Email
Your feature answering the key questions raised by the prospect of Scottish independence (What a carve-up! From politics to sport, oil to national debt, how the split could work (10 September) leaves out an issue which many of us consider extremely important: culture. There is constant, fruitful cultural collaboration between the four nations of the UK, including touring across borders, funding and sponsorship, co-production and shared educational initiatives. The article mentions the BBC, but as the BBC Proms 2014 season ended many of us were asking whether the BBC Scottish Symphony Orchestra will still be around in a couple of years, and whether the participation of an independent Scotland in this great national music festival had yet been considered.
Scotland may be able eventually to join the EU as an individual nation, but in the meantime will it still be able to draw on EU funding for cultural projects – and, indeed, for educational purposes? Even a short hiatus could be deeply damaging.
The Edinburgh festivals receive funding not only from Scottish sources but also from the BBC, VisitBritain and Arts Council England. Will, and indeed should, this funding cease in the event of independence? The Edinburgh fringe may well remain a mecca for arts companies from all over the UK, but the funding and resources that individual national arts councils currently put into this annual cultural hotbed may be thrown into question.
I think it very likely that artists north and south of the border will strain every sinew to keep cultural relationships strong and thriving, but I fear that the upheaval of moving towards independence for Scotland may unintentionally break or damage a great many cultural links and ties.
Catherine Rose
Olney, Buckinghamshire
• The debate on the Scottish referendum has been littered with the panegyrics to the union from the Westminster-based politicians. Yet what has the union done for the cultural life of Scotland and its heritage?
From my experience the union has stunted the cultural life of the country. Linguistically, Gaelic has been brought to the point of extinction, Doric and Scots have been sidelined for years. Scotland remains the only country not to teach its own children its history, and the built heritage has been neglected, bulldozed or shunned by politicians fearing anything that might be construed as “too nationalistic”. During my time on the Ancient Monuments Board, the struggle to secure the protection of Scotland’s battlefields was a case in point, as time and again the political masters of the British parties sought to block moves that might be too Scottish.
In conclusion, if you believe in the cultural life of Scotland unhindered and a heritage truly protected and nurtured for future generations, then there can be only way to vote.
Dr Scott Peake
Director, The Saltire Society, 1998-99; member, Ancient Monuments Board for Scotland, 1996-2000
• Claire Enders (What would a Scottish yes mean for democracy, 14 September) claims that “Scotland simply isn’t big enough to support strong independent media”.
She suggests the substitution of a Scottish Broadcasting Service for the BBC in Scotland would reduce media plurality. However, since 1957 Scotland has had an independent commercial station, STV, with a vibrant news and current affairs output, which would continue to offer strong competition to any licence-fee/state-funded broadcaster. Not since the 1980s has Channel 4 had any Scottish current affairs or political output, so the level of plurality would remain unchanged.
She suggests Scotland could not secure a free-to-air deal with the BBC. The licence fee (or post-independence equivalent) in Scotland raises £300m; the pro-rata share of network BBC television is £75m, while BBC Scotland costs £86m. Even if the BBC secured £100m for supplying its services to Scotland (considerably more than Ireland currently pays for the same privilege), that would still leave £200m to fund SBS, radio and online services.
After independence the Scottish parliament and whichever government the people of Scotland elect would shape Scotland’s media regulation. Holyrood, elected on a proportional representation basis, and with much greater cross-party pre–legislative scrutiny, is considerably more democratic than Westminster.
The biggest threat to democracy in broadcasting posed by independence has been the BBC reverting to the kind of suspension of impartiality that we last saw during the General Strike of 1926.
Professor Robin MacPherson
Edinburgh Napier University
• Tara Conlan’s article (Independent Scotland faces doubling of BBC licence fee, 12 September) chimes very closely with my own knowledge and experience. I was BBC controller Scotland from 1982 to 1992. While the sums involved now are different, the relativities will be unchanged. In my time the licence fee income from Scottish viewers pretty well equated to the sum required to run the radio and television services for Scotland. In effect the BBC centrally provided network programmes for Scotland at nil cost. The same is true of Wales and Northern Ireland.
To provide the programmes which Scots currently enjoy from London and other parts of the UK would require the successor body to purchase broadcast rights and content. The cost of such provision could, as suggested, double the licence fee for Scots.
If a BBC paper was drawn up three years ago, I am disappointed that it has not been published. As Burns said , “facts are chiels that winna ding”.
Patrick Chalmers
Bibury, Gloucestershire
