I am angry and disappointed that, as a Scotsman living in England, I am not entitled to vote in the referendum. This question is crucial to Scotland’s future.
My first thought is that it is ironic that the Yes campaign is seeking independence after the Scottish banks have had quite recently to be bailed out by the Bank of England.
This financial disaster is analogous to the failure of the Darien Scheme in 1700. However, this failure was a factor in the move towards union with England.
The Yes campaign needs to explain what would happen if these banks were to fail in an independent Scotland, where the Bank of England would not be available to bail them out.
Another cause for concern if Scotland becomes independent is that decisions will be taken in London which will have an important effect on Scotland without input from the Scottish Government, beyond what could be conveyed by the Scottish High Commissioner in London.
In addition, there are unresolved uncertainties regarding important matters such as the form of currency, the sustainable level of public spending, the provision of pensions for an ageing population and the maintenance of jobs.
The Yes campaign considers that these matters pose no problems whereas the No campaign takes the opposite view.
I want the very best for Scotland.
However, for the reasons I have given, I do not think that this would be achieved in an independent Scotland.
(Emeritus Prof) Edward Armour