New Statesman Scotland
As if the Justice Minister, Jim Wallace, did not have enough to worry him (what with helping First Minister Donald Dewar hold together the creaking coalition while fighting off the supporters of Section 28), now the aficionados of the Scots language are nipping at his heels. Proponents of that energetic variety of Middle English we call Scots (and used to call Inglis) are now pressing for a simple question to be inserted into the census of 2001: "Do you speak Scots or any dialect of Scots?" That eminent Scotophone, the writer and broadcaster Billy Kay, says that the last time the question was asked, more than one and a half million folk answered yes (or aye).
"That's a lot of people," Kay says, "which is the reason why the Scottish Executive is reluctant to ask the question. With that number of people claiming to speak Scots, it might have to put some money behind the language."
This diary feels that Kay and his allies have a case. Only 60,000 of us speak Gaelic, but the language is extremely well funded. What's good for the tongue of Duncan Ban MacIntyre should be good for the tongue of Robert Burns. Besides which, the Scots language has been Euro-blessed: it is recognised under Part II of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages. Justice Jim could score some easy points for the executive by sticking "a quaistion anent Scots abeilitie" into next year's census. And it is a cause that might well appeal to his boss, Dewar, one of the few senior politicians known to read books.
At the launch in Edinburgh of Tom Nairn's latest (and excellent) opus, After Britain, the author was asked if he was completely sure that there could be "no going back" on the devolution settlement. He was sure. Devolution was the settled will of the Scottish people. Dismantling Holyrood was unthinkable. He could not see how it could be done. Well, maybe. This diary would like to remind him that the Scotland Act which set up Holyrood makes it plain that sovereignty remains with Westminster. And Westminster did suspend the elected assembly at Stormont and may well do so again. Nor did Westminster think twice about dismantling the Greater London Council which was popular and an electorate bigger than the whole of Scotland. It is not too hard to imagine a future Tory government - run by a fierce ideologue such as, say, Michael Portillo - losing patience with what it saw as Holyrood's whingeing and deciding to take it away. What would we all do then?
A public-school education is not what it was. Tony Blair's alma mater, Fettes College, must be red-faced at the dismal performance of the school's young capitalists. In the Scotsman/Merrill Lynch "Global Investment Challenge" for schools, the Fettes team (imaginatively called "Fettes 1") is currently lying 43rd in a league table of 50. So far, Fettes 1 has only managed to increase its nominal £1 million by 44.38 per cent, whereas the "Profit and Peace" crew from the Edinburgh state-run Catholic school, Holy Cross, is top of the league with a whopping 79.87 per cent increase.
If this goes on, Holy Cross will become the breeding ground for Scotland's young entrepreneurs. Now the school has no fewer than five teams in the Scotsman/Merrill Lynch league: "Profit and Peace" (1); "Crazy Cash" (24); "Hoochy Mamas" (35); "Funky Finance" (46); and "The 3 Mcs and Mick" (48). Financially ambitious parents should forget Fettes College and that Harvard MBA. Higher business studies at Holy Cross seems a better bet. The school did, after all, produce multi-millionaire Tom Farmer, only begetter of the "Kwik-Fit" emporia. (But does the Archbishop of Edinburgh know about the school's Hoochy Mamas?)
Post this article to
We want to encourage people to comment on our content and to exchange views with other readers and hope this will be done on a courteous basis. However, if you encounter posts which are offensive please let us know by emailing comments@newstatesman.co.uk and we will take swift action where necessary.
