FRUSTRATION with Tory scaremongering and the spreading of disinformation about Scotland’s new hate crime legislation has no doubt been felt by many MSPs over the past few weeks.
The breathless hyperbole spread by the Scottish Conservatives doesn’t serve anyone – except, of course, the Tories themselves, who appear unconcerned about the negative impact of hate crimes on Scots.
Today, though, SNP MSP Christine Grahame looked to have had enough and undertook what can only be described as a verbal evisceration of her Tory colleague Russell Findlay during a debate on the Hate Crime Act in the Scottish Parliament.
After discussing analysis of the legislation from former Tory MSP and legal expert Adam Tomkins – who criticised those who wrongly suggested the law would criminalise comments deemed merely offensive to others – Grahame took aim Findlay.
'Self-indulgent, flamboyant and frequently reckless'
— The National (@ScotNational) April 17, 2024
SNP MSP Christine Grahame had some choice words for Tory MSP Russell Findlay during a debate on the Hate Crime Act 👀 pic.twitter.com/p5hsFE9Rbu
She said: “Unfortunately for me, the charge is not led by considered contributions such as [those from] Liz Smith or even Jamie Greene but as usual by Russell Findlay, who is not known for similar forensic talents to Adam Tomkins with regard to legislation.
“But has apparently an insatiable appetite for the next tabloid banner headline with his self-indulgent, flamboyant and frequently reckless contributions here and indeed in committee.
“That may offend Mr Findlay but I trust he will appreciate that it is an example of my right to expression of free speech, which I know he will defend to the hilt.”
READ MORE: SNP MP's perfect comeback after Ruth Davidson calls them 'entitled'
The debate was brought forward by the Tories, who are calling for the Hate Crime Act to be repealed.
This is despite the fact that doing so would render crimes aggravated by prejudice – such as scrawling antisemitic abuse on a synagogue – less punishable by law.
Still, if nothing else the debate provided the opportunity for Grahame to skelp Findlay.
For that, at least, the Jouker is grateful.
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