Scottophobia

Letters pubished by the Glasgow Herald


The Herald is almost unique in the Scottish press in that it not only understands the discrimination against England as a result of devolution but, unlike the cowardly "English" press, it actually dares to report it. But your editorial, Scottophobia lives on today (May 15), certainly falls short of your usual balanced reporting.The opposition by English people to a Scottish MP becoming prime minister is nothing to do with a phobia or even dislike of the Scots. It is simply the case that, since devolution, Westminster now spends roughly 80% of its time dealing solely with England. It is not unreasonable for the people of England, representing 85% of the population of the (dis)United Kingdom, to want somebody who is accountable to the English electorate as prime minister.Were Gordon Brown to become the British prime minister, he would have a free rein over England but would be almost incapable of introducing any legislation that would affect his own constituents. He would be safe in the knowledge that no matter how unpopular a piece of legislation was, nobody in England could vote him out of office as he is elected in Scotland. Westminster has become largely irrelevant in Scotland since devolution so the diehard Labour constituents, most of whom would vote for a chimpanzee if it wore a red rosette, are very unlikely to vote him out based on what he has done to the auld enemy south of the border.I have no problem with a Scottish MP becoming prime minister of the UK once a fully-devolved government, with at least the same powers as the Scottish Parliament, has been introduced in England. Until this happens, increasing numbers of English people will refuse to submit to minority rule by unaccountable Scottish politicians.

Stuart Parr, Telford, Shropshire.

THE growth in Scottophobia was inevitable. The idea of devolution might have been to strengthen the Union, but only fools could have thought that a manifestly inequitable system, that Labour created, could possibly achieve that aim. Gordon Brown or John Reid have every constitutional right to be prime minister but neither will have any electoral mandate for the bulk of that job. Post-devolution, the duties have changed dramatically. Besides going on lots of holidays and prancing about the world saying how they are going to save it, the PM's main function is to oversee the administration of England.Brown/Reid are, however, elected to Westminster to represent their constituents on non-devolved matters. So they have no mandate from either Scottish or English electors to deal with things like health, education, law and order, etc. That is why they should not be PM of the UK until England has a devolved parliament of its own. Constitutionally, there is no reason why an English MP representing an English constituency should not be secretary of state for Scotland, but if any such person were appointed there would be a big protest from Scotland.

Edward Higginbottom, Rea Bank, Weir Road, Hanwood, Shrewsbury.