I am a student on an exchange in the United States and would like to take this opportunity to comment on the proposal to raise the drinking age in Scotland.

In the US, the age to drink legally is 21. However, it is naive to assume that there is no drinking problem. Students at university attend fraternity and house parties where binge drinking is the norm. The problem that exists with this American culture is the lack of protection that is afforded by being in a bar or nightclub. In addition, the house parties require transport and are a prominent reason why so many American students drink and drive. There were more than 17,941 deaths in the US in 2006 due to "alcohol-related" collisions, compared to 550 in the UK.

Raising the drinking age treats the adults like children; it assumes that we are unable to drink socially and responsibly. So I would be able to vote, stand for parliament, marry, smoke, but not to drink? I would be deemed responsible enough to raise a child but not to enter a nightclub? It appears illogical for members of parliament to justify introducing a proposal using a country where the problems are far greater than exist here. If a comparative analysis is being used, then Europe appears to have a workable solution: it does not seek to criminalise alcohol but promotes it from a young age.

I cannot deny the existence of the drinking culture in Scotland, but raising the drinking age is an ill-informed and unworkable solution.

James Wallace, 1034 Clayton Lane, Austin, Texas.

I find myself becoming increasingly uneasy as I follow developments in the debate between retailers and the Scottish Government, or, to be more precise, Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill, on the subject of policy related to alcohol sales and irresponsible consumption in Scotland.

It appears to me that the Justice Secretary is becoming increasingly belligerent in his statements of intent on this topic.

Mr MacAskill appears to have already diagnosed the problem and to have convinced himself that the solution lies in the area of pricing policy.

The retailers are deemed to be the principal villains of the piece and he has embarked on a crusade to ensure that he, and not the retailers, will determine the price of alcohol. The messianic zeal displayed by Mr MacAskill is worryingly reminiscent of the unflinching self-belief of our unlamented former Prime Minister in relation to a range of issues.

If the disastrous Blair premiership taught us anything, it was surely that there is no place in government for zealots. Cool heads and rational thought are more likely to bring about successful solutions.

Unfortunately, those are qualities which Mr MacAskill appears not to possess.

Hopefully, the First Minister will soon recognise the damage Mr MacAskill might inflict on the image of the SNP, and decide that the time has come to rein him in.

John Kelly, 65 Hunter Road, Milngavie, Glasgow.