Holyrood gives us more chance to improve the quality of life

Sir Ian Campbell is right in his list of the fields in which the Scottish Executive has failed to improve the quality of life in Scotland since devolution (Letters, 10 June), although not everybody would share his priorities in putting the issue of fox-hunting at the top of the list.

However, if he is looking forward to a day when we Scots will slink back to the Unionist fold, and he and his kind will say, "you see, children, what did we tell you, you're not big enough to look after yourselves: now be good and do what we say in future", then he had better wake up.

The principle of Scottish self-determination is no more discredited by the fact of the First Minister, Jack McConnell, than the principle of parliamentary democracy is discredited by the fact of the Prime Minister, Tony Blair.

If Sir Ian Campbell and his party had the welfare of Scotland at heart they would be organising themselves to tackle such issues as health, education, transport, regeneration of rural communities, support for the arts, etc, in the context of devolution: for, most certainly, the presence of a Scottish Parliament has given us far more opportunities to improve matters in those and other areas than we had before, even though the Executive is incapable of taking them.

It is true that the devolution settlement will not last, but what will follow it is independence: the incorporating Union is as dead as the Holy Roman Empire. If the Tories hope to regain any degree of relevance in present-day Scotland, that is the point from which they have to start.

J DERRICK McCLURE, Rosehill Terrace, Aberdeen

In reply to Sir Ian Campbell's complaint that the Scottish Parliament has done nothing, off the top of my head, here are some of the achievements of the first six years in the area of policy I know quite well: the most radical set of rights for homeless people anywhere in Europe; a target set to improve standards in housing and action on fuel poverty; new rights for tenants of private landlords; new help for people facing mortgage possession; and a huge expansion in the amount of services offering support to vulnerable people to stay in their homes.

Of course, it may be that Sir Ian has not benefited personally from any of these things. But, in general, people with "Sir" in their name tend to do okay from society anyway. It is people in more modest circumstances that need an active parliament promoting their interests. And from that point of view, the Scottish Parliament is doing an awful lot better than the version in London ever did.

GAVIN CORBETT, Briarbank Terrace, Edinburgh