JOHN Swinney, Depute First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills (refers to the Scottish Government’s Education Delivery Plan (“A chance for all to have their say on the future of our education sector”, Agenda, The Herald, September 21). “This recognises,” he tells us “the critically important relationship our teachers and early years practitioners build with our children” so that they are “best placed to make decisions for our children and young people”.

But the teachers who are to be empowered and funded directly through the Scottish Government, initially by £100 million of diverted council tax, are head teachers, the same individuals in fact who were to have been appointed Named Persons in August had it not been that the Supreme Court deemed their use of personal data illegal. And Mr Swinney has made it clear that he has no intention of abandoning his Government’s controversial surveillance plan for our children.

However, the governance review, an engagement between the wider community of the whole of Scotland and Mr Swinney to take place over the next three months, is to precede a full formal consultation in March. Whether this is to be on funding only or on the entire proposal to delegate powers to schools – Mr Swinney’s text is unclear on the subject – the promise is in line with EU law regarding consultation on matters of important public interest and may reassure those who question the effectiveness of the proposed measure in promoting educational equity.

But we have had many public consultations and they follow a similar format. They rarely if ever ask whether the proposed project is to go ahead but only how it should be implemented. Moreover, there is no obligation on the authority or body consulting to take any account of the result of its Inquiry.

So let us at least be clear on the implications of Mr Swinney’s plan. The unelected head teachers and early years practitioners in their alter ego as Named Persons are to be further empowered at the expense of elected representatives at local council level.

Whether or not the SNP’s commitment to a further referendum is genuine or is shared by a majority of the population, there is no doubt that the people of Scotland favour the ballot box – a preference that our legislators at Holyrood seem prepared to ignore when it suits their political agenda.

Mrs Mary Rolls,

1 Carlesgill Cottages, Westerkirk, Langholm, Dumfriesshire.

I HAVE wondered why, during the debates on independence and the European Union, the Scottish National Party and pro-Europe supporters have not made more mention of the successes of the countries within the EU whose populations are smaller than Scotland – and indeed, even some countries that are not much bigger than ours.

With consultation now beginning on whether or not it will be wise to hold a further referendum on independence, we should surely consider that countries whose economy and population is smaller than our own are thriving, even in spite of the global downturn. Twelve are the same size as, or smaller than, Scotland in terms of population, and the remainder of the population statistics seem, on this occasion, to prove the rule that it is not necessary to have a population of 60-million plus to be successful.

Almost of equal significance is in the fact that many of the nations that form the expanded EU were not even in existence 26 years ago – Slovakia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovenia and Croatia – and when it first joined the EU, Finland was below average in terms of wealth. Now it is a very successful part of the European Union.

Other countries had to stand alone and establish themselves outside the Iron Curtain– Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary and Poland – nations to whom some in England have a tendency to turn up their collective noses (which is the only reason that Ukip was able to grow in popularity).

Some of these countries have a population larger than Scotland, but their economies, in terms of GDP, are still below what an independent Scotland could easily produce.

Again of course, the anti-Europe and anti-independence lobbyists will rightly point to the examples of Eire and Iceland, but both have recovered, and indeed Iceland is booming at present – only eight years after the economic downturn.

We should naturally, be careful (even cautious) about the path we choose to travel, both for ourselves and the generations yet to come, but we should not be so blinkered that we cannot consider taking control of our own destiny – others did, many were forced to, but at least we have a choice.

Francis Deigman,

12 Broomlands Way, Abbeyfield, Erskine.