THERE was considerable pain for the SNP last night after their flagship anti-bigotry policy suffered a defeat in the Scottish Parliament.
MSPs voted 65-61 to repeal the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act.
The legislation, though popular with the public, has often proved controversial with fans.
SNP MSP James Dornan warned the defeat would “erode the powers our police have to tackle bigotry” and accused the opposition of putting politics ahead of fighting sectarianism.
But Labour’s James Kelly, whose Members’ Bill challenging the Act was voted on last night, described it as a blow for “discredited legislation which has failed to make any progress in tackling sectarianism”.
The repeal Bill will now move on to further consideration at committee level before a final vote of all MSPs.
The act was passed in 2011 by the then majority Scottish Government, following an ill-tempered Old Firm game that saw 34 arrests inside the stadium.
Only SNP members originally supported the Bill, and there has been a strong desire among opposition politicians to have the legislation binned.
During yesterday’s debate Tory MSP Liam Kerr said it was not legislation that would challenge bigotry: “We need an enduring change in culture and attitude, but that happens in homes, classrooms, communities. It is facilitated by the world of charities and third sector organisations such as Nil by Mouth, and we need to see and support more of that community led activity.”
Speaking afterwards Kelly said: “It is time for the SNP Government to listen to the will of Parliament and get behind repeal. Instead of continuing to pursue this broken law, it must work to unify parties, anti-sectarian organisations, faith groups and education leaders, and start taking the problem of sectarianism seriously.
“For too long the SNP has hidden behind the Football Act and pretended it is some sort of silver bullet.”
But Dornan said he worried about what scrapping the act would do: “The vote this evening is deeply concerning, with James Kelly’s repeal Bill set to erode the powers our police have to tackle bigotry in order to land a political blow.
“Mr Kelly is a politician doggedly pursuing a self-serving agenda – and now opposition parties have joined him in being deaf to the views of the vast majority of people and stakeholder groups across Scotland.
“At a time when the SNP Government is focused on education, health, jobs, the economy and protecting Scotland’s place in Europe, Richard Leonard and James Kelly would rather see us remove legislation that tackles sectarianism, prejudice and discrimination whilst offering no alternative in its place.”
Fans Against Criminalisation, a group of football supporters campaigning in favour of the repeal, said they were delighted with the result.
“A huge step forward on the road to repeal. We are now within touching distance,” they tweeted.
Community Safety Minister Annabelle Ewing said it was a “sad day for Scotland”.
She added: “We are resolute in our determination to combat bigotry, homophobia, racism and offensive behaviour targeting people for simply being who they are.
“It’s not acceptable, and we want the people of Scotland to know we have their back.”
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel