Letter: Scots have a say

DR Ian McKee (Letters, 27 April) makes a rather odd comparison between the Scots in the early 21st century and women not having the vote 100 years ago in his flawed argument that the former have no say in their affairs. Clearly, he is no historian, in common with most Nationalists.

According to Dr McKee, Scots had no voice in the invasion of Iraq, for example. Well, thanks to some nifty footwork by Scots-born and educated Mr Blair, no-one had any real say in that apart from him. Parliament went along with him because it believed the case he made for war in the national interest.

Dr McKee would have us believe that the Scots are unique in not having a voice in the decisions about their affairs. This is, of course, pure sophistry. The Scots were the guiding lights in the 13 years of Labour misrule. Imagine what delights Scotland would have had ifBlair and Gordon Brown had been let loose on a purely Scots stage?

Of course, because of the very representative way the British state is set up, we Scots have not only participated in, but have, indeed, led the decisions deplored by Dr McKee. That does make it rather difficult for him to try to pretend that we are a saintly bunch who have no part in the decisions a country with clout like the United Kingdom has to make on the world stage.

Much better to be a powerless nonentity that can cower in the shadows, as, no doubt many who subscribe to the famous "cringe" that seems to epitomise such a viewpoint would have us do.

Perhaps an analysis of world affairs might show we Scots have, in fact, contrary to Dr McKee's view, probably had too much of an influence.

Andrew HN Gray

Craiglea Drive

Edinburgh