I HAVE nothing against Angus but it is beyond doubt that the ancient county’s many assets do not extend to ferries or islands.
Accordingly, it is a little puzzling to find that the two Ministers in the Scottish Government appointed to these remits would be more at home in Brechin than Barra, more naturally in tune with the road to Dundee than making their way to Stornoway.
Given the ferry crisis afflicting the west coast, every element of which ends up at the Scottish Government’s door, there is an overwhelming case for the issue to have some priority; perhaps even the attention of Cabinet Secretary Michael Matheson.
However, Mr Matheson – whose exciting new title is Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero, Energy and Transport – has been the invisible man when it comes to ferries, several barge poles separating him from the sources of maritime disarray.
I doubt if we will see Mr Matheson hurrying into the Ferguson Marine yard to take responsibility, any time soon.
That privilege may belong to Graeme Dey, MSP for Angus South and now Transport Minister whose 18 listed responsibilities include “ferries inc. CMAL”. Well, good luck with that. Without any background in the subject, he will probably follow advice from those whose long-range genius created the problems in the first place.
READ MORE: Brian Wilson: SNP hammered hospitality but guaranteed George Square chaos
Then we have the Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and – very much a late tag-on – Islands, Mairi Gougeon, MSP for Angus South. The previous “and Islands” Minister was Paul Wheelhouse, from the Borders, who for some reason became Minister for Ferguson’s although, unlike Mr Dey, he was not a Transport Minister. So many Ministers, so little continuity, so much title-shuffling.
The common characteristic is that none of them has constituency interests in either ferries or islands. The SNP have six MSPs in the Highlands and Islands (including the Clyde) and none has ever been allowed near either role. This is consistent with nobody from the communities served by CMAL and CalMac being on the boards of either.
I doubt if there is a coastal country in Europe, perhaps the world, where the same prohibition would be tolerated. Certainly not in the Scandinavian lands which are so often held up as role models – which set me thinking about the Faroes and why the idea of autonomy for the Scottish islands should be taken seriously.
Ferries are only the current example. It is inconceivable that an islands-based ferry company could do a worse job. Indeed, the Western Isles Council has just put forward a very coherent plan, both short-term and medium-term, for escaping from the current mess. It should, I suggest, be Mr Dey’s preferred reading before he gets to the civil service brief.
There are immediate costs involved but they are minimal compared to the vast sums wasted on the Ferguson debacle. Thereafter, I am confident that an islands-based ferry company would be more efficient, more responsive to public needs and would not require an additional penny from the Scottish Government.
It would also create enough jobs to be transformational in island communities. For decades in the islands, “Gourock” has been shorthand for mismanagement, nepotism and worse. It is an anachronism dating back to the 1973 merger of MacBrayne with the Caledonian Steam Packet Company (previously part of British Rail) that the whole show is run from there rather than some of the places it is supposed serve.
The same reasoning can be applied to every distinctively island public service, run from afar. Crofting regulation is another easy example. The whole thing is a shambles regulated from a centralised bureaucracy in Inverness. It is impossible to believe it would not be more pro-active and alert to depressing realities on the ground if it operated at localised levels.
READ MORE:Brian Wilson: There's nothing green about dividing Britain or closing down the North Sea
Neither is the argument confined to the public sector. The first person I heard espouse the Faroes as a role model was the late Ian Noble who had gone there in the 1960s and learned how economic development and cultural renaissance went hand in hand. He applied that principle in Skye, particularly as founder of Sabhal Mor Ostaig, Scotland’s Gaelic college.
The lesson has never been built on. Greater political and administrative autonomy would keep people in the islands – just as in Faroes where population has gone from 30,000 in 1960 to almost 50,000 today. Natural entrepreneurism would flourish. How curious that one of the biggest fish farmers in our own islands was recently bought by a Faroese company. Could it ever happen the other way round?
The neo-colonialism exercised by Edinburgh should be replaced by serious decentralisation. No “subsidy” is required. The pretence Scotland’s islands don’t pay their way is ridiculous. From Shetland’s oil to Islay’s whisky, not to mention a disproportionate contribution to Scotland’s global images and a host of world class products, the islands pay their dues many times over to UK and Scottish coffers.
Anyone who actually believes in devolution would see the case for islands’ autonomy – not as a threat or challenge but merely as a means to better, fairer, more creative governance.
The same can and should be argued in urban settings. Look at the great success of the metro Mayors in England and Wales, delivering for their cities and regions because they can stand up to central government. In contrast, Scotland has a higher degree of centralisation than ever before. The challenge to that mindset could start in the islands and work its way in.
Our columns are a platform for writers to express their opinions. They do not necessarily represent the views of The Herald.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel