Glasgow museums' Italian collections to tour China
The plan is for the first venue, in Shenzhen, to display the items from September this year before they are shown 'in five or six other cities'.
READ MORE: Winners announced for oldest book prize in the UK
They would return to Glasgow in 2028 and could then be displayed in Kelvingrove Museum. The council's city administration committee will be asked to approve the plan on Thursday.
'With a new international strategy, regular trade missions, links between the city's universities, businesses and China and the targeting of a direct air route into the city, the timing to use an exhibition as cultural exchange and the backdrop for other initiatives is now,' a council report states.
The report, which is set to be presented by Bailie Annette Christie, SNP, the city convener for culture, sport and international relations, adds the tour will 'leverage more visibility for the city, its businesses, visitor economy, cultural significance and academic institutions'.
This could result in 'more awareness of Glasgow in a number of cities across China', it states. Glasgow Life, the council's culture and leisure arm, which Bailie Christie chairs, plans to work with partners across the city to 'take advantage' of the exhibition.
The report states Glasgow Airport is targeting a direct China to Glasgow air route to complement two direct flights per week — four in summer — between Edinburgh and Beijing.
Titian's Christ and the Adulteress is another famed Italian painting currently residing in Glasgow that could be headed on the road (Image: Glasgow Museums)
Ideas to promote the tour include using the University of Glasgow's networks, as it has 9,000 Chinese students as well as alumni who now work in China.
Connections through Glasgow's chamber of commerce, which aims to attract inward investment from businesses in Beijing and Shanghai, will also be explored.
It is hoped that the exhibition will mean Glasgow contributes to the Scottish Government's drive to 'deepen economic, social and cultural ties with China'.
Research by the UK tourist board, VisitBritain, has found Chinese people associate Britain highly with museums, opera and films, the council's report adds.
Alongside 33 paintings, the collection includes examples of ceramics, glass, marble sculpture, textile, arms and armour. To promote Glasgow, there would be information about the city within the exhibition.
An exhibition of the city's Italian art went on tour to the United States in 2013 and all but one of the paintings and objects have been in storage since.
READ MORE: Met Police silent after unlawful seizure of pro-Palestine journalist's property
Paintings which were shown in America included Titian's 'Christ and the Adulteress' and Sandro Botticelli's 'The Annunciation', which once hung in the Church of St Barnabas in Florence.
A minimum of three tour venues are needed for the exhibition to be economically viable. Glasgow Life would be working with NOMAD Exhibitions on the tour, which has estimated around 100,000 visitors per venue.
A three-way agreement with NOMAD and Sun Pavilion Culture and Technology Co, which helps develop exhibitions, would be signed, outlining the responsibilities of each partner. Glasgow Life is expected to receive a fee from each of the host museums in China.
In 2023, China was Scotland's fifth largest long-haul international market by number of visits, and fourth by number of nights and expenditure.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Will the US dodge a recession? Economist weighs in on Trump policies
He added, "It's not yet stagflation but it's edging that way." Stagflation is an economy characterized by high inflation, slow or stagnant growth and high unemployment - an unusual and toxic cocktail. Typically, a sluggish economy leads to low inflation, allowing the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates to stimulate more borrowing and activity. Will the Fed lower rates in September? The Fed, however, faces a dilemma because lowering rates to bolster a softening labor market could further drive up inflation. Consumer price increases generally have eased substantially after a pandemic-related spike but recently edged higher, in part because of Trump's sweeping import levies. His policies are imposing countervailing forces on the economy. Tax cuts and increased spending on border security and defense are set to juice growth. But those positive catalysts are expected to be more than offset by the tariffs, a historic immigration crackdown, layoffs of hundreds of thousands of federal workers and big cuts to social services programs such as Medicaid and food stamps, Begley said. During Trump's presidential race against former Vice President Kamala Harris last year, Moody's, among other research firms, predicted Trump's economic blueprint would spark a recession by mid-2025. Moody's has updated its forecast in part because the contours of his plan recently have become more clearly defined, Begley said. "We have a better view where things are going," he said. What tariffs has Trump imposed? For example, high double-digit tariffs are in place for steel and aluminum, foreign cars and Chinese imports. And the White House has reached deals with trading partners such as Japan, South Korea, Vietnam and the UK that set tariffs at 10% to 20%. Trump's deportations and constraints on Southern border crossings are well under way. And his huge budget bill, which he signed into law on July 4, expanded his 2017 tax cuts, beefed up military and border security outlays, and slashed some entitlement spending. How is the economy doing under Trump? All told, Moody's projects Trump's policies will reduce economic growth by an average 0.4 percentage points annually - nearly half a point - during his term. That would leave the economy expanding an average 1.7% annually over the four years, with growth bottoming at 1.4% next year and peaking at 2.2% in 2028. The economy grew at an annual rate of 1.2% the first half of 2025. It's projected to grow at slightly less than a 1% pace in the second half, according to economists surveyed by Wolters Kluwer Blue Chip Economic Indicators. By contrast, the economy averaged 2.3% growth the decade after the Great Recession of 2007-2009 and 3.5% during former president Joe Biden's term. The latter, however, included unusually strong gains as the nation emerged from the pandemic recession. In 2024, Biden's last year in office, the economy grew a healthy 2.8%. Growth had been expected to downshift no matter who won the 2024 election as a post-COVID-19 surge in consumer demand petered out, Americans depleted government pandemic aid and other government stimulus measures faded. But by the end of Trump's term in 2028, the economy will be 1.3% smaller than if his policies had not been enacted, Begley wrote in a report. Also, the unemployment rate is expected to peak at 4.7% in 2027 before falling to 4.4% by the time Trump leaves office. Without his policies, unemployment would broadly hold steady at about 4% and there would be about 885,000 additional jobs, Moody's said. Is inflation ever going to go down? Trump's policies similarly are poised to push up inflation by an average of nearly half a percentage point a year. That would leave annual inflation averaging 2.6% during Trump's term and peaking at 3.1% in 2026, based on the Commerce Department's personal consumption expenditures price index. Inflation then would decline and nearly reach the Fed's 2% goal in 2028, the last year of his term. Absent the president's policies, inflation would achieve the Fed's target next year, Begley's analysis shows. Are tariffs contributing to inflation? Tariffs, by far, represent both the biggest drag on growth and the largest contributor to inflation, Begley said. Companies are expected to pass most of the costs of the duties to consumers, driving up prices. And that's expected to sap their buying power and reduce consumption, which makes up 70% of economic activity. Without the tariffs, the net effects of Trump's policies on growth would be slightly positive, Begley said. The benefits of tax cuts and increased defense and border spending would outweigh the toll taken by the immigration crackdown, federal layoffs and cutbacks to Medicaid and food stamps, he said. What are the negative effects of deportations? Another big hit comes from the deportations. Like the tariffs, the immigration crackdown is projected to both curtail growth and boost inflation. A reduced supply of workers in industries such as construction, agriculture and hospitality is expected to drive up wages and prices. And a smaller population of immigrants means less consumer spending. Here's why Moody's forecast of the effects of Trump's policies is less dire than it was before he took office: Less retaliation from tariffs Although Trump's tariffs are higher than anticipated, Moody's expected more significant retaliation from foreign countries that would batter U.S. manufacturers' exports. At least so far, those nations have taken a more restrained approach. Fewer deportations than expected Moody's figured the Trump administration would seek to deport about 1 million immigrants who lack permanent legal status each year. But Begley said that has proven logistically challenging. Goldman Sachs estimates monthly deportations have averaged an annualized pace of about 600,000. Tax cuts give middle-class Americans more spending money Although Trump vowed during his campaign to eliminate taxes on tips and overtime, Moody's didn't necessarily expect him to follow through. The budget bill, however, scraps taxes on tips up to $25,000 a year and over time up to $12,500.
Glasgow Times
an hour ago
- Glasgow Times
Plans for 1400 new homes in Cumbernauld take step forward
The development, intended for a site on the eastern edge of the town, is one of the council's community growth area initiatives which are part of the North Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2022. Some 20% of the housing would be designated for the affordable housing sector. Other features of the development include new or upgraded road and footpath access, shops, and play areas with significant amounts of existing woodland to be retained. The committee was not unanimous as Councillor Adam Smith (SNP, Cumbernauld East) moved against granting planning permission. He said the community growth area sites has experienced problems with polluted water courses, flooding and disruption from road closures. Councillor Smith also said that he was under the impression the required amount of affordable housing was 25% rather than 20, although he was advised the proposed amount was in keeping with current policy. READ MORE: Major plans revealed to close two police stations Other members expressed concern over the impact on education and health services, particularly given the current shortage of GPs. Councillor Smith then tabled to refuse on the grounds that the proposed £5.6 million contribution to enhance education provision in the area was inadequate, but this was outvoted 17-3 by the committee in favour of granting the application in principle and subject to a list of conditions. The report on the proposals also gave details of 72 representations received during public consultation, of which 71 were objections and one was in support. Among the objectors were Carbrain and Hillcrest Community Council, which cited environmental damage and potential impact on society, local services and infrastructure and community group People Opposing Palacerigg Planning Application. In addition to the concerns raised by the community council, objectors mentioned loss of greenbelt, traffic and road safety, noise and loss of privacy, and drainage while also claiming insufficient effort had been made to engage with the public about the proposals. The letter of support referred to safe pedestrian links, including through the industrial area to the train station and town centre, traffic control, active travel including safe routes to school and the phased approach to the development. The report responded to the other points of objection, saying the site was not designated greenbelt, the proposals included several improvements to travel networks, and other issues could be adequately addressed through the conditions attached to planning permission. The report also highlighted the job creation aspect of the development which is expected to see a monthly average of 147 people employed during construction, predominantly residents of North Lanarkshire.
The Herald Scotland
3 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Reeves did not discuss Grangemouth during Ineos meeting
Sir Jim, who is ranked seventh on the Sunday Times Rich List and is reportedly worth over £17 billion, was among several 'external stakeholders' present at the meeting, understood to have taken place on Monday April 8. The Grangemouth refinery ceased processing crude oil on Monday April 29. READ MORE: The SNP called the revelation 'damning', while the GMB described it as an 'inexplicable abdication of responsibility'. Petroineos, the joint venture between Ineos and PetroChina that owns the 100-year-old site, first announced plans to close the facility in November 2023. The company said it was losing £385,000 a day, and that its future as an import terminal would 'require significantly fewer people to operate', with a 'net reduction of approximately 400 roles over the next two years'. It was the last oil refinery operating north of the Border. In recent months, hundreds of workers have taken voluntary redundancy, while a number of compulsory redundancies have also been made. A report commissioned by the Scottish and UK governments — known as Project Willow — was tasked with charting a low-carbon future for the site. But it concluded that around £3.5 billion in private investment would be needed. Grangemouth stopped refining at the end of April (Image: Jeff Mitchell/Getty) As well as the impact on local jobs, the closure has also hit the economy. Recent figures from the Scottish Government show GDP growth fell by 0.4% in the three months to May — wiping out the 0.4% increase seen in the first quarter of the year. In May alone, GDP contracted by 0.2%, following a 0.1% boost the previous month. The largest drop was seen in the manufacturing sector, which was badly affected by the refinery's closure. Output fell by 4.1% that month. In response to an FOI submitted by the SNP, UK Government officials initially refused to disclose details of the meeting, before finally conceding that 'a meeting did take place in April 2025 at which the Chancellor and Sir Jim Ratcliffe were present'. However, they confirmed: 'The threatened closure of the Grangemouth refinery was not discussed at that meeting.' The Treasury said its obligations under the Freedom of Information Act meant it was unable to say who else was present. SNP energy spokesperson Graham Leadbitter said the episode demonstrated a lack of political will from the UK Government when it came to protecting Grangemouth, especially compared to the nationalisation of the Scunthorpe steel plant, the support for a refinery in Lincolnshire, and the £100 billion spent on nuclear energy in England. He said: 'This is a damning revelation. Scots will be disgusted to learn that just days before the Grangemouth doors slammed shut, Rachel Reeves held a meeting with the owner, Sir Jim Ratcliffe, yet didn't even bother to mention the refinery. 'The UK Government only conceded the information after significant pressure, which speaks volumes about how desperate they were to keep this under wraps. 'That's because the truth is that never mind being an afterthought, the fact the Labour Government didn't even think it worthwhile to bring up such a critical issue to Scottish jobs shows Scotland doesn't even register as a thought at all. 'A steel plant in Scunthorpe was nationalised, a refinery in Lincolnshire was bailed out, and £100bn is found for English nuclear power plants — yet when it came to a Scottish refinery the UK Labour Government didn't lift a finger to keep it in operation. "That tells Scots all they need to know about Westminster and where Scotland lies in its priorities. 'It is this disregard for Scottish industry that leaves a growing number of Scots to wonder just how long we stay tied to this so-called Union of Equals, because only with independence can we prioritise Scottish jobs, Scottish growth and Scotland's people.' Robert Deavy, a senior organiser with GMB Scotland, representing contractors at the site, said: 'In the months and years leading to its needless closure, the public support of ministers on both sides of the Border did nothing to save Grangemouth. 'Now we discover that despite all the warm words in public, in private, the Chancellor did not even think it worth raising with the owner. 'Her silence only confirms the lack of political will or even interest in protecting our industrial infrastructure and all the jobs and communities it supports. 'It beggars belief that Rachel Reeves did not discuss Grangemouth with Jim Ratcliffe weeks before he pulled the shutters down but thought it worth asking for his help to formulate government policy? 'The Chancellor would be far better asking for guidance from the workers, families and communities shattered by this avoidable closure.' The Treasury said the meeting in question was regarding a different issue and that the Chancellor has had "extensive engagement" on the future of Grangemouth. They also pointed to the £100 million funding package to "secure a just transition for the Grangemouth workforce and community," and the Prime Minister's promise to allocate £200m from the National Wealth Fund to "grasp the opportunities" of Grangemouth. A UK Government spokesperson told The Herald on Sunday: "This Government recognises Scotland's vital role in the UK economy, with the Chancellor delivering a record settlement in the Spending Review, the largest in real terms since devolution in 1998. "We are investing millions of pounds in Scotland's defence and clean energy industries, securing tens of thousands of jobs, and we have already announced a £300m package to secure a just transition for Grangemouth workers and secure the long-term future of the site." Ineos declined to comment. Sir Jim is Manchester United's minority owner (Image: PA/Adam Davy) Earlier this year it emerged it took First Minister John Swinney more than two months to secure a meeting with Sir Jim. According to investigative website The Ferret, the two men finally spoke via video call on April 25, after Mr Swinney had written to the Ineos chair requesting a meeting at a 'very early opportunity' to discuss 'a way forward that protects employment at Grangemouth'. Most of the meeting's details remain redacted, but partial minutes show Ineos arguing the refinery was 'aged and loss making', and Sir Jim expressing 'concern about carbon taxes and energy costs'. The Scottish and UK governments jointly funded the £1.5 million Project Willow feasibility study, which was carried out by Ernst & Young and commissioned by Petroineos to assess the future of the site. READ MORE Last month, UK energy minister Michael Shanks said there was a 'certain inevitability' that Grangemouth would close by the time Labour came to power. Appearing before the Scottish Affairs Committee in the Commons, he described Grangemouth currently as a 'hugely investable opportunity' for businesses. Asked whether the UK Government considered bringing Grangemouth into public ownership, Mr Shanks told MPs: 'I think it is fair to say we didn't take any option off the table and we did look at a whole series of options. 'But firstly, the Government's not in the business of nationalising failing businesses. 'That is difficult to say, but it is the reality that a business that's losing tens of millions of pounds, it can't be nationalised with the public facing the cost of that. 'That's the same position we're in with the Prax Lindsey refinery (North Lincolnshire), and it's the same position with Grangemouth.' Mr Shanks said Labour 'moved every possible option forward' to do what it could to save the refinery. He added: 'The truth is, we were far too far down the line with the Grangemouth process to really change the outcome and as regrettable as that is — and it genuinely is, and I've met the workers on a number of occasions, I know how significant the impact is on them and their families — there was a certain inevitability about the outcome by the point in which we came into Government.'
