Democratic sham

Alex Salmond has laid great store in the enhanced democracy which he asserts that an independent Scotland would benefit from. He also entertains an inflated opinion concerning the extent to which the SNP represents the people of Scotland.

In this context it would be well to take into account the following facts.

The white paper states that there would be no second chamber in the Holyrood parliament although this is a component in all major Western democracies, essential to ensure the necessary checks and balances in the law-making process.

Salmond seems to propose that in the event of a Yes vote he personally will select the Scottish representatives of the team that would negotiate the terms of independence with its counterpart from Westminster/rUK, a proposal hardly exemplary of democratic principles.

Salmond claims that the Westminster parliament is “not what Scotland’s voters voted for”, although out of a total of 59 MPs from Scotland sitting in the House of Commons, the SNP could muster only six, indicating that the Scottish electorate overwhelmingly trusts the unionist parties in non-devolved policy matters.

He conveniently ignores the fact that even in the last Holyrood election SNPs garnered a minority (only 45 per cent) of the popular vote.

All of these facts undermine Salmond’s contention that an independent Scotland would be more democratic than a Scotland within the UK. Indeed, the likely power concentration in the SNP leadership would indicate an alarming trend towards a presidential – even dictatorial – model of government.

This raises grave concerns over the credibility and trustworthiness of the Yes campaign leadership, and therefore calls in question its assertions on other key aspects of the future of this great country.

David K Murdoch

Edinburgh