Points of View

Recent research has confirmed that poisoning intensity is greatest on land managed as grouse moor and that the effect of this is to constrain the recovery of the golden eagle population in Britain, preventing re-colonisation of areas in the southern and eastern Highlands and in parts of the Southern Uplands.

Research into the hen harrier indicates that this bird is heavily persecuted on managed grouse moors, with productivity significantly lower in these areas compared with breeding attempts elsewhere in the uplands.

The number of birds of prey poisoned illegally in Scotland rose to a record high in 2006: 39 confirmed cases of pesticide abuse involving eagles, red kites, hawks, falcons, owls, buzzards and ravens. This is double the number in 2005 and the highest for 12 years.

Because such poisoning is most likely to take place on private land in remote areas it is likely that many more incidents go undetected, so true figures for numbers may be much higher.

These statements are based on peer-reviewed published research, Scottish Executive and RSPB publications.

Ross Minett, Campaigns Director, Advocates for Animals, 10 Queensferry Street, Edinburgh.

Damning of LibDems is hard to understand
So Iain Macwhirter thinks we may be heading for federal government in the UK (July 9). I hope he is correct. The work done by the Liberal Democrats in the Steel Commission provides serious proposals for the fiscal basis of such a system as well as recommending the constitutional convention he commends.

However, this is not the policy of the SNP administration or, as far as I am aware, of any party in Scotland, other than the LibDems. Mr Macwhirter's conclusion that the LibDems are irrelevant to the constitutional debate is, therefore, difficult to understand. The party might have made a mistake in not trying to negotiate a coalition deal with the Nationalists. Once the honeymoon period of populist spending is over and the tough decisions come, the country might have been better served by a coalition with a partnership agreement which could command a majority.

However, supporting proportional representation and coalition politics does not mean you are under an obligation to enter into any partnership on offer. The Nationalists and federalists are different animals. As I recall, the main criticism before the election of the LibDems from political pundits was an over-eagerness to be in power. Damned if you do, and damned if you don't.

Dr Joan Mitchell, Bagbie, Carsluith, Newton Stewart.

A tale of two city gatherings
There was an interesting contrast between two events taking place in Glasgow on Saturday. In George Square some 1500 Muslims and others not of that faith gathered peacefully to condemn the recent terrorist acts in Glasgow and London, and pledged to co-operate with the police and stand united to root out the extremists and ensure Britain's safety.

Meanwhile, some 10,000 of a different religion, or perhaps none, disrupted the centre of Glasgow and caused great inconvenience to ordinary citizens, while marching to celebrate a battle that took place in another country more than 300 years ago. Hundreds of police were on duty to patrol the march and deal with unruly followers, and more than 60 arrests were made.

What conclusions should we draw from these two demonstrations?

Iain A D Mann, 7 Kelvin Court, Glasgow.

Youngsters in limbo
Bailie David MacDonald is quite right to complain that people aged 16 and 17 live in a limbo. They are treated as criminally liable citizens and can marry or join the armed forces and yet they are denied the vote. In primitive societies it was common for young men and women to become recognised as adults through some big ceremony of passage. For all our modern sophistication we have lost sight of that clarity we once had in welcoming youngsters into adulthood.

We need a single age when you can drink, vote, smoke or go live in Katmandu if you want to provided you obey the law. In more inspired times our leadership may even send the young "graduates" a congratulatory pack to enhance a sense of membership and belonging.

Allan MacKenzie, 42 Union Road, Inverness.

Popular mandate
Sandy Gemmill (letters, July 6), is right to show that the answers to some political questions can have highly complex implications and it may be better to leave the West Lothian Question unanswered. There are many things in law and politics that do not follow a logical course and, unlike physics, we do not have laboratory experiment as a court of last resort. In politics and law, however, we are dealing with the most unpredictable of things: human behaviour.

When a Prime Minister changes between elections it is alleged there is no mandate and there should be a General Election. When did a Prime Minister ever have a popular mandate? None of the landslide Prime Ministers - Blair, Thatcher and Attlee - had such mandates.

In our system a Prime Minister cannot have a popular mandate without constitutional change. I have voted in every General Election since the Second World War but no name on any of my ballot papers ever turned out to be a PM. I have had no individual say on the occupant of that office. In fact, the only popular mandate any PM ever has is from constituency electors.

If Gordon Brown's assumption of office is sufficiently important to call for a General Election, it must be one with a difference, for it is not right to elect every MP when only one job has changed. We must vote directly for the occupant, otherwise there would still be no popular mandate, and, for election to that office, we need other candidates. I assume there would only be one from Labour, for it has recently settled that issue. We could finish up with a popularly mandated PM with minority support: a presidential system in all but name.

Those who call for such an election - when they did not do so when their party was in power - do it, not for more democracy, but for possible political advantage, which is so transparent that cynicism is not necessary.

Chris Parton, 40 Bellshill Road, Uddingston.