SCOTTISH universities are being "Anglicised" under controversial changes to the way they are run, a former leader of the SNP has warned.

Gordon Wilson, who led the SNP from 1979 to 1990, said the Scottish Government had got "the wrong end of the stick" on the reforms and should scrap them.

The attack came as the Higher Education Governance (Scotland) Bill passes through the Scottish Parliament.

Last month, ministers backtracked over some of the new laws amid fears they would lead to greater ministerial interference in the sector.

However, there is still confusion over plans to introduce new paid, elected chairs of universities' powerful ruling Courts because Scotland's ancient institutions already have elected rectors who chair Court.

Mr Wilson said: "The SNP Government has got the wrong end of the stick in its proposals to reform the governance of Scotland’s universities.

"Of course, it is facing an organised campaign to retrench existing power structures, but that does not mean its proposals to have elected chairs of university Courts are right.

"In fact, it is sad to see the SNP Anglicising Scottish universities through its replacement of rectors in favour of paid chairmen of university Courts - it should take the opportunity to do something more constructive as change is necessary."

The intervention comes just a day after the chairs of Scotland 18 universities and higher education institutions wrote an open letter to The Herald arguing that the moves to make their position an elected post would have put them off applying.

Mr Wilson stressed that ministers were right to pursue reform, but suggested as much as half of the membership of Court should be elected - with a chair then appointed by the Court itself.

In particular, he wants to see the existing role of rector extended to all universities and is opposed to the payment of chairs stating: "The best ones will accept the duties as part of public service."

He added: "University Courts are largely self-perpetuating oligarchies where vested interests of staff and students and appointed lay representatives control the final decisions.

"Far from having any power, an inexperienced person elected as chair would not have the knowledge to counter the power of an administration as his or her term was coming to an end."

However, Emily Beever, NUS Scotland women’s officer, said elected chairs presented a "great opportunity" to increase democracy and diversity of university leadership.

She said: "We would still want to see greater clarity on the role of any pre-selection process for election candidates, and assurances that staff and students won’t be denied a choice of candidates as a result of an opaque and management dominated process.

"Universities have nothing to fear from an elected chair and everything to gain, with someone who has the backing and support of students and staff, and can provide genuine critical friendship to university management."

A Scottish Government spokesman said: “The Higher Education Governance Bill aims to ensure that the entire campus community has a say on how our higher education institutions are governed. We have worked closely with stakeholders, including the Chairs group, over the course of the Bill’s development, and continue to listen to their views which we are familiar with.

“We think that the post of senior lay member, who performs the key role of chair on the governing bodies of our institutions, should be an elected one. This role is pivotal in the leadership of all Scottish institutions, and all staff and students should have their say in appointing the best candidate for the role.”

The origins of the Bill date back to 2011 when a number of universities, including Glasgow and Strathclyde, brought forward course cuts.

Unions felt consultations with staff and students were rudimentary and decisions were motivated by economic considerations rather than academic ones.

There have also been long-running concerns over the spiralling salaries of principals and the increasing autonomy of their management teams.