Affront to democracy (Jonathan Wills)

Let’s see if we have this right: the chairwoman of the SIC education committee, who is a member of the Church of Scotland, has vetoed my compromise proposal for some sort of public discussion forum on education, which would have satisfied the reasonable request by Shetland’s religious communities to have their views on religious education taken into account by the committee.

In using her veto, the chairwoman ensured that a representative of the Church of Scotland would be appointed (perhaps “annointed” is a better word) to the committee as an unelected member with a vote.  She also proposes to try to find a way fairly to represent all the other religious communities in our islands on the committee with just two more unelected representatives, again with a vote each. That is clearly impossible.

The chairwoman used her veto in the belief that (a) she had no conflict of interest as a member of the church being given privileged and discriminatory rights and (b) that she had no option, having been informed (mistakenly, in my opinion) that the council had no legal alternative. She also refused to defer the matter to see if a reasonable compromise could be reached.

The education committee currently has 11 members. Soon it will have 14 and a fifth of them will be unelected appointees. I imagine that most reasonable persons, be they of a religious bent or otherwise, will regard this as an affront to democracy. It is, in a small way, the sort of clerical interference, in properly secular matters, that British troops have been fighting against in Afghanistan.

Tom McIntyre is no Taliban and a very fine councillor he would make, I am sure, were he to submit himself for election, as I hope he will in the SIC elections next May. But he has no right to be on the committee, other than the flimsy and literal-minded interpretation of the law that was presented to bemused councillors at Thursday’s meeting.

This craven decision, which conflicts with European law and the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights (both of which forbid religious discrimination) makes the council look foolish. More seriously, there is a danger that it will bring Shetland’s religious communities, and particularly the Church of Scotland, into disrepute. I am not a religious person but I respect the rights of those who are. Those rights include being taken seriously by the body responsible for education in these islands. We can do that by establishing a public forum of some sort.

The last one met infrequently and people with an interest in religious education felt it did not listen to them. The solution to that problem is to set up a forum that does meet regularly and does listen – not slavishly to obey an outmoded law for fear the government will send a policeman to the Town Hall to make us behave.

I can assure the chairwoman of education that the government, which has let this sleeping dog lie for a very long time now, has no wish to see a test case, for reasons apparent to anyone familiar with West Central Scotland.

If this forum requires an amendment to the council’s new constitution, I am sure we have legal staff who could manage to draft the necessary fine print. The chairwoman of the education committee should be asking them to do just that, rather than chucking her weight around by vetoing the efforts of a councillor to broker a workable compromise. If a forum cannot clear the legal hurdles, there is nothing to stop the education committee inviting religious representatives to address its meetings from time to time, or inviting them to one of the famous “seminars”.

Hopefully the people appointed to these three unelected positions will have the good sense and the democratic decency not to take them up, but instead to take up this suggestion of a different forum where they can air their views and exert such influence as reasoned argument may afford them. We have enjoyed religious peace in Shetland for a very long time. Thursday’s veto endangers that because it gives religious minorities good reason to feel discriminated against.

Cllr Jonathan Wills
Lerwick South.


Add Your Comment
  • Evelyn Morrison

    • August 26th, 2011 11:15

    Gosh! That’s a revelation – councillors / trustees have to adhere to their legal requirements……

  • Robert Wishart

    • August 26th, 2011 12:53

    Dammit: Wills is right again. The idea that unelected appointees should have a vote on any public body is certainly an “affront to democracy”. Worse, they will be granted this privilege on the basis of their professed “faith” rather than their ability to reason. A secular society? Ha.

  • Jim MacLeod

    • August 26th, 2011 14:40

    I completely agree with everything Jonathan Wills says (on this issue).

  • Jim Anderson

    • August 31st, 2011 23:44

    So ‘legally’ the SIC need to appoint a rep. from the kirk to the Education Committee. Needless to say they’ve decided to appoint three, brilliant! Next we’ll be getting the Queen to appoint someone to the Charitable Trust!

  • Colin Hunter

    • September 2nd, 2011 0:30

    There’s quite a few similarities between politicians and ministers when you sit down and think about it. While the politicos make unsubstantiated claims in the council chamber, the Ministers are doing the same from the pulpit! Neither one has any scientific proof that what they say is actually TRUE! On the one hand you have a story that has been told so often over the past 2000 years that a great many people believe it to be the truth, in fact The “Gospel”. Politicians, on the other hand, will tell you whatever story their heads of department and so called “Advisors” choose to feed them! Whether there is any actual truth in such utterances is definitely open to debate! I personally don’t think that any one “religion” should have any more credence than any other. If one is represented. they should ALL be represented! There is the road to utter chaos!


Add Your Comment

Please note, it is the policy of The Shetland Times to publish comments and letters from named individuals only. Both forename and surname are required.

Comments are moderated. Contributors must observe normal standards of decency and tolerance for the opinions of others.

The views expressed are those of contributors and not of The Shetland Times.

The Shetland Times reserves the right to decline or remove any contribution without notice or stating reason.

Comments are limited to 200 words but please email longer articles or letters to for consideration and include a daytime telephone number and your address. If emailing information in confidence please put "Not for publication" in both the subject line and at the top of the main message.

200 words left

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


Get Latest News in Your Inbox

Join the The Shetland Times mailing list to get one daily email update at midday on what's happening in Shetland.