bit of it. I'm content with my vote. I didn't vote for nationalism, or for the SNP, or for Alex Salmond. I voted for the chance of building a better Scotland.

Both sides in this debate have been guilty of gross exaggeration. Yes has painted a hopelessly over-optimistic picture of the road to independence. It won't be easy, there will be huge economic challenges, the rUK won't just agree to everything Scotland wants. No has been only slightly better. They rubbish the idea of Scotland using the pound without currency union on the grounds that we would end up like Panama, with its use of the US dollar. But Panama's growth has averaged 8 per cent over the past five years; it's booming.

There's no doubt that separation will be painful and expensive. Scotland will have a difficult time for at least the next decade. But what happens after that is very much down to ourselves. We don't have far to seek for problems in this small country of ours. Beveridge in his seminal report of 1942 identified five giant evils stalking the UK: want, disease, ignorance, squalor and idleness. Make the "d" stand for disability, and all five are still at large, in Scotland and in the rest of the UK. Westminster has weakened the giants, but it certainly hasn't defeated them.

Small countries do have advan­tages. They can be more nimble in their economic policies, and that's a significant advantage in today's fast-changing world. Scotland has a particular advantage because of its international recognition and its generally very positive global image. The government of a small country is nearer the people and less likely to surround itself with the sort of bubble that surrounds Westminster; there's a better chance it will govern for the people.

An independent Scotland will have to take responsibility for its own problems and its own future. No more will we hear the nationalist whinge about it all being West­minster's fault for stealing our oil, or not giving us enough power or money. We can make our own decisions and decide our own path. The road will be rocky, for sure, and not everyone will be happy with the direction of travel. But I'm confident that the people of Scotland can find ways of defeating the giant evils that stalk our land and can build a society of which we can all be proud.

Doug Maughan,

52 Menteith View, Dunblane.

THE lengthy debate is almost over and decision time is upon us. The only question the Scottish people are asked to answer in the ballot box tomorrow is: "Should Scotland be an independent country?" In other words, are we capable of running our own country and do we want to? I think the Queen can be assured that we have all been thinking very carefully about it.

The vote is not primarily about future oil reserves, currency unions and the pound, border guards, membership of the European Union and Nato, or removal of Trident, important as all these obviously are. If the Scottish people vote Yes all of these matters and many others will be negotiated and resolved in due course, hopefully with goodwill and common sense on both sides and having regard to the democratically declared will of the people.

Too much of the public debate recently has been more like a party political campaign before a General Election, with vague promises of more powers and dire threats of what will happen if the other side wins. All of these are side issues to the central question - simply, do we believe that Scotland is capable of taking full charge of all its own affairs?

In the past few decades more than 100 countries around the world have taken the decision to become independent, almost none of them with the wealth of natural resources, the economic opportunities and the established social infrastructure that we already have in Scotland. All these new nations seem to have survived and many have become very prosperous. Not a single one has sought to return to its former dependency status and being ruled from elsewhere.

It is simply illogical and in fact insulting to suggest that Scotland alone is incapable of achieving similar success, and would be better off remaining a minor part of a declining United Kingdom still with delusions of grandeur but heavily in debt, with constantly-widening divisions between the richest and poorest, between the politicians and the people, and between the City State of London and the rest of the country.

Only a Yes vote will give Scotland the opportunity to develop its own economy and elect governments of our own choosing to make decisions that are in the best interests of Scotland. Surely we have the confidence in ourselves as a proud nation to grasp this once in a lifetime opportunity.

Iain AD Mann,

7 Kelvin Court, Glasgow.

I HAVE never written to a newspaper in my 64 years, and I probably will never do so again. However, I feel so strongly about the possible break-up of the UK, that I feel compelled to offer my thoughts.

I am English, but have lived in Scotland for around 15 years. Like me, many English people are very envious of the strong national identity of Scottish people. Of the four home nations, the Scottish identity is the strongest. Three hundred years of UK membership has not weakened Scotland's culture and traditions. Neither Westminster, Strasbourg nor, for that matter, Holyrood can take them away.

I hope that the Scottish electorate vote for the right reason. Not that they dislike David Cameron and the Tory policies. Unlike the referendum outcome, the UK Government may change at the next General Election in 2015. Nor should people vote due to any historic resentment of the English. We have lived, worked and fought together successfully for more than 300 years.

The Scottish economy may or may not be successful. I do not think that anybody, including David Cameron and Alex Salmond, can accurately forecast how the economy will look in 10 years. There are too many variables, how many jobs will move south, the issue of the pound, EU membership, how much oil is economically recoverable rather than in the ground, and so on. But it is a fact that the UK economy is recovering well from the 2008 global recession, better than any other European country.

What is certain is that without a strong economy any promises from Holyrood or Westminster on jobs, social care, child welfare and the NHS will not be met.

Initially Scotland will not be a member of the European Union. What will happen to the thousands of EU citizens living and working here? Will they have to return to their home country? Or will they have to apply for work and residence permits?

The polls are forecasting that the Yes and No share of the vote will almost be equal. If this turns out to be correct, as a 100 per cent turnout is unlikely, it means that less than 50 per cent of electorate will have voted for the referendum outcome - whether it is Yes or No.

A close vote also means that almost half the population will be disaffected, whatever the outcome. This is not a good situation for any country, and certainly not good for a newly independent nation.

Independence is forever and it will be difficult if not impossible to reverse if it does not work. Is it worth the risk?

Mel Green,

14 Dick Place, Edinburgh.

IN the question of the economics of independence, there are those like myself who will vote No, on the evidence presented by the likes of Paul Krugman, the independent IFS and the three political parties who represent nearly 80 per cent of the country's voters. And voting Yes will be those who prefer the version given voice by Joseph Stiglitz, the association of poujadiste small traders called Business for Scotland, and the SNP, whose support peaked at 22 per cent in 2011.

The binary format of the referendum has made the choice simple for those who "don't know" or are undecided in the face of the risks involved. They might ask themselves the following:

If you were buying a house, and one surveyor said it had dry rot and the other said it did not, would you bet your savings and your mortgage on one of them being right? Or if you were buying a car and you had one mechanic say it was sound and another that it was a heap of junk, would you take the risk?

Or if you were wagering your life savings and those of your family on a horse, would you bet on one on which the vets could not agree as to its fitness? Likewise, two of the world's top economists cannot agree as to the benefits or otherwise of independence. The stakes are enormous and the odds are long.

Alex Salmond is a betting man, and is obviously prepared to take these risks. This week, Scottish voters should look at themselves and decide whether they are also that reckless. I trust that they will not be.

Peter A Russell,

87 Munro Road, Jordanhill, Glasgow.

WITH just hours to go, Scots still appear to be split right down the middle. A Yes win will do nothing to change this and carries enormous unnecessary risks. A No win, on the other hand, will mean more powers for Holyrood, pleasing both No and Yes voters alike whilst retaining the strength, security, stability and international influence of the UK (benefiting both No and Yes voters alike).

Diehard nationalists can carry on blaming London for everything either way!

Reflecting upon all of the hostility and division generated by this referendum campaign, it now appears that only one side can reunite us.

Keith Gilmour,

0/1, 18 Netherton Gardens, Netherton Gate, Glasgow.