It is now clear that Westminster promises cannot be relied upon

Yet the results of the survey show that, even if we vote to stay in the Union, our punishment for daring to have a referendum in the first place should be to have our Barnett formula pocket money cut by more than 10 per cent. And if we actually have the audacity to vote for independence, we should be forbidden the privilege of sharing their pound.

Bewildering as they are, these findings do at least demonstrate beyond doubt that no future UK government, of whatever mongrel hue, can promise to deliver the enticements so far offered to persuade us to turn our backs on the precious opportunity to become masters of our own destiny. In the event of a No vote, a Westminster Parliament cannot guarantee to deliver further devolved powers or the continuation of the Barnett formula if English voters (whose support is of primary importance to them) are truly as eager to exact retribution on the Scots as this survey suggests.

The disappointing results of the survey suggest no less than three apposite adages. We're damned if we do, and we're damned if we don't. You pays your money and you takes your choice. And we might as well be hanged for a sheep as a lamb.

Granted, none of them constitutes an intellectually sound basis for choosing independence, but they may be something for undecided voters to reflect on.

Iain Stuart,

34 Oakbank Crescent,

Perth.

OH, the irony. On the same day as David Miller (Letters, August 20) instructs us that supporters of independence have lost the economic argument, Iain AD Mann spells out with exceptional clarity the real financial situation without the spin and errors produced by pro-Unionists.

Of course we can not only survive but we can also thrive as an independent nation, and the whole issue of the pound is in reality an irrelevant distraction. If you really believe that Westminster politicians will act against their own interest then you are ignoring the whole history of the political classes.

However, your front-page report on English attitudes to the referendum should jolt every voter who intends to vote No and convince every don't know that the only course of action is a Yes vote. I have long known from my colleagues in England that there is a massive groundswell of public opinion determined to punish those uppity Scots for their impertinence of wanting to be independent.

The "best of both worlds" argument as put forward by the Better Together camp will rapidly be used against a Scotland which vote No. A large majority of English people buy into the much-publicised myth that Scots live off the English taxpayer. There will be no more powers for Holyrood and you can forget being £1400 better off in the Union as promised by Danny Alexander.

This underlines the reality that a No vote is not a vote for the status quo, but in fact a vote to make Scotland a much more deprived country.

David Stubley,

22 Templeton Crescent,

Prestwick.

ROY B Hudson (Letters, August 20) is viewing the Unionist parties' refusal to consider a currency union through rose-tinted Unionist glasses.

He avers: "The decision by the three main Unionist parties was on the back of Treasury advice that had concluded that a shared currency was not in the interest of rUK or Scotland. With the leaders of the Unionists announcing their decision well before the referendum it was better that way than the deceit of not saying but knowing beforehand their ultimate decision."

The truth is very different. The continuous attack on the Scottish Government's position serves to obscure to Scottish voters and the population of the rest of the UK the reckless and potentially ruinous behaviour of George Osborne and co. The idea this decision was taken on the back of Treasury advice for soberly-considered economic reasons is laughable. The Civil Service, in this case the Treasury, is the very epitome and embodiment of the British state. Together with the political elite they seek only to preserve their own power, position and privilege and their view of the UK's position in the world.

This was a premeditated and co-ordinated political attack on the Yes campaign and nothing more. It makes no economic sense to rule out a currency union without even a moment's discussion.

The rUK will inherit approxi­mately £130 billion debt which will cost it £5bn every year just to service, without reducing that debt by one penny. At the same time the economy the UK relies on to provide the taxes and revenues to service its debt will shrink by 10 per cent. George Osborne's ambitious plans to eliminate the deficit will be blown out of the water. The UK's debt to GDP level will exceed 100 per cent.

To compound the UK's problems, Scottish exports would be removed from the UK's balance of payments figures. The UK has one of the worst trade deficits of any developed country. The gap would almost double. Transaction costs calculated at some £500m would be imposed on rUK business. All of this would have a very negative impact on the value of the pound and lead to increased borrowing rates for the UK. The Tories' austerity regime would stretch even further into the future.

This is a reckless and cynical political manoeuvre which shows a total disrespect for Scottish electors and the democratic process and a cavalier attitude to the economic well being of the rest of the UK.

Kenneth McNeil,

Alva Place,

Lenzie.

A NEW perspective on a new currency: The new Scottish army would inherit the high reputation of the British Army. The new Scottish diplomatic service would similarly be held in high regard.

A new Scottish currency would be respected because of Scotland's track record as part of the Union that built up sterling: Alex Salmond's war cry should be "the reputation of the pound is ours, and were going to keep it". No-one should object to that.

Andrew Findlay,

Fawside Lodge, Gordon, Berwickshire.

I AM concerned that Iain AD Mann is of the opinion that state pensions can be excluded from his calculation of public expenditure in an independent Scotland.

Page 144 of the White Paper Scotland's Future makes it quite clear that for those people living in Scotland in receipt of the UK state pension at the time of independence, the responsibility for the payment of that pension will transfer to the Scottish Government. Furthermore, the White Paper promises a much-improved level of pension.

Pensions is one of the few areas in which the White Paper has clearly set out what will happen in a post independent Scotland. It is in other areas such as overseas represen­tation, defence, civil service infra­structure for collecting taxes and administrating public services that there is no clear statement of intent.

Sandy Gemmill,

40 Warriston Gardens,

Edinburgh.

MY father belonged to a very small village in the south of Skye, while his good friend belonged to another small village in the north. Many's a time they sparred over their preferences for the north and the south, but were totally united in their pride in their native island. It is well known in the Highlands that Skye and Lewis people think that their island is quite superior to the other, but in any discussion on the merits of the Western Islands, they will immediately support one another.

Glasgow people are certainly a bit wary of those who come from the east, especially from the capital, but all unite in knowing that the Scots are definitely superior to any other race in the world. And so with the UK. I know which of the four nations which make up the UK is the best, is more than a notch superior to any of them, but that does not stop me from supporting with pride a British team in the European Championships, or in the Olympics.

I am passionately fond of my country, Scotland, and will correct anyone abroad who ignorantly suggests that I am English - worse still if they actually mean British; of course that kind of error reinforces the Yes vote. But the present climate has led to my feeling very frustrated. I would wave my Saltire with as much pride and gusto as any other Scot, but that symbol has been hijacked. Anyone who waves a Saltire, or cares passionately about Scotland, is perceived to have only one vote in mind.

Scotland is a great nation, but is strong enough, not weak enough, to be part of a greater whole, as well as individually great. It is only by working with others that this world is going to survive.

Kirsteen Maclean,

25 Gartconnell Road,

Bearsden.

AS the independence campaign grinds on, there is one aspect which worries me most of all. It is the sheer divisiveness it has created among the Scottish people.

I could never have imagined the level of bitterness, even downright nastiness, which has come from people I thought I knew better. Even families are split to an alarming extent.

Whatever the outcome, I fear all this may leave us a legacy we could well do without. Also, I wonder what impression this is giving to that outside world which has always tended to think that the Scottish people are a wonderful lot.

Jack Webster,

58 Netherhill Avenue,

Glasgow.