There is no doubt that George Square would benefit from a sympathetic revamp ("T in the Park promoter will help choose square's design", The Herald, October 6 & Letters, October 1 and 4).
Replacement of the dreadful red surface with quality paving – preferably impervious to chewing gum – and extending between the Cenotaph and the City Chambers would certainly enhance the square. Parking spaces should be removed and the little-used Hanover Street made a dedicated drop-off point for coaches, allowing visitors safe and direct access to shops, restaurants, the Information Centre and George Square. The reinstatement of the lost lawns, trees, and benches is surely worthy of consideration.
There seems to be a lack of joined-up thinking within the City Chambers. George Square is so often marred by tents and other paraphernalia. Most events could be more suitably housed elsewhere, such as Glasgow Green for funfairs and pop concerts, and McLellan Galleries for art shows such as the Royal Glasgow Institute. The cost of refurbishment would be a fraction of the proposed George Square work. Surely this substantial amount of money would be better spent elsewhere.
It seems a decision has already been made to remove the statues. If this happens, I have severe doubts they will ever be returned. No other civic space in Britain contains so many statues, and while some may appear to have only tenuous links to Glasgow's past, all represent a period in the history of the city which is admired by visitors. As for Sir Walter Scott, whose influence on Scottish tourism is widely recognised, it seems that, as a tourist guide, I will be denied the chance to repeat with pride – as I always do when introducing the city – it shows the big-hearted warmth and generosity of Glasgow that a son of Edinburgh is in this most prominent position.
Fionna Eden-Bushell,
32 Clouston Street, Glasgow.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article