A Free Scotland?

This article was written by Michael Veitch, Parliamentary Officer, CARE for Scotland.

The Hate Crime & Public Order (Scotland) Bill, passed by the Scottish Parliament by a margin of 82 to 32 votes last week, occupies the category of a well-intentioned but misguided piece of legislation. While all right-thinking people would of course wish to take a very firm stand against those who would stir up hatred towards others, the problem with Bill is the obvious danger that legitimate, but potentially deeply offensive, free speech be unduly inhibited.

The final stage debate on the Bill last Wednesday night turned out to be one of the best debates held within the Holyrood chamber for many years. Though many MSPs were forced to participate via video link due to Covid restrictions, this is no way inhibited what turned out to be robust and fiery discussion of the fundamental issues at stake.

The outstanding contributions of the night came from left-wing feminist MSPs, angered by a perceived lack of recognition for the status of women in the legislation. Johann Lamont, Elaine Smith and Jenny Marra (all Labour) and Joan McAlpine (SNP) were especially brave in their remarks, which are well worth consulting in the Official Report. Liam Kerr and the Justice Committee Convenor Adam Tomkins (both Conservative) attempted to ‘lead the line’ on the main free speech amendments, including attempts to persuade Parliament of the need for a ‘dwelling defence’ to protect the basic human right to privacy when conducting conversation in one’s own home. 

While excellent and very strong free speech amendments from Lamont and McAlpine were ultimately voted down, together with the ‘dwelling defence’ amendments from Kerr and Tomkins, Christians and others concerned about free speech can take heart that the Cabinet Secretary for Justice, Humza Yousaf, had brought forward a relatively strong free speech amendment of his own, which was accepted, alongside an additional free speech amendment from Tomkins. In the event, the final vote on the Bill split largely (and predictably) upon party lines, with only the Scottish Conservatives, and a handful of others, voting against the Bill. It seemed that while many were keen to speak the language of free speech, few were prepared to vote for it.

We can and should be thankful that the Bill, as passed last week, was far less of a threat to free speech than when it was originally lodged. That said, it will be critical to monitor its implementation going forward, lest those who are ideologically opposed to the free expression of ideas deemed ‘hateful’ by some, seek to use the new powers in the Bill to shut down the free expression of opinion in churches or elsewhere.