Myanmar's Aung San Suu Kyi spent her 80th birthday in a cell
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
18 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Summerhall founder condemns apology over Kate Forbes event
He described the wording of a statement, which suggested Ms Forbes would be prevented from the Scottish Government-funded venue in future, as "idiotic" and "nonsense'. He insisted he would not have allowed it to be signed off had he still been responsible for Summerhall. Read more: Mr McDowell, who revealed he had attended the deputy first minister's event at Summerhall, said it would be 'impossible' for a Fringe venue to enforce any kind of ban on an individual taking part in future events. In an exclusive interview with The Herald, he suggested the main concerns for arts venues should be to ensure they operate within the law and uphold principles of freedom of speech. Robert McDowell has previously won Herald Angels Awards for his work at Edinburgh Festival Fringe venue Summerhall. (Image: Stewart Attwood) Summerhall Arts, which has taken over the running of shows and events at the venue from Mr McDowell, 'apologised unreservedly' to artists and performers appearing during the festival for the appearance of Ms Forbes in its programme. The deputy first minister, who was booked to appear as part of a series of political events organised by The Herald, has direct responsibility for the funding of Edinburgh's festivals as the culture secretary, Angus Robertson, represents the Edinburgh Central constituency. Ms Forbes announced £300,000 for funding aimed at 'safeguarding' the future of the Fringe in March, when she described the festival as 'one of Scotland's signature events.' Summerhall, which is now run by chief executive Sam Gough and a board led by Deborah Christie, secured public funding for the first time in January when Creative Scotland decided to allocate the arts charity more than £600,000 for the next three years. Ms Forbes spoke at Summerhall days after announcing she would not be standing in next year's Holyrood election, saying she wanted to focus more on family life. A devout Christian and a member of the Free Church of Scotland, Ms Forbes was criticised during her SNP leadership battle over her views on gay marriage, abortion and trans rights. The apology from Summerhall Arts, an arts charity formed months before the venue was put up for sale by Mr McDowell's family, said it should have considered the likelihood of Ms Forbes being booked for The Herald's Unspun Live events, and the 'understandable upset it would cause'. Alerting companies to the appearance of Ms Forbes hours before she was due to appear, the venue added: 'Our main concern is that cancelling the event could pose significant additional risk to the safety and wellbeing of LGBTQ+ artists, staff and audiences by attracting those who share Kate Forbes' views outside of these walls to Summerhall. 'We do not believe LGBTQ+ rights, nor their existence, is up for debate. We recognise that the LGBTQ+ community make up a significant proportion of our artists, audiences and staff, and we have work to do to repair the damage from this oversight. 'At this stage, we can guarantee that we will be writing robust, proactive inclusion and wellbeing policies that prevent this from happening again.' Mr McDowell, who bought Edinburgh University's former vet school building to turn it into a year-round culture venue, said he was no longer involved in the programming or running of Sumerhall, but had been visiting every day during the Fringe to attend shows and events. Mr McDowell told The Herald: 'I've not been able to find out who issued that apology. I don't know who wrote it. If I had been asked, I would have said that it was nonsense. 'Of course, these things are up for debate. Everything is always up for debate. What are the arts if they don't allow freedom of speech? 'If somebody has an objection to something you don't ban it. You just turn up and ask a question or make a statement. It's an opportunity to say what you think. 'Whoever compiled that statement was just addressing their friends. It's part of a cancel culture kind of way of thinking. 'Some people sometimes take it upon themselves to sort of think that if the feel strongly enough about something there ought to be a law and if there isn't they will impose their views. 'Sometimes people feel that if someone has gone out on a limb they have to show a bit of a solidarity and then get carried away 'Unfortunately we all have to try to tolerate it and hope that will get over themselves at some point. "The idea that you could ever construct a way of doing this is idiotic. It would be possible. There's no way you could second guess artists or shows. 'I could see how the apology happened, but I thought it was silly and stupid. It's what happens when people rush to judgment. 'I don't like the way everybody rushed to judgment on JK Rowling. She can cope with that. I'm on her side, pretty much, but I can understand why some people aren't.' Mr McDowell drew a contrast between the apology over Ms Forbes and the efforts of long-time arts campaigner and promoter Richard Demarco to bring artists from around the world to Edinburgh. He was recently forced to move part of his archive from Summerhall, where he had been offered space by Mr McDowell after he opened the venue in 2011. He said: 'Demarco crossed the Iron Curtain more than 90 times, not because of propaganda or politics, but to embrace across the divides. That's we have to do in the arts, that is our job. 'One of the good things about the country and democracy we live in is freedom of speech, where can have debate and we can have discussion. 'What I do not like is where people do not want to have debate or do not want to discussion, or where they say: 'It's more important that I don't ever feel uncomfortable'. 'Venue management only have to apply the laws. They can have views and opinions, but they cannot censor. This is about freedom of speech.' Mr McDowell said he would be opposed to any attempt to ban elected politicians from speaking or being interviewed. He added: 'It's extremely important for freedom of speech for journalists to be able to question people in public, and to have further discussion and debates in public. 'I sat in on Kate Forbes' session. I think she is a lovely person. I used to enjoy meeting Alex Salmond, even though he and I had opposite views. I respected him. He was a real person.' Creative Scotland issued "dignity at work" guidance to all applicants for long-term funding. They state: "Everyone working in Scotland's creative and cultural sectors is entitled to be treated with dignity and respect, whether they are an employee, freelancer, contractor, board member or volunteer. "Creative Scotland does not tolerate bullying, harassment, or victimisation under any circumstance, and expects the same of any organisation that we support with public funding. "Those applying for activity that involves employing other people should ensure that they have appropriate safeguards in place to ensure dignity at work, including approaches to ensure best practice in areas such as equality and diversity, harassment and bullying, disciplinary and whistle-blowing. "Our role is as a funder, and we do not have a regulatory role. However, we expect all grant recipients to take their responsibilities around safeguarding and dignity at work seriously when in receipt of public funds and failure to do so could result in payments being suspended or grants withdrawn." A spokesperson for Creative Scotland said: "We are in dialogue with Summerhall Arts to understand recent events and the steps they are taking to address concerns that have been raised." The Herald has teamed up with to make the purchase of tickets for the Edinburgh Festival Fringe so much easier. To buy tickets, please click here.
The Independent
a day ago
- The Independent
Myanmar's military rulers set December date for general election
Myanmar is set for a general election in late 2025, nearly five years after the military took power in a coup. The first phase was expected to start on 28 December, state broadcaster MRTV quoted the Union Election Commission as saying. The dates for subsequent phases would be announced later. The announcement came almost three weeks after the military junta said that it was ending the state of emergency and restructuring its administrative bodies to prepare for the election at the end of the year. The military imposed a state of emergency and drew up new administrative structures after ousting Aung San Suu Kyi's government in early 2021 and jailing members of her National League for Democracy Party. At least 55 political parties are registered for the election and nine of them plan to compete nationwide. "Six parties are under review for approval and registration,' The Global New Light of Myanmar reported earlier this month. But critics say the election will not be democratic since there is no free media in the country and most top members of Suu Kyi's party are in jail. The plan is widely seen as an attempt to legitimise and maintain the military's rule. The election is expected to be dominated by the junta's proxies and the outcome is likely to be favourable to the military, critics say. A general election was supposed to be held in August 2023 but the junta repeatedly pushed the date back. A newly formed interim administration announced its plan to hold voting in over 300 constituencies, including in areas currently held by armed groups opposed to the military. The military justified its February 2021 coup as a necessary intervention following what it claimed was widespread fraud in an election held three months earlier that was won decisively by Ms Suu Kyi's party. But election monitors found no evidence of the alleged fraud, which would have changed the outcome of the exercise.
Daily Mail
2 days ago
- Daily Mail
STEPHEN DAISLEY: Arts venues that want to ban ideas they don't like forfeit any claim to public funds. Defund them. Let them close...
When it announced its ban on Kate Forbes, which it now says isn't a ban, Summerhall Arts promised 'robust, proactive inclusion and wellbeing policies that prevent this from happening again'. The happening in question was an on-stage chinwag with the Deputy First Minister during the Edinburgh Fringe. Summerhall explained that it was concerned about 'attracting those who share Kate Forbes's views'. I thought the Edinburgh Fringe was nothing but people who share Forbes's views, but Summerhall was not talking about the Highlands MSP's support for the national impoverishment plan more commonly known as 'independence'. No, they were referring to her gender-critical views. Summerhall said: 'We do not believe LGBTQ + rights, nor their existence, is up for debate.' It cited concerns for 'the safety and wellbeing of LGBTQ+ artists, staff and audiences' and said 'a designated relaxed space' would be available for anyone affected. Anyone affected by Kate Forbes? Are we talking about the same Kate Forbes? 5ft 2in? Likes the Bible? So young she makes Ross Greer look middle-aged? It's hard to imagine a functioning adult who would require a safe space to protect them from Forbes. Summerhall was going on like it was hosting Hannibal Lecter rather than the most senior woman in Scottish politics. This is the sort of fankle you get into when you believe, or pretend to believe, that political speech – and mainstream political speech at that – is violence and oppression and literally genocide. There are people who feared Scotland would become McGilead if Forbes, a practising Christian, was elected First Minister, who also think women should be shunned for wilful disbelief in the doctrine of self-identification. That is what this is ultimately about: heresy. Forbes does not accept that the material reality of sex is transformed by the assertion of an invisible inner essence called gender identity. For that, anathema is pronounced upon her and she is to be excommunicated from polite society. Kate Forbes is not the fundamentalist here. One would have thought even that clanjamfrie of self-regarding midwits, the Edinburgh arts world, would have learned its lesson from the Joanna Cherry incident. Two years ago, the Stand Comedy Club tried to cancel a Fringe event featuring the former Nationalist MP, blaming staff disquiet over her views on women's sex-based rights. Cherry, an advocate of some standing, gently suggested the club seek some legal advice since what it was proposing amounted to unlawful discrimination. The Stand duly consulted a Rumpole or two, only to be told Cherry was right. The ferret not only reversed but did so while reading a grovelling letter of apology. Talk of cowards who would rather placate crybully censors than stand up for free expression brings us inevitably to Amina Shah, the chief executive of the National Library of Scotland (NLS). NLS was originally intending to include The Women Who Wouldn't Wheesht in its 'Dear Library' exhibition. Edited by journalist Susan Dalgety and civil service insider Lucy Hunter Blackburn, it's a collection of essays penned by the women who fought against Nicola Sturgeon's Gender Recognition Reform Bill. The authors include people with sharply contrasting political views. If you want the definitive, behind-the-scenes account of what the Scottish Government tried to do and how they were stopped, The Women Who Wouldn't Wheesht is it. I heartily recommend it. Amina Shah seems less enamoured. Upon learning the book would be part of the exhibition, some LGBT+ activists on the NLS staff allegedly demanded it be removed as it contained 'hate speech' and its display would pose 'severe harm' to library employees. We have library employees in Scotland who are afraid books might hurt them. Every day, it becomes less and less baffling that we burned so many witches in this country. Rather than suggest these people seek help, or at least alternative employment, Shah dropped the book from the exhibition. It's not so much that Scotland's chief librarian caved into censors, it's that she did so with a book whose authors risked everything rather than shut up when they were told to. You can't always judge a book by its cover, but when the cover reads 'The Women Who Wouldn't Wheesht', you can probably judge the authors. They kicked up a fuss – rightly so – and Shah has been hit with criticism and, it is said, a donor boycott. That these women were bolshie is commendable but what matters above all else is that they were right. The most powerful people in every sector of public life, enterprise, academia and the arts insisted they were wrong, and not just wrong but cruel, and not just cruel but bigoted. Their meetings were disrupted, their events cancelled, their jobs threatened, and their reputations tarnished on social media. They were exaggerating and misrepresenting. They didn't understand the law and should be disregarded. But they were right. The Supreme Court ruling in favour of For Women Scotland didn't make them right, it merely confirmed they had been all along. I happen to broadly agree with the book's authors, but even if I didn't – and especially if I didn't – I would want to learn exactly what they believe, and how they went about turning those beliefs into one of the most successful political campaigns in modern British history. Instead, there is a pronounced incuriosity, not only an intolerance towards ideas but a total indifference. Ideas are interactive; that's the point of them. One idea meets another and you take the best from both to form an even better idea. Not any more. Now, there are good ideas and bad ideas, and the bad ideas should not be considered. In fact they must be suppressed, because they have the power to harm and to corrupt. Orthodoxy is back, baby. Only it's no longer forbidding clerics or moral crusaders demanding filthy, dirty books be put on high shelves, it's people who imagine themselves to be enlightened and rational and liberal. For dark comedy, nothing at the Fringe can compete with the spectacle of social progressives inadvertently forming a Mary Whitehouse tribute act. Summerhall Arts relies heavily, and the National Library almost exclusively, on taxpayer subvention. Arts funding can be controversial. Some think it subsidises the cultural pursuits of affluent and otherwise privileged people. The search for truth, beauty and humanity should not belong to any one class or sector. It is the hallmark of a liberal society, a society in which liberty is used not only for transient gratification but to better understand the human, the ideal and the transcendental. Unfortunately, our cultural sector seems to be overrun with leaders who believe themselves already in possession of the truth, and uninterested, if not instinctively opposed, to the exploration of other ideas. An arts sector so ideologically prescriptive that it will not countenance wrongthink in its venues or on its bookshelves is one that has forfeited any claim to public funds. Institutions like Summerhall Arts and the National Library of Scotland should not benefit from the spoils of liberal society while having at its load-bearing walls with doctrinal sledgehammers. Defund them, let them close, and invest in new institutions that value free minds and free expression.
