A nation’s constitutional and political arrangement has to be particularly peculiar if it is not even clear who should and should not speak for its citizens in a national and/or international context.

Perhaps it is a regular problem across the world with Councillors, Members of Parliament, Senators, Governors, Mayors, Prime Ministers and Presidents all jostling to speak up for their part of the planet and, consequently, perhaps I should not be too concerned that Scotland seems to regularly face this problem. However, concerned I am and the latest talking point in this ongoing debate stems from the sad news that a Scottish aid worker, Linda Norgrove, has been killed in Afghanistan.

Tributes have been made by David Cameron, Alex Salmond, William Hague and U.S. General David Petraeus, all highlighting the courageous nature Linda possessed and the valuable contribution of her work. However, for Fraser Nelson at The Spectator, this collection of statements was one too many as the First Minister of Scotland should “confine his comments to the provision of public services”.

It seems to be a poorly timed and somewhat crass observation from the right-wing journalist and I daresay one that would not have been made if Boris Johnson was publicly regretting the death of a Londoner but, regrettable context to one side, the central thrust of Fraser’s point deserves consideration. Who is it that speaks for Scotland?

In quickly trying to research a decent answer to this question I noted that it is something that I have already considered in the not so distant past. There was no equivocal answer to the question of who would meet Barack Obama were the U.S. President to land at a Scottish airport on a UK visit but Alex Salmond was on hand to meet the Pope during the recent state visit and that did not seem to cause much controversy, despite the First Minister’s role extending beyond the confines of the provision of public services as Nelson’s Column would have it.

The appropriateness of speaking on behalf of a nation is of course dependent upon the circumstances. Most Scots agree that Kenny MacAskill is the most appropriate person to make decisions on Scotland’s behalf in a legal context, even if the Prime Minister recently suggested, mistakenly, that he may be able to intervene. Similarly, in a sporting, educational, health or environment related field, a Scottish voice is reasonable as such areas are devolved.

The converse of this argument of course is that areas reserved to Westminster are ‘off-limits’ for Holyrood MSPs. Trident, for example, is unavailable to be argued for or against as it falls outside of the Scottish Parliament’s remit. Those in favour and against renewing nuclear weapons have largely ignored this philosophy and have been vocal in sharing their opinion on the matter. Others, including former First Minister Jack McConnell in a literal sense, have run away from the issue but that does not solve the problem.

Personally (and this will come as no surprise coming from a blogger) opinions should not be stifled; minds are there to be spoken. If anyone wishes to release a statement on any matter, relating to any country and inviting whatever criticism then they should be free to do so.

Fraser Nelson wishes “periods of silence” from Scotland’s First Minister, something that the Chinese State wishes from recent Nobel Peace Prize winner Liu Xiaobo. This stifling of speech is the wrong approach for any situation that sits anywhere on the range from the sad news of a Scottish person dying to the delight of a Scottish person winning Olympic Gold.

There is little doubt that Scotland’s future is up for grabs with debate ranging in varying degrees of fervour and volume between politicians, interests groups, journalists and even lowly bloggers.

Fraser Nelson wonders “how you would train yourself to see political opportunity in times of crisis”. I wonder how someone can see journalistic opportunity in the aftermath of such a sad news story. Both exploits, wherever they exist, will no doubt continue so perhaps who shouts the loudest is the best way to settle such subtle disputes.