A UNIVERSITY has been attacked for continuing to invest in some companies that manufacture weapons.
The criticism came after Edinburgh University said it would no longer invest in firms that manufacture "controversial" weapons such as anti-personnel mines, biological and chemical weapons, depleted uranium ammunition and nuclear weapons.
Kirsty Haigh, a student campaigner with Edinburgh University, said: "There is no such thing as uncontroversial weapons. If you’re killed by a controversial or uncontroversial weapon the outcome is still the same - you’re dead.
"Our university is once again flouting its moral obligations. They don’t care they’re continuing to funding destruction, but simply wants to appear to be taking action.”
Jovan Rydder, a student campaigner with Edinburgh University Amnesty International Society, added: "I expect our university to share a strong contempt for the promotion and legitimisation of violence and I am astounded that given the opportunity it has decided to maintain its complicity in the production of tools of war."
However, Professor Charlie Jeffery, the institution's senior vice-principal, said the move was an important phase in an ongoing review of responsible investment.
He added: "As well as our divestment from these major companies and our ongoing commitment to zero investment in manufacturers of controversial weapons, we will continue to examine the positive case for additional investments in low carbon and renewable technologies."
Urte Macikene, a spokeswoman for the Edinburgh University Students’ Association, said: “I’m pleased the university is clarifying its stance against investment in controversial weapons.
“There is always more to be done in pursuit of ethical investment, and I look forward to working closely with the university in taking forwards a review of the ethical investment policy as a whole. I hope we will be able to identify further ways to make our investment portfolio more ethical and sustainable."
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 here