All places on the programme are free, except the cost of travel to and from the venue.
The event will include debate on issues of the day, dialogue with guest speakers, and the presentation by each delegate of a short paper on a subject of their own choice.
If you are eligible for the programme and interested in taking part, or know anyone who might be interested, please contact Islay McLeod on her usual email address:
islay@scottishreview.net
and she will send you further details.
I’m warming to the Scottish Review as a source of serious and sensible Scottish writing, it’s a good product I always go to immediately when it pops into my inbox. But is there any way you might be able to nudge some of your contributors into eschewing the use of ‘His Eckness’ and other such monikers? My objection isn’t, I hope, partisan but to do with the quality of writing in your otherwise excellent publication. If it were original or witty, it might work. But, frankly, it is usually juvenile and dull.
Not being a journalist or writer, I don’t know about the editorial sensibilities that might make having ‘a word to the wise’ simply a laughable notion. I’m sure someone of Kenneth Roy’s experience could find a way.
Jim Fraser
Kenneth Roy replies: Sadly, on the odd occasion that I attempt to correct or influence the people who write for this publication, it always leads to trouble.
Maxwell MacLeod’s shock horror piece (19 March) about the threat of Scottish lecky being boycotted by those dastardly Sassenachs post-independence mentioned Ed Davey’s inaccurate use of the term
‘United Kingdom’ in that epoch. I recently read a blog containing the misprint ‘Un-tied Kingdom’. Perhaps that should be the official description in the event of a rupture.
Petitions seem in vogue now on Scottish Review. Maybe we should start one to promote this term or even a poll to find the best alternative.
Bill Fraser
Kenneth Roy replies: That seems to be all the Frasers for this edition.
This photograph was taken at a demonstration outside the SNP conference in Elgin a couple of years ago. You will see from the placard the question of whether or not England (or anyone) would buy Mr Salmond’s over-priced electricity was already on the minds of many. Independence or not, the rest of the UK is not responsible for ensuring that the expensive energy produced from wind farms is purchased. I doubt England will be buying anything from Ireland. It will keep the lights on by puchasing cheaper nuclear from France. This is what makes the whole green energy thing one big, expensive and very bad joke.
Denise Davis
Dick Mungin (19 March) suggests that a No vote will usher in a new, grown-up Scotland that will be able to debate who and what it wants to be. In effect, voting No will really be voting Yes for a better Scotland. Truly worthy of Sir Humphrey. May I just ask one thing? Why has it taken a nationalist government and an impending independence referendum to bring into focus the idea that Scotland could and should be better than it is now? Me, I like to keep things simple. Yes, for a better Scotland, is a Yes. No, for the status quo or worse, is a No. Voting No, which is really a Yes, I don’t believe is an option on the ballot paper.
Judith Jaafar
The Cafe is our readers’ forum. Send your contribution to islay@scottishreview.net
