Universities need to start living within their means

It looks to me personally that our universities are pleading poverty when they should be living within their means. I suggest they are really after control of the whole tertiary budget rather than join forces harmoniously with Further Education colleges with equal status and esteem. I am certain that the idea of universities giving up their independence and becoming part of a national standardised and coherent tertiary network is far from the thoughts of universities.

Bill Brown, Milngavie.

The value of language learning

I HAVE read the heated exchanges in your columns on the topic of Gaelic (Letters, July 25, 30 and August 1) and I feel like the debate is not well set: some people do not know what learning and speaking languages other than English means. Because I think that is exactly the issue: too many people who are against Gaelic only speak English.

I am Italian and learning other languages has incredibly enriched my understanding of my native tongue. After moving to Scotland I decided to start learning Gaelic, one of the very few Celtic languages surviving the Roman Empire. That of Gaelic is therefore a frail heritage which is once more endangered by an imperialistic attitude.

English is, and will be for the foreseeable future, Scotland's main language. In time it has become entrenched in the Scottish culture, thanks to political alliances and forced assimilation. This is not new, nor unique to Scotland: my own language would have been Milanese, a language related but not mutually intelligible with Italian, had it not been wiped out almost completely because it was a supposedly “inferior” language nobody spoke any more.

And yet, losing that language means losing a heritage that lasted over a thousand years, a bit of my identity, and a way of thinking and seeing the world, too. That heritage is now almost completely lost: once the last few native speakers die, it will be gone, and the world will be poorer for it. The same should not happen to Gaelic.

I recently had a heated discussion with an acquaintance of mine. He repeated all the usual talking points against Gaelic, including that you could instead learn another, more useful language. Funnily enough, he is an English monolingual who has never done so. It's a condition which seems to be rife among those opposed to Gaelic: they only speak English and see no point in learning another language. The reality is that they feel scared and uncomfortable. But trying to suppress Gaelic won't change this, and by not taking the challenge of learning languages, these people are losing out on a wider, deeper understanding of the world, which includes their own language: English.

In his letter (July 25), Stan Hogarth says that by learning Gaelic "we'd be speaking to ourselves, again". But those who are against Gaelic appear to do exactly that: just speak to themselves, without ever looking at how beautifully rich and varied the world is outside of the walls of English. "Ambulances, police cars, road signs all written in a foreign (to 99% of us) tongue. What is the point?", asks the reader. The point is to make you think, however uncomfortable (and possibly unusual) that might be. But let me say this: if all you can think of is that something unfamiliar must be negative, I wonder whether you actually want to spend your holidays abroad - gasp! - in unfamiliar Italy, Spain, or France. You might find they don't speak English.

Riccardo Robecchi, Glasgow.

A pair of young Gaelic learners (Image: Newsquest)

Advantages of road over rail

THE first time I read the letter by Robin M Brown (July 31), I was nodding my head in agreement as he wrote: "With an electrified railway line running parallel to this route, could this freight traffic not be consolidated onto one or two train loads?"

However, when I re-read the letter the following day, what flashed through my mind was the thought "What was Mr Brown doing driving on the motorway with an electrified railway line running parallel to this route, when he could have been doing productive work, or simply relaxing?"

I often take the train for precisely these reasons. Nonetheless, even a rail enthusiast like me has to admit that road transport has one major advantage: its sheer flexibility.

READ MORE: We have better things to spend money on than propping up Gaelic

READ MORE: Beware: Labour will be coming for all our universal benefits

The parcel delivery and logistics companies to which Mr Brown refer probably have multiple depots spread across the UK, and the frequent stopping at intermediate points to unload, and perhaps take on, other goods would soon nullify the rail speed advantage. After all, I think it was precisely that which killed off the traditional mixed goods trains in the 1950s, and led to the development of the Freightliner concept.

In any case, there would still be the need for road transport to move goods to and from the rail depot.

If historical precedent is anything to go by, Mr Brown should be careful for what he wishes.

A couple of hundred years ago, as the bill to authorise construction of the Liverpool to Manchester Railway was passing through Parliament, some of the principal objectors included the canal proprietors and carters, who feared loss of traffic to the railway.

Their objections counted for naught, and the railway was duly constructed. However, it generated so much additional business that, in the end, more carters were needed to carry the increased traffic generated at the termini and intermediate stations.

Christopher W Ide, Waterfoot.

Quick, here's an idea for veggies

ANY time I ask vegetarians why there isn't a major fast food outlet specifically for vegetarians, they don't seem to know.

There's clearly a market for vegetarian fast food if people are ordering it from McDonalds, KFC and Burger King.

I'm as thick as two planks, yet even I can see that a meat-free, fast food outlet offering quick service and a healthier lifestyle for people would make a fortune.

Stephen McCarthy, Glasgow.