Sutherland deserves same rights as Alex Salmond has promised the Islands says area leader
Alex Salmond’s pre-referendum pledge to give more powers to Scotland’s island communities if there is a Yes vote in September should be rolled out to Sutherland as well, according to Highland councillor Deirdre Mackay.
She believes that the county’s fragile state and declining population means it is equally if not more worthy of support.
In a report called “Empowering Scotland’s Island Communities”, the Scottish Government has promised to bring forward a post-independence bill for an Islands Act to place a duty on government and public bodies to “island-proof” decisions and create a “Minister for Island Communities” post.
It also promised to support the establishment of Island Innovation Zones to sustain job opportunities and allocate all net income from seabed leasing revenues to island communities, rather than central government.
But Mrs Mackay said: “Much of what is proposed could be implemented now under existing powers and does not require independence to do so.”
She continued: “Sutherland is a special place every bit as much as the islands. Like the islands, we have an abundance of natural resources, a strong sense of identity, pride in our cultural traditions and we are faced with exactly the same challenges of rurality, remoteness, peripherality and small population.
“The land mass of Sutherland could accommodate the land masses of Shetland, Orkney and the Western Isles put together, but we have only a fraction of the population and it’s declining. Shetland, for example, has a much larger income per head of population and the lowest unemployment figure in Scotland.
“The distinctive needs and priorities of Sutherland are no different to the islands but, although our shared challenges can be ticked off one by one, we have never received the wealth of support enjoyed by the islands.
“Shetland, Orkney and the Western Isles have the enviable advantage of their own dedicated MPs and MSPs and enjoy the autonomy and significant powers of their own dedicated councils. In contrast, Caithness, Sutherland and Ross, with its significantly larger joint population, share one MP and one MSP across an unmanageably large land mass.
“The evidence is clear that while the economies of the islands are buoyant and their populations growing, the economy of the north, and Sutherland in particular, remains fragile.
“It cannot be the case that Sutherland loses out to the islands. Directing resources at one area inevitably means somewhere else is penalised and I have real concerns that Sutherland is drawing a short straw.
“We need a commitment from the Government, and opposition parties, that the needs of the north will be fully supported and represented at national level.
“Even worse, the fact that Highland was excluded from this debate means that a commitment was made to the islands to give them all the future revenues from Crown Estate land up to the 12 miles offshore limit. This represents huge sums of money freed up for development and obviously ignores areas of shared interest such as the Pentland Firth and the west coast.
“In the event of a Yes vote, the Islands have been pledged the undiluted attention of their own special government minister and an Islands Act of Parliament which would place a duty on the Scottish Government and relevant public authorities to island-proof decisions and functions where these would have an impact.
“Why is this restricted to the islands? Why will this not apply to all rural areas?”
Mrs Mackay, who is chair of the Caithness and Sutherland area committee, went on: “To ensure a strong voice and influence, the islands have also been promised a seat around the table of a new Strategic Energy Committee. This while we have massive natural resources to produce renewable energy, have a long history in the oil and gas sector and the marine potential in the Pentland Firth. Why should Caithness and Sutherland not be a part of this?
“A range of issues have been highlighted in the report as requiring special attention in the islands, such as broadband, infrastructure and renewables etc – all of which equally apply to Sutherland.
“The aim of the report is to build a wealthier and fairer islands and nobody would argue with this. However, Sutherland meets all the same criteria, has significantly less support, and should be subject to the same recognition and pledges.
“We need to ensure that there is a comprehensive commitment to Sutherland, that its needs will be represented right at the heart of government by whoever should be in power.”
