The shoogly peg brigade
ROBERT Burns had a word for them in 1707. A parcel of rogues, he called them. Bought and sold for English gold. The end of our Scottish parliament was concluded for the benefit of a few. No democracy then, of course, although there was rioting in the streets of Edinburgh.
So what would he make of our present lot? Our Parliamentary representatives of the Labour, Liberal Democrat and (one solitary) Tory persuasion have huddled together to ensure that if it is the will of the Scottish people to reclaim our sovereignty, and have our own fullyempowered parliament, they will do their best to make sure it doesn’t happen.
After all, for more than 300 years they have hung their hats in the Westminster cloakroom – still wee fish, but in a bigger pond – and suddenly they are discovering that their hats might be on a shoogly peg. Their jobs might just be disappearing. They might even, perish the thought, have to come back to Scotland.
Come to think of it, why don’t we call them the shoogly peg brigade? I think Rabbie would approve. Margaret Macaulay, 20 Deanburn, Penicuik. IF Scotland votes Yes, we will no longer be subject to the House of Lords. And since the House of Lords is part of the UK legislative set-up, Scottish dukes and earls will no longer be able to sit in it.
While being a lord allows someone to sit in the Lords, equally, being able to sit in the Lords validates the noble title. If that validation is taken away, aristocratic titles will have no backing, no recognition, and will be as worthless as Weimar or Confederate bank-notes.
The Queen is still head of state of Australia and Canada, but there is no Duke of Tasmania nor Earl of Saskatchewan. After 100 years of futilely trying to abolish the House of Lords, with just one cross in a box we can not only rid ourselves of that undemocratic anachronism, but we also get to abolish the Scottish aristocracy.
The bonus sounds even better than the prize. David White, Leebrae House, Lee Brae, Galashiels. IT is becoming clearer that this debate is not so much about ideology or identity, as has been suggested in some quarters, since these will continue whatever the outcome, as about the pragmatic issue of governance: the opportunity to do something different in the development of a more democratic and inclusive political culture that will build on the massive groundswell of public interest, and the formulation of policies that reflect more effectively the values and social priorities that people hold important.
Even if the Westminster parties manage to cobble together a lastminute package as a sweetener to those who would prefer a devomax option, previous experience and disaffection with both Conservative and Labour governments will leave many of us unconvinced.
Moreover, the negative and alarmist emphasis of Better Together on the risks of independence ignores completely the significant risks and uncertainties if Scotland should remain within the United Kingdom – not least the real possibility of a more right-wing, Europhobic Tory government after the next General Election. (Rev Dr) Norman Shanks, 1 Marchmont Terrace, Glasgow.