Why the Scots are naturally superior

Alan Clark is a big man, rangy, with the build of a hillwalker and climber. We talked in the book-lined sitting room, his large frame inadequately contoured into an armchair by the fire.

Clark has impeccable Scottish antecedents: since 1725, the male line of the family have all been born in Scotland; the Clark Memorial Hall, now Paisley Town Hall, was built by an ancestor; his wife Jane attended Paisley Grammar School; until the 1930s the family owned the Ardnamurchan Peninsula in Inverness-shire. Clark regards these Scottish connections as being ``natural and fundamental.''

I asked him for his view on public access to private land and the Scottish freedom to roam philosophy: ``I am completely relaxed about it. I myself am a professional roamer and rambler so I can hardly object to others doing the same. Under Scottish law people can walk where they like. How can anybody stop them? The law of trespass is a pretty cumbersome business. You have to prove damage. I don't think that there is a court in Scotland that would convict, unless the case in question actually involved setting fire to things.''

Clark is equally relaxed about land ownership and he denies that Scottish land is being exploited or is ill-managed by owners. However, he makes some notable exceptions, such as the Island of Eigg. Clark confessed that he thought Keith Schellenberg was ``a bit of an ass - spelt with an r.'' But Clark continued: ``There is another side. I know the argument about sole landlords and I don't discount it, but I haven't heard anyone suggest a viable alternative. There are various crofter schemes and that's fine, if they work.

``But there are vast, unpopulated areas. What are you to do with them? What worries me about the land management argument is that it is never presented as a rational debate between various alternatives. Isn't it really the case that some people object to landlords, not because they are not Scots, but rather because landlords give themselves airs and graces? Scotland must be the only country left in Europe where this sort of resentment is used to fuel arguments which should be conducted rationally, rather than emotively.

``However, I can see that it may be a bit offensive, nowadays (and I will probably get into trouble from friends and neighbours for saying this) for people to come up from the south for a few weeks just to use Scotland as though it were a huge playground. I mean, the braying of voices, the Barbours and the Range Rovers . . . I don't much care for it myself. The land breathes again once they have gone.

``But equally objectionable is the way in which the protest movement in Scotland is being infiltrated by, and kept stoked by, people who are not even Scots. A quarter of them, I could say half, come up from Coventry or Birmingham or wherever, and just like winding the thing up. These kind of people are, in my opinion, just in the way.''

Clark is unequivocal in his condemnation of what he sees as irresponsible development, particularly in regard to super-quarries and to factory-salmon farming: ``These are excellent illustrations of industrial or commercial exploitation which is neither labour-intensive nor conducive to long-term environmental welfare. Super-quarries and salmon farms are examples of development which goes further than it should.

``This is the whole green dilemma : you can't forbid people to extract limestone, within reason; and it is a good idea to farm fish. But where is the golden mean which allows you to extract limestone and to farm fish without wrecking everything. I fear that human greed is so ineradicable that developers will always go to excess before a reaction to what they are doing makes them pull back.''

I suggested that, from his recently-published diaries and from his conversation, he was at heart a closet Scottish nationalist. Clark was delighted with this observation and quipped that Alan Massie, the Scottish writer and journalist, held the same view.

``But I can't support the SNP because I have observed them in the House. Their discipline is very poor. By that I mean that they shrink from defining and sticking to long-term objectives. This is a kind of cowardice. I don't want to insult them, but this aversion to defining long-term objectives, to thinking them through, to evaluating the cost, is anathema to me.

``I think that the Scottish people are greatly superior in their character to the English and that once they really were on their own they would surprise everyone by being able to get their act together very fast. Scotland would become a natural magnet for many disappointed aspirations which exist in the South. But the SNP capitalise on people's discontent. They say that in an independent Scotland there will be a job for everyone. How can you possibly say that? That is a completely artificial undertaking; to say that everyone will have a job, everyone will have full-scale health care; that everyone will have education at the highest level; that

``If you claim that you can banish elitism, elitism based upon merit, what you are doing is misleading the mob. No society can flourish unless it has running within it a recognition of the elitist concept. Some people have more drive, are more intelligent, are more courageous, more creative than others and everyone should have the opportunity to aspire to being in that group.

``If you pillory people when they get there and say: `Oh no, we can't have that, we are all going to be equal,' you will never create a vibrant, vigorous, balanced economy. Whenever the Nats have to grudgingly admit that I am a Scot, they always include the rider: `Grandson of a Mill owner', a bad word, you see, because my great-grandfather was grinding down the workers. In fact, he was creating prosperity and employment.''

Clark continued: ``It is unusual for a completely integrated, civilised, balanced, socially-structured and exemplary society like Scotland to have the opportunity to make itself independent. All the Scots have to do is grasp the nettle. Vote for it. The trouble is that if the Scots do vote for independence, then who will run the country? The present SNP? These guys haven't really got any idea of how to do so and they would make a mess of it.

``One of the great paradoxes about the SNP is the argument that Scotland will be all right because it will have its own parliament and will go into Europe. All Scotland will have to do to make up for the shortfall in funds that previously came from England will be to ask Europe for the difference. It isn't that easy.

``I think that an independent Scotland would be very strong if it does the right things, if it sets its face against accepting a lot of European grant money and cohesion money and so on. Don't let them buy you. Scots are very proud and they have been through this before, many times, in their history. Don't fall for it again. Let Europe come to Scotland. There are a lot of things Europe will want from an independent Scotland.

``They will want the oil, they will want proper reciprocal trading arrangements; they will want access to Scottish industrial facilities, because (I am sorry to say) wage rates in Scotland are far lower than they are in most European countries. Forget about the Social Chapter. John Major is right about that. The Social Chapter is a device, put in, conjured up, by our industrial rivals in the EEC to try and reduce British competitiveness.''

``Scotland is a rich country and its people are its greatest asset. Independence is what Scotland can have and independence is what would make Scotland flourish. It is such an heroic prospect that I, personally, hold my breath in anticipation. But devolution is a complete charade, it is a deception, a giant con, a waste of money, forget it. If Scotland really wants independence, let Scotland vote for it.''