CRITICISMS directed at the Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh (RBGE) over the closure of Inverleith House (Artists voice dismay over Inverleith House gallery closure, The National, October 20), overlook the basis on which this decision has been made.
Given RBGE’s status as non-departmental public body (NDBP), a not-for-profit body, and a registered charity, its decision to stop supporting a non-essential part of the organisation which does not contribute to its key functions seems shrewd, rather than “short-sighted”.
The trustees have made a choice to no longer direct organisational resources towards a contemporary art gallery which was financially unsustainable. RBGE is Scotland’s botanical institute and, first and foremost, a scientific institution.
This decision has been made to ensure it remains a renowned centre of expertise and continues to work to address the global issues of biodiversity loss and ecological degradation.
The grant received from the Scottish Government is restricted to supporting RBGE research and educational activities.
Put simply, this money cannot be used to prop up exhibitions which have little relevance to its mission.
Education remains key to the achievement of RBGE’s mission. This year the Botanic Cottage, which originally stood at the garden’s entrance when it sat on Leith Walk, was rebuilt and opened.
This building is now used to host a variety of educational events which are free and open to the public.
Using Inverleith House for this function would seem more in keeping with the organisation’s core mission, rather than a showcase for contemporary art.
More importantly, there are other public bodies which have been set up to do the latter.
Creative Scotland has a statutory role to support and develop quality and excellence in the Scottish arts and culture.
Policy changes within this body resulted in regular funding for the gallery being lost in 2014.
However, these funds have arguably been redirected to more appropriate and innovative sites and initiatives which are better suited as centres for contemporary art.
This includes Hidden Door Festival, a multi-arts festival which takes place in “hidden spaces” in Edinburgh. It would appear to fit the bill for those seeking free access to contemporary art in unexpected places.
This original initiative also plays an important role in supporting local visual artists, showcasing home-grown talent which would have been unlikely to make on to the hallowed walls of Inverleith House.
Similar initiatives include the Collective Gallery on Calton Hill and St Margaret’s House in Edinburgh – both of which have been supported by Creative Scotland as part of its commitment to the capital’s thriving arts scene.
Incidentally, currently those who wish to visit the galleries within the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew – RGBE’s contemporary south of the Border – have to pay an admission of £14 to the garden itself.
Having been, I can assure you the ticket is worth every penny, However, it compares rather sharply to the approach being taken by the RBGE.
Admission to the Inverleith site is free and has been since 1670. This does not seem
“short-sighted” for the UK’s oldest botanical garden.
Ensuring admission remains free would appear the more effective way to ensure the organisation is able to continue build the general public’s understanding of the world of plants.
Remaining focused on the core will ensure it continues to do so for many generations to come.
Name and address supplied
THE proposed trade deal between Canada and the EU required to be passed by 47 parliaments.
Twenty-eight of those are state parliaments like Westminster. The other 19 are, dare I say, “regional” parliaments, which I would have thought were rather like Holyrood.
The parliament which rejected the deal, in the Wallonia region, represents just one third of Belgians, three and a half million people.
I was under the impression that Westminster had upgraded Holyrood to one “of the most powerful devolved administrations in the world”, but it is clearly still in a league well below that of Wallonia.
What is the difference between these 19 European parliaments and our own in Edinburgh? Surely promotion to this premier division of European regional parliaments would fulfil the commitment to enhance the status of Holyrood, and resolve the issue of consultation with Holyrood over the Brexit settlement as all 47 – or 48 – parliaments will have to be consulted?
David Kelly
Aberdeenshire
REGARDING Michael Gray’s column (Nicola Sturgeon’s compromise position throws up potential hurdles, The National, October 25), Theresa May, when she became Prime Minister, promised a new adult approach to the Brexit negotiations.
This appears to involve giving the First Ministers of the three devolved administrations with the UK, each one elected by their respective parliaments, a direct line to David Davis, May’s appointed Secretary of State for exiting the European Union. As an adult approach, it seems very much on a par with the organ grinder letting the bairns speak to the monkey.
John Jamieson
South Queensferry
NICOLA Sturgeon’s meeting with Theresa May to discuss the crisis prompted by the EU referendum result had no good outcome. May acted like a sadistic headmistress of an austere public school, treating the First Minister and the Scottish Government like errant schoolchildren who needed to be “educated” about their place.
Westminster will never agree to separate Brexit terms for Scotland, while billions of pounds will be paid into the EU annually to allow London to maintain its position as a leading European financial centre. The issues around which the SNP are seeking to pressure London are precisely those on which May and her cabinet are refusing to offer concessions. Over the last weeks, it has become clear that the Conservatives, despite their deep divisions, are led by elements set upon pursuing a so-called hard Brexit and who are ready to sacrifice access to the single market in order to end free movement of EU labour and preserve the City of London from regulatory interference.
Alan Hinnrichs
Dundee
ALEX Orr (Letters, October 25) rightly recalls the Hungarian uprising of 1956 against Soviet-dominated rule. That uprising was successful, but, unfortunately for the Hungarians, it coincided with the British-French invasion of Egypt which was a response to the Egyptian nationalisation of the Suez Canal. As might be expected, the British imperial attack on Egypt led to the Soviet imperial re-occupation of Hungary.
The day after the British invasion of Egypt, a fellow student at Glasgow asked me: “Are you going to join the army?”. I replied: “The Egyptian army or the Hungarian one?”
David Stevenson
Edinburgh
AS an octogenarian, I find many things have ceased to interest me (with the exception of indyref2), especially if a piece of legislation or a movement is going to take many years to come to fruition. I sat up smartly, however, when I read that the police were to get back on their bikes. Apart from bringing them closer to the public, it would do some officers no harm to lose some weight in pursuit of their duties.
This is no new idea, however. I well remember PC MacCorquodale toiling up Alderman Road in Knightswood. Corky rode a “sit up and beg” cycle and in winter, with his solid leather gaiters, boots and overcoat, posed no threat to a fleeing criminal. I think the new breed with mountain bikes is something he would have approved of.
Jim Gibson
Selkirk
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here