John Swinney criticises Fringe venue over Kate Forbes row
A 'designated relax space' was made available for artists, and Summerhall said it would be 'writing robust, proactive inclusion and well-being policies that prevent this from happening again.'
Speaking to journalists about the row after an event hosted by think-tank Enlighten and Charlotte Street Partners, Mr Swinney said: 'I think there is no reason why Kate Forbes shouldn't be able to speak at any venue in Scotland.'
Further probed on the actions of Summerhall, Mr Swinney, who also appeared on Unspun Live at the Fringe, added: "I don't think that's appropriate.'
READ MORE:
Swinney rules out SNP cabinet reshuffle before 2026 election
Since the fallout, Summerhall's chief executive Sam Gough has said: "No one is banned from appearing... We have not banned anyone.'
Former SNP MP Joanna Cherry has also criticised Summerhall, the venue that hosted The Herald's Unspun Live Fringe show featuring Deputy First Minister Kate Forbes.
Ms Cherry, who attended the event, described the situation as 'shocking' and said it was symptomatic of a wider problem at the festival: 'It is also shocking that a venue in this city has effectively said that the deputy first minister of the country is not welcome there…and that staff are so coddled that they need to have a safe room provided for them when Kate did come to speak.'
Speaking at Matt Forde's Political Party show, Ms Cherry also singled out recent controversies, including the National Library of Scotland's decision to remove a collection of essays by gender-critical women from an exhibition.
Asked by Forde whether free speech is under threat in Scotland, Ms Cherry said: 'I think there are…threats to freedom of speech in Scotland and, regrettably, they have come not wholly from my political party. The Greens are certainly enthusiastically on board, the Lib Dems as well, and some people in the Labour party.'
She placed part of the blame on former First Minister Nicola Sturgeon, adding that the current First Minister 'does not have the courage to speak against it.'
Ms Cherry criticised Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar as 'missing in action' on issues of free speech, while praising Scottish Conservative leader Russell Findlay as 'pretty good' on the topic. She described Liberal Democrat leader Alex Cole-Hamilton as 'absolutely appalling' and said the Greens were 'unspeakable.'
'There is a real problem in our politics in Scotland that has seeped into our public life,' she said.
Ms Cherry condemned the National Library of Scotland for censoring a book written by feminists, lesbians, and sex abuse survivors who opposed what she called Sturgeon's 'identity politics.' She accused the librarian and board chairman of bowing to pressure from a small staff group representing an LGBT network, saying: 'I think that's shocking.'
Discussing the broader threat to free speech, Ms Cherry concluded: 'There is a real problem here that we are seeing at the festival.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
3 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Joanna Cherry could be called in Moira Salmond legal case
The former First Minister raised a compensation claim of £3million against SNP ministers almost two years ago over a flawed sexual misconduct investigation by the Scottish Government. A Holyrood committee investigated the mishandling of the complaints and also found that there were serious shortcomings. The legal case concerns possible "misfeasance" - a civil law term meaning the wrongful exercise of lawful authority - by officials while Nicola Sturgeon was First Minister and was paused following Mr Salmond's sudden death in October last year. READ MORE: On Sunday, it emerged that Mrs Salmond's resolve to proceed with the case was strengthened by attacks on her late husband in Ms Sturgeon's memoirs, Frankly, published last week. Writing on X, Ms Cherry, who was a close ally of Mr Salmond and is a prominent critic of Ms Sturgeon, welcomed the report that the case is to resume. "It's important that this action continues," wrote the former SNP MP on X. "Misfeasance in public office is a very serious matter. The Scottish Parliament inquiry was hamstrung and partisan politicians had the wool pulled over their eyes. A court of law will be very different." Ms Cherry revealed last week that she is writing a book about her time in frontline politics when Ms Sturgeon was First Minister. The manuscript is due to be completed this autumn with the book due to be published next year. Referring to Ms Sturgeon's government's policies on gender self-declaration, which she opposed, she wrote: "I have a lot more to say about this in the book I'm currently writing although my take is slightly different." She later continued: "In her political afterlife as in her political life Nicola evades scrutiny. For those hoping to understand better what was really going on behind the scenes during her leadership, this memoir will disappoint. It will be left to others to spill the beans." A family friend told the Sunday Mail that Mrs Salmond was "upset and angered by the continued attempts to smear Alex in the book" with "ridiculous and inaccurate" allegations. "It has only strengthened her resolve to make sure the full truth comes out and Alex's name is cleared," they told the paper. Now executor of Mr Salmond's estate, his widow has assembled a legal team including a KC and two junior counsel and has raised money to fund the case. The friend added: "Her case against the government is now live, the legal team is in place, the finance in place and this will be going ahead, no question of that. "Alex may not be here to defend himself but his family are determined to stand up to those who continue to attack him." Ms Sturgeon's book includes strongly disputed claims Mr Salmond opposed gay marriage, failed to read the 650-page independence white paper and that he or an aide acting on his behalf may have been responsible for the leak to the Daily Record about the Scottish Government investigation into complaints against him. She also denied there had been any "conspiracy" to ruin Mr Salmond's reputation - a claim the former Alba Party leader maintained until his death at the age of 69. Ms Sturgeon said her former mentor "would have rather destroyed the SNP than see it succeed without him". She also claimed he "impugned the integrity of the institutions at the heart of Scottish democracy - government, police, Crown Office", adding: "He was prepared to traumatise, time and again, the women at the centre of it all." Ms Sturgeon and Mr Salmond fell out dramatically in 2018 after it emerged her government had investigated misconduct complaints made against him by two female civil servants. Mr Salmond had the probe struck down at the Court of Session as unfair, unlawful and "tainted by apparent bias", and was awarded £512,000 in legal costs. He was later cleared of 13 sexual assault charges at the High Court in Edinburgh in 2020. He launched the Alba Party as a rival to the SNP a year later. The former First Minister, who admitted he could have behaved better towards women on occasions, had always denied any criminality. He sued the Scottish Government in November 2023 alleging there had been misfeasance by various civil servants under Ms Sturgeon and sought damages of around £3million. Promising a "day of reckoning", he said at the time: "Not one person has been held accountable. With this court action that evasion of responsibility ends." In a Court of Session hearing last August, Mr Salmond's lawyer said the police were probing whether one senior civil servant "gave a false statement under oath" to a Holyrood inquiry that was probing how the sexual harassment claims were handled. The civil action was frozen when Mr Salmond suffered a fatal heart attack in North Macedonia. But Mrs Salmond's legal team is now reactivating proceedings. A spokesman for the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service told The Herald that the case had been "sisted" until 19 September. He added: "Following this date the parties would advise the court, if they are ready to proceed or if they are requesting a further sist to the case." The Scottish Government has previously vowed to defend itself "robustly" in court. Last night a Scottish Government spokeswoman said: 'It would not be appropriate to comment on live litigation.' The SNP was approached for comment.
The National
3 hours ago
- The National
Scotland is wealthy but GERS makes it look poor. Time for a rethink
It's all predictable. Performative. Boring. And utterly, utterly bogus. Self-evidently, Scotland is a wealthy country with a sophisticated economy and well-educated workforce. If Scotland can't be independent on the grounds of economics, then someone has clearly forgotten to tell all the other independent countries without a fraction of our advantages or per capita wealth that they can't be independent either – and that they surely must come to their senses immediately. READ MORE: SNP must not act as bystanders in run-up to next year's election But then, any meaningful debate about the economics of independence has never been about whether we could, but rather about whether we should. Which is why it suits Unionists to ignore the political and economic imbalances of the UK to try to keep the independence debate mired in the narrowness of a GERS publication which, in its present form, is of no real use to anyone interested in a meaningful, good-faith discussion about the Scottish economy. For despite the no doubt best efforts of the civil servants involved in producing it, all GERS really offers is a distorted view in the rear-view mirror, based on the difference between two very large numbers, each of which rely to a very large extent on estimates and assumptions rather than cold, hard outturn figures. If you were foolish enough to try to use GERS as a proxy for independence, then there are some big problems with that. Since it allocates large amounts of reserved UK expenditure to Scotland, it immediately carries with it the assumption that an independent Scottish Government would wish to continue with certain spending lines – like expenditure on nuclear weapons, for instance. Clearly, not even the most rabidly pro-Trident Scottish Unionist could seriously anticipate that this would ever be the case. A more serious flaw arises when it comes to spending under the control of the UK Government. GERS allocates a spend 'for' Scotland, as opposed to providing a record of what's actually spent 'in' Scotland. This means that large tracts of the defence budget, or the wages and taxes of tens of thousands of civil servants in London and the South-East of England, all get allocated on a population share to Scotland, on the grounds that this spend takes place for our benefit too. READ MORE: Scottish city among 'best places in the world' for young people to live The result is that Scotland is allocated costs of activity supposedly for its benefit, while missing out on higher tax revenues that would exist if such government work were actually located and employed in Scotland. And all of this is – remember – a snapshot of one year in the past, rather than any kind of dynamic look forwards. Nevertheless, the vested interest in portraying GERS as showing that a Scotland free of Whitehall's apron strings would immediately have higher taxes, poorer services, a plague of boils and locusts, or perhaps all at the same time (with even worse to come), still persists. Last year, I mused about why Alex Salmond might have kept GERS in place after he became First Minister. I concluded that since the figures at the time were so advantageous for Scotland relative to the rest of the UK, it must have suited him in that pre-referendum stage to turn those figures right back on those who had always previously tried to deploy them against independence. Even if so, it's surely now past time to give GERS a decent burial – or at least to turn it into something vaguely useful for the people of Scotland in whose name and at whose expense it is produced each year. READ MORE: 'Cover up': Labour refuse to release files on secret meeting with Israeli minister If we are to keep GERS, then we should get rid of the estimates when it comes to tax by devolving complete control of all taxes, and place Revenue Scotland in charge of their collection within Scotland. This would both locate more jobs in Scotland and give us solid real-time outturn figures for revenues. We should ensure GERS reflects actual expenditure happening in Scotland rather than allocations of UK spending elsewhere. This would help solidify the true extent of the much-trumpeted 'Union dividend.' We should also provide a breakdown of how UK spending decisions filter through to the Scottish Government's eventual budget. At year end, comparing UK Government boasts of increased funds with the reality of what actually reaches Holyrood would be both illuminating and enlightening for the public.
South Wales Guardian
4 hours ago
- South Wales Guardian
Swinney says SNP majority at Holyrood could make second referendum a ‘reality'
He dismissed as 'laughable' claims from critics that this strategy for getting a second referendum is 'punting' independence 'into the long grass'. However, while opinion polls have the SNP in the lead in the run-up to the crucial Holyrood vote, none has indicated Mr Swinney's party could win an overall majority. The Scottish Parliament's proportional representation system makes it harder for any single party to win more than half of the seats, with only former SNP leader Alex Salmond having achieved this in 2011. That victory led to the 2014 independence referendum, with Mr Swinney now relying on this 'precedent' as he seeks to secure a second vote on Scotland's place in the UK. His comments came as he indicated independence supporters are 'frustrated' that despite the 2016 and 2021 Holyrood elections both returning majorities of MSPs supporting independence, successive Westminster governments have refused to allow a second ballot to be held. Mr Swinney, speaking at an event organised by think tank Enlighten in Edinburgh on Tuesday, also noted that while Scots voted to stay in the UK in 2014 there were now 'various polls' with a majority for independence. Pressed on his strategy of using a Holyrood majority to achieve another referendum, the Scottish First Minister insisted that the idea this was 'punting it into the long grass is laughable for me'. Instead, he insisted independence as an 'urgent necessity', claiming decisions by the Labour Government at Westminster will make it harder for him to achieve his 'mission' of eradicating child poverty. However, he insisted he has 'got to be realistic' about how a second referendum could be brought about. Mr Swinney said: 'An independent Scotland will only come about if it carries domestic and international legitimacy, ie the rules of how it becomes independent are accepted by all parties.' He stressed this had been the case in 2014, as he added: 'If we want to advance on this issue there has got to be a means of breaking the log jam that we are currently in. 'Two successive elections, the majority of members of the Scottish Parliament supporting holding a referendum on independence and the Westminster government just folds its arms and says 'no'.' The First Minister noted that 'in 2011, when the SNP won a majority of seats in the Scottish Parliament, that led to a referendum in 2014'. And he added: 'If we want independence to happen we have got to rely on that precedent.' He rejected suggestions from Enlighten director Chris Deerin that returning a majority of SNP MSPs to Holyrood next May was a 'bold ambition', as he called on independence supporters to make the issue a 'priority' in that election. 'Then we can turn this into reality,' Mr Swinney said. Polls currently indicate the SNP could still be the largest party at Holyrood after the next election, but have so far failed to show Mr Swinney's party winning more than half the 129 seats. However, Mr Swinney recalled that in the run-up to 2011 election, his party was 'miles behind' in the opinion polls but 'then we won a majority four months later'. And he said: 'Today, nine months out from the election, I am ahead in the opinion polls. 'When I took over as SNP leader we were behind. I have brought the SNP back into the lead, a commanding lead in the opinion polls, and on the opinion polls today, we still would be the largest party by a country mile in the Scottish Parliament.' However he insisted: 'That's not good enough for me. 'I have set out what we have got to do to clear a pathway to win Scottish independence and I am going to give absolutely every fibre of my being from now until May 7 next year to make sure it happens.'
