Official Report 274KB pdf
The next item of business is a debate on motion S7M-01084, in the name of Simita Kumar, on building stronger, safer and inclusive communities.
15:33
I am pleased to open the debate on building stronger, safer and inclusive communities together.
Colleagues, I am not sure whether my accent gives me away, but I hope that it does not come as too much of a surprise to hear that I was not born in Scotland. My parents, my wee sister and I migrated from the Fiji islands more than 20 years ago and settled in a community in the east end of Glasgow.
As with any period of transition, it was not always easy. Collectively, we were, unfortunately, subjected to racialised name calling. My family and I have been spat at and shouted at. Our windows have been broken more times than I care to remember.
The incident that broke me was when our shed was deliberately set on fire. The memory of that fire will, unfortunately, live with me for ever. However, what I remember just as strongly is what happened afterwards. In the midst of that pain and anguish, my neighbours stood beside me. They showed up, they offered solidarity, they stood beside us and they wrapped their arms around my family and reminded us that we were not alone.
That is what community means to me—it is not the absence of hardship; it is the presence of people around us who refuse to let us face hardship alone. My neighbours, who are predominantly white working-class people, chapped on almost every door in the community to have discussions with one another about our experiences. I did not even know that that was happening, but they did community cohesion before someone had ever put those two words together. Presiding Officer and colleagues, have you ever felt your heart expand tenfold because of the kindness and empathy of the people around you? That is the community that I grew up in and the Scotland that I know and believe in.
I do not like labels, but I stand here before members as a woman, a person of colour, a new Scot and, very proudly, an immigrant. That is only part of my story and who I am—it is not the whole picture—but, just for a moment, I urge you to walk in my shoes and those of people just like me. Imagine coming to the Parliament, which is my place of work, week after week, wearing all those labels and preparing myself mentally to sit here and listen to speech that is filled with hatred, misinformation and intolerance. Colleagues, I genuinely ask whether that would be acceptable in your workplace, place of worship or community, yet it is being normalised in this very Parliament. Of course it is then repeated in the media and by some bad actors; the words that we hear in this Parliament are often used as soundbites that can be showcased online later for clicks and impressions to extend the rhetoric, spread misinformation, scapegoat and dehumanise people. I fear that I will be hearing a lot of that this afternoon, if the amendments are anything to go by.
I sometimes do not know whether I should feel outraged, sad or angry. I wish that I could say to all of you that my experiences are unique, but the truth is that my lived experience is shared by most, if not all, people of colour and by anyone who is just a wee bit different. However, although part of me remembers the incidents of 22 years ago, another part remembers the beauty of Scotland and its people. It is that beauty—the kindness, generosity and humanity of the Scottish people and our communities—that gives me the strength and the hope that I need to carry on, to show leadership and to remind everyone that we bleed the same.
At its heart, this is a very simple principle: everyone in Scotland should be treated with dignity and respect; we should all be able to feel safe in our communities; and we should be able to live our lives free from prejudice, hatred, discrimination and fear. I hope that the Parliament will unite around that today.
Every day, we build connections with people whose experiences might be different from our own. We choose understanding over assumption, conversation over division and inclusion over exclusion. When we share a commitment to fairness, respect and opportunity for all, we create places where everyone feels that they matter; the labels—my labels—do not matter.
The Scottish Government has a well-established approach to tackling hate and building cohesion. However, we have recently seen an increase in divisive rhetoric and intimidation, which has led to fear and alarm for those who have been targeted. That includes the disorder in Glasgow in July and the distressing attacks in Edinburgh in June.
Legitimate concerns about issues such as violence against women and girls have been exploited, which is unacceptable. Violence against women and girls is a serious and persistent issue that requires a determined response from us all. We must not allow it to be weaponised as a means to scapegoat entire communities. I have been engaging extensively with a range of communities and have heard directly of the impact that that has had.
Let me be absolutely clear. These are the actions of a small minority who create fear, division and hostility in Scotland’s communities in person and online. They do not reflect the communities or Scotland’s values, and there can be no justification for, excuse for or tolerance of such behaviour.
Our task is not simply to respond when tensions emerge but to strengthen the conditions that allow communities to flourish, so that everyone can feel safe, valued and able to contribute.
It is against that backdrop that visible action and leadership are important. Ensuring community cohesion is everyone’s responsibility and it cannot be built through a single programme or intervention. We are taking co-ordinated action across Government and with partners to address the social, economic and cultural factors that shape people’s shared sense of belonging and connection to one another and the community.
The distinct focus on community cohesion in the newly published programme for government signals practical next steps to enhance our work in that important area. Those actions include establishing a ministerial task force on community cohesion to address our shared urgent concerns and issues and identify priority areas for action. That responds directly to what communities and stakeholders have told us through our engagement. The first meeting of the task force will take place as soon as possible.
Building on the success of the initial community cohesion fund, we are increasing our investment from £300,000 to £500,000 in this financial year. The fund is designed to take a broad approach to cohesion at grass-roots level, in the recognition that issues such as poverty, the cost of living, housing challenges, social isolation, misinformation and a lack of opportunities for people from different backgrounds to connect can all impact on community cohesion.
That is why we are supporting practical, community-led action that tackles those underlying challenges and helps to build trust, strengthen relationships and create a stronger sense of belonging. That investment reflects our commitment to prevention and the long-term work of building stronger, safer and more connected communities across Scotland.
We are committed to taking a comprehensive approach to preventing violence against women and girls, supporting victims and strengthening the accountability of perpetrators. Among a range of actions, that includes further investment in prevention, the introduction of a misogyny bill and the establishment of a trauma-informed sexual offences court—which will strengthen the alignment between priorities in addressing violence against women and girls and approaches to public protection.
In the previous parliamentary session, my colleague Pam Gosal brought forward proposals for a domestic abuse register. Is the Government considering that, to tackle violence against women?
I am sure that the Minister for Victims and Community Safety, who is sitting next to me, will consider that as part of the next approach, but I do not believe that that was taken forward in the previous session.
We are continuing our important work to advance inclusion across Scotland, including action to understand and address the root causes of hatred and prejudice, improving outcomes for LGBTQI+ people and supporting disabled people to live the lives that they choose. We will continue to challenge institutional and interpersonal racism and ensure that Scotland is a place in which people of all faiths and beliefs can practise freely and flourish. That is inseparable from the action that we are taking to eradicate poverty, improve access to services and ensure shared prosperity. It is a whole-Government approach.
I do not think that the minister will find anyone in the chamber who disagrees with the sentiment behind her remarks on respect across all the communities that make up Scotland. However, she has also alluded, I think, to the fact that we need a strong justice system. Why, then, in the Government’s spending review, is there a plan to cut funding for the courts and the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service? At the very moment at which we need a rigorous and strong justice system, why is the Government undermining those fundamental pillars of our justice system by imposing cuts?
We do have a strong justice system, but we also have an issue with men—it is mostly men—perpetrating violence against women and girls, and addressing that should be at the core of everything that we do in this Government.
Addressing shared issues, including violence against women and girls, in dialogue makes us more effective and able to work towards outcomes that benefit us all. I sincerely hope that every member in the chamber will join me in unequivocally condemning hatred and prejudice and will show leadership in rejecting divisive rhetoric and hate.
I hope that all party leaders will join the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice and Housing in attending the cross-party meeting that is being organised by the Scottish Federation of Housing Associations following the recent fire in Possilpark in Glasgow. I welcome that discussion with social landlords, which not only provide housing but play a key role in our communities. Their role is critical at a time when responsible leadership and constructive dialogue are needed more than ever.
I have to confess that I was a wee bit disappointed to read the Labour amendment. At First Minister’s question time yesterday, Paul Sweeney showcased exactly the kind of cross-party leadership that we need, and I had sincerely hoped that that would be replicated in the amendment today—but alas, here we are.
That aside, as I said, I hope that we can lead by example, by listening to and having respect for one another, being thoughtful about the impact of the words that we use and showcasing solidarity with all our communities in Scotland.
We all want to feel safe in our homes and our communities; to be treated with kindness and respect; and to have a sense of belonging and connectedness. As we leave the chamber tonight and return to our constituencies, I ask members to consider what action we can all take, individually and collectively, to fulfil the needs of the people we work for.
If we succeed, the benefits will be felt far beyond the chamber. We can, together, build cohesive and prosperous communities. That is the kind of Scotland that we should all be working towards.
I know that the minister has taken a couple of interventions—
I am winding up, Deputy Presiding Officer.
I urge members, if we can come together—
The minister has spoken for more than 14 minutes and 30 seconds. I appreciate that she has taken some interventions, but she will have to wind up.
Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer.
Again, I urge everyone to come together and speak with those values, not just for the communities that we have been elected to serve but for our children and young people, to show collective leadership and help to create a future that is built on dignity and kindness.
I move,
That the Parliament agrees that all individuals should be treated with dignity and respect and able to feel safe in their communities; supports robust criminal justice responses to violence, intimidation, hatred and disorder that harm individuals, and damage community relations; rejects attempts by the small minority of people who create fear, division and hostility within Scotland’s communities in person and online, and supports efforts to build trust, strengthen cohesion and ensure that everyone can live safely free from prejudice, hatred and discrimination.
15:48
As we begin the seventh session of the Scottish Parliament, it is clear that there is a need for parties that believe in challenging the narrative of the various protests, some of which are stirring up anti-immigration sentiment and causing wider harm to our ethnic communities, to come together. I agree with the minister and pledge today that Scottish Labour believes that we must work together—I hope that that is clear.
I am personally alarmed when I talk to friends and constituents who tell me that they have experienced an increase in racism and feel less safe. They have always faced racism, unfortunately, but there has been a change, which is alarming. That is why I was proud to be part of the Stand Up To Racism “Off our streets—no to the far right” rally in June. In fact, it was that rally that featured in the BBC documentary on Glasgow. Where there was a counterprotest that spilled over, it proved to be febrile and menacing, and the police had some difficulty in keeping order. I saw the angry faces of men, some who had face coverings. That is not the Glasgow that I know, which has a proud history of welcoming immigrants and refugees. I have spent my political career arguing for that, so I am clear about where I stand on it.
For those who have not seen it, the documentary gave a large chunk of the airtime to the far-right vigilante group Scots Active, whose spokesperson talked about cultures not aligning and there being a race war. Unfortunately, the documentary had a lack of voices from refugee charities, which I think would have helped to provide some balance.
The documentary also showed open drug dealing, violence, theft and antisocial behaviour in Glasgow’s city centre. I am sure that Glasgow’s city centre is not the only place where that happens, but that activity intensified when there was no police presence. Policing our streets and our city centres is absolutely essential to making a difference. We used to police Glasgow a lot more visibly than we do now, and the current situation has to change.
I agree with Pauline McNeill. Does she agree that, sometimes, when we talk about available police numbers for the front line, we forget that, of the 16,000 or so police officers, a large percentage are not available for front-line duty? There are modified officers and there is a very high level of sickness and absence. We are putting intolerable pressure on the police officers who are available to go on the front line. Does she agree that we need to be honest about the true resource strength of Police Scotland to do the kind of policing that many of us in the chamber would like to see done in Glasgow and throughout Scotland?
I agree with Stephen Kerr that there is a bit of a crisis in policing that the Government needs to recognise. If we do not have officers on the front line, we cannot uphold the rule of law. Upholding the rule of law is also about ensuring that we have cohesive communities and public confidence in tackling hate crime, but we cannot do any of that if we do not have police officers visible on our streets. The latest statistics show that, over a 10-year period, we lost 1,000 police officers from our streets.
Crime is on the rise, and youth violence remains a serious concern, with an increase in the number of 11 to 15-year-olds carrying knives. Although a good job has been done on the number of people carrying knives—there was a bit of a reduction in those figures, which has to be recognised—the numbers are increasing among that particular age group. The Government is in denial about that, but I think that it has to be addressed. It makes no sense to me that the Scottish Government would cut funding for initiatives such as the no knives, better lives programme, which was mentioned last week, when we clearly have an issue.
On violence against women and girls, it is also important that the Government recognises that boys need positive role models. That needs to be part of the solution. Time and again in this chamber, I have argued that we must tackle the root causes of the epidemic of violence against women and girls. A year ago, Gareth Southgate—we know him as a former professional footballer—gave a lecture. I think that his words resonated a lot with many young men when he said that there is “a growing crisis” among young men and that they need positive role models so that they do not turn to misogynistic behaviour and “toxic influencers”.
The latest Crown Office figures show that, over the past two years, the most serious domestic abuse crimes, such as murder and culpable homicide, have almost doubled. We have to look at the root causes of that, or those figures will continue to rise.
This summer, Stacy Hunter was murdered by a former partner who had been bailed after previously trying to strangle her, and had been told to stay away from her. Stacy’s family has urged the Scottish Government to expedite the roll-out of GPS tracking of violent offenders. The Cabinet Secretary for Justice has spoken about that and about the Government’s plans, but he has not been able to tell the Parliament that there has been any progress on that, which gives me cause for concern.
If the Government is serious about reform and tackling what I think is a crisis in criminal justice, it cannot be done without up-front investment. The Criminal Justice Committee was told this morning that we cannot adhere to the legal time limit for High Court trials and that, instead of 30 days, it will be 900 days. That is an absolute outrage. Criminal justice has to be a priority for this coming budget.
As well as joining with the Government in its work in this area, as I said earlier, we will also be arguing for better funding for criminal justice for those reasons.
I move amendment S7M-01084.4, to insert at end:
“; recognises that Scotland will only build safe and inclusive communities by fundamentally tackling inequality and delivering better opportunities and living standards for everyone, and calls on the Scottish Government to restore policing at a local level, while addressing the needs of communities across the country, including by reversing declining Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) scores, reforming the skills system and improving access to good local health and social care.”
I remind the chamber that, if any member wishes to speak in the debate, they need to be present for the full opening and the full closing speeches. If they need to leave the chamber for any reason, they can give a reasonable explanation to the clerk or send a note to the Presiding Officer. More than one member has left the chamber during opening speeches, and I hope that they have heard this message.
15:54
Community cohesion is not achieved by simply putting different groups of people in the same postcode and declaring the job done. Cohesion requires something much more fundamental: people living alongside one another, respecting one another, participating in their communities and sharing a commitment to the laws, values and responsibilities of the country that we call home. We need to be honest about where that is not happening. Across parts of Scotland, communities have experienced rapid demographic changes while struggling with the pressures on housing, public services and local infrastructure. Too often, people who have lived in those communities for generations feel that their concerns are dismissed rather than heard.
What is the Scottish Government’s solution? It is to fill our communities with people whose values do not align with those of ordinary Scots and who have no interest in integrating—strangers.
Will Thomas Kerr take an intervention?
I know that that word makes the Holyrood establishment uncomfortable, but tough luck. To assist those who are easily offended, here is the official definition of the word: “strangers”, the plural of “stranger”, refers to
“people whom you do not know, have not met before or are not familiar with.”
If that does not describe the hundreds of fighting-age young men who are arriving daily on our shores, I do not know what would. [Interruption.] I can already hear a collective groan about immigration policy being reserved, but we know that these men arrive in our country and then come to Scotland to exploit our rules and be prioritised over our own people, thanks to this Government.
Will Thomas Kerr take an intervention?
However, what is the response of the political establishment? It is simply to scapegoat working-class people and gaslight them into believing that they are the problem, not those in power or those with alien cultures. It is not on. Enough is enough.
Will Thomas Kerr take an intervention?
Multiculturalism has failed.
Will Thomas Kerr possibly take an intervention?
If we want an example of why, let us look at my home city of Glasgow, where we have more asylum seekers than anywhere else in the United Kingdom—so much so that my city is the asylum capital of Great Britain, hosting 1 per cent of the UK’s population but 6 per cent of asylum applicants.
Will Thomas Kerr take an intervention?
Not from a has-been—take a seat. [Interruption.]
Individually, asylum seekers are putting overwhelming pressure on the homelessness system and, because of that and failed years of Tory, Labour and Scottish National Party mismanagement, Glasgow risks becoming—
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. Although I respect the fact that it is Thomas Kerr’s decision whether he wishes to take interventions during a debate, I query whether his last remark to my colleague fits with the Parliament’s standing orders in relation to members treating one another with respect. Regardless of our differing views, this has gone downhill rapidly already.
Could the cabinet secretary refer to the particular comment that she is talking about? A number of comments have been made.
I will not repeat the comment in the chamber. I would like someone to reflect on the entirety of Thomas Kerr’s speech and judge whether it breached standing orders in any way, shape or form, but I will not give any more heat to the debate by saying the particular comment.
As the cabinet secretary knows, all members must extend courtesy to one another at all times.
I want to be clear that, just before the recess, the member in question—
Will Thomas Kerr take an intervention?
I will.
In relation to that point of order, Reform members have been labelled Nazis and members of the Third Reich, so if we want to talk about respect in the chamber—
As Mark Simpson knows, if he wants to make a point of order, he should not just press his button but reference the standing order to which his point of order refers. If any other member wishes to make a point of order, they need to refer to standing orders.
As I was saying, the member who was heckling from a sedentary position accused me personally of being part of the reason why someone in Edinburgh ran about with a knife before the summer recess, so I will take no lectures from this lot about anything to do with respect.
Will Thomas Kerr take an intervention?
No, I will not.
Individually, asylum seekers are overwhelming the homelessness system, and, because of that and the failed years of Tory, Labour and SNP mismanagement, Glasgow risks going bankrupt, with that issue alone costing us between £74 million and £75 million. That is not a sustainable approach.
If you want to look at where multiculturalism has failed and integration does not work, look no further than Govanhill, where a once-great community has become a ghetto. Govanhill was once the historic heart of Glasgow’s Jewish community. Now, its reputation is for nothing more than daytime drug dealing, child exploitation, mass illegal migration and street gangs.
The residents of Govanhill deserve safer streets, decent housing, functioning public services and a genuine sense of community. They deserve politicians who will listen when they see rapid change and put pressure on when they need to. Sadly, the population change means that the community is now represented by an MSP who is more interested in Gaza than in Glasgow. That cannot be good for community cohesion. [Interruption.]
Mr Kerr, could you sit down? The standing orders make it clear that there must be courtesy towards other members at all times.
We should be able to discuss immigration honestly, without branding everyone who raises it as racist. Sadly, this chamber is too small minded to do that.
Will the member take an intervention?
No, I will not.
I will now state some facts that I know the SNP and its extremist pals in the Greens will not like. Coming to Scotland is not a right—it is an honour and a privilege. People who come to Scotland legally should be expected to speak the language, respect the law, learn to participate in wider community and respect the traditions and freedoms of the society in which they will be living. People who come to Scotland illegally, on the other hand, should be detained and deported immediately. That should not be controversial to say.
It is time that public policy starts to recognise the needs of people who already live here. Housing allocation, access to services and investment decisions must be transparent, fair and based on clearly understood rules. When politicians talk about community cohesion, they should remember that cohesion works both ways. Strangers who have arrived here illegally have a responsibility to the communities that they join, the Government has a responsibility to the communities that receive them and elected representatives have a responsibility to listen to everyone—not only those from the loudest campaign group or those who follow the latest political fashion.
We should not be afraid to say that Scotland has a culture, a history and a set of shared civic values that are worth preserving. By filling our communities to the brim with outsiders who have alternative interests to those of local Scots, we risk losing our culture entirely.
If we genuinely want community cohesion, we need to build communities where people know their neighbours, respect the law, contribute where they can and feel that the Government has not forgotten them. That is what a cohesive Scotland should look like, and that is what Reform will always champion.
To those watching outside, let me say this: we on the Reform benches will always prioritise you, the people of Scotland. We will never change who we are or apologise for saying what needs to be said. If members feel uncomfortable with it, they better get used to it. Unlike those who have invaded our country, we are here to stay. Reform will always put Scotland first.
I move amendment S7M-01084.1, to leave out from the first “supports” to end and insert:
“believes, however that many people do not feel safe in their communities and that the Scottish Government is ignoring the genuine issues created by a lack of integration and assimilation by previous generations of immigrants to Scotland; highlights the example of the Scottish Government withdrawing the funding of one year English lessons for child asylum seekers, prior to mainstream school, as an example of direct policy choices which, it believes, have driven division and destroyed cohesion in communities across Scotland, and calls on the Scottish Government to recognise the undue pressure put on Scotland's working-class communities as well as the genuine concerns raised by communities regarding the impacts of its policy decisions and not to dismiss them.”
I call Kate Nevens to speak to and move amendment S7M-01084.3. You have six minutes.
16:02
I declare an interest as a former employee of Amnesty International UK.
First, I thank the minister for lodging today’s motion and for being so candid about her own experiences. It is important that we stand united in the face of this rising hate and work together to ensure that everyone in Scotland is treated with dignity and respect and can live safely and free from prejudice and discrimination.
As we have seen in recent months, and unfortunately in this chamber, Scotland is far from immune from the corrosive forces of racism and hatred. If we are to become the safe, welcoming and inclusive country that I truly believe most of us want to be, and if we are to cement ourselves as a nation of friends, not strangers, urgent united action is needed.
I want to be very clear what we are actually talking about when we talk about the rising number of public safety issues: we are talking about harm and violence both on our streets and online that is disproportionately affecting marginalised groups. We are talking about violence and harm against migrants, asylum seekers, Muslims and people of colour, as well as those who are part of our trans and queer communities.
We are talking about this week’s fire at a Glasgow tenement, which our colleague Paul Sweeney has rightly condemned in this chamber. That fire was deliberately started after disinformation was shared online that the building was housing asylum seekers. It was then celebrated by far-right groups.
We are talking about the violent Islamophobic attacks that have taken place in Edinburgh and Glasgow, the Nazi salutes and the deliberate intimidation of people in hotels in Falkirk. We are talking about the targeted threats to and intimidation of community-run organisations that are providing support to marginalised groups across Scotland. And we are talking about the disgusting events in Dover and Portsmouth, where hundreds of balaclava-clad men gathered to block incoming boats carrying asylum seekers—people who have every right to seek safety in the UK.
In my Edinburgh and Lothians East region, constituents are telling me that they feel afraid. They are afraid to leave their homes, afraid to take their children to school and afraid to use public spaces, with some reporting being harassed in public parks, for example, for being visibly Muslim.
I am devastated to see that the latest data on hate crime in Scotland paints a similar picture. There has been a 17 per cent increase in the total number of charges reported as containing at least one element of hate crime since last year, with racial crime being the most commonly reported category.
I also want to be really clear about where the threat is coming from. It is the result of dangerous and hateful language against migrants, asylum seekers, Muslims and people of colour and other marginalised groups, and the deliberate spread of disinformation, which is fanning the flames of the rising violence and fascism and making all of us unsafe. As the Scottish Trades Union Congress has said, this has not happened by accident but is
“the product of right-wing forces, both in our politics and in our media, whipping people into a false frenzy of hatred and division.”
On Monday, Neil Cowan, Scotland programme director at Amnesty International UK, called on
“political leaders in Scotland”
to
“show clear moral leadership, challenge racist narratives, meaningfully tackle online misinformation and stand firmly alongside those who are being targeted.”
I urge my colleagues to heed his calls.
I was really pleased to see the emphasis in last week’s programme for government on tackling violence against women and the importance placed on prevention. Gender-based violence is endemic in our society, and I am pleased to see the Government giving it so much prominence.
Will the member give way?
Not at this time.
However, I want to note that we are seeing the deliberate weaponisation of violence against women and girls by hate groups. Far-right groups are making themselves out to be the protectors of women, when their behaviour is in fact making all women less safe. I was appalled to see reports over the weekend of a protester at the Reform UK conference being grabbed by the hair by audience members and having fingers stuck in her mouth.
When considering what steps we can take, we must listen to voices across our communities, invest in community-led approaches, address trauma and tackle systemic inequality. Criminal justice responses are one part of the picture, but they should not subsume wider efforts to bring about systemic change. We should be working with community groups to co-design strategies for community safety, ensuring that any response is shaped by those most impacted by violence and discrimination. We should be offering support to individuals in our community who are at the sharp end of this violence—
Will the member give way?
I am afraid not.
That includes funding accessible and culturally-informed mental health and trauma services. We should be offering resources to community groups that are supporting people facing injustice, including investing in third spaces that support communities to feel safe, and supporting the provision of sustained anti-racist education and training.
In my region, many fantastic community projects are already doing that vital work, providing community meals and safe spaces, and organising walking buses to help children get to school safely. That is not just true of our urban centres; as my colleague Laura Moodie mentioned to me, rural Scotland is too often overlooked in discussions about community cohesion. Our villages and towns frequently demonstrate what genuine inclusion can look like. They understand that strong communities are built through participation, contribution and relationships, and that such work does not happen by accident, but is carried forward by volunteers who give their time, energy and compassion to others, much like Simita Kumar’s neighbours. I cannot emphasise enough how important that community-led work is to our communities’ health, safety and wellbeing, and to the support that we provide to one another.
The Greens support the Government’s motion, but our amendment calls on the Government to strengthen investment in community-led safe spaces, in mental health and crisis support, and in the safety and security of front-line charities and community organisations that are facing threats and abuse.
The challenges that we are facing right now are big, and are growing, but they are not insurmountable. By working together and listening to and involving people from across our communities, we can develop a robust strategy to build stronger, safer and more inclusive communities for everyone across Scotland.
I move amendment S7M-01084.3, to insert at end:
“recognises the disproportionate harms to marginalised groups, and condemns the far right’s deliberate incitement of violence against migrants, asylum seekers, Muslims and people of colour; further recognises the need to work with community groups to co-design strategies for community safety, ensuring that any response is shaped by those most impacted by violence and discrimination; and calls on the Scottish Government to increase investment in community-led safe spaces, culturally appropriate mental health and wellbeing services, crisis support as well as the safety and security of frontline charities and community organisations that are facing threats and abuse.”
16:09
The Scottish Government’s motion will apparently build
“Stronger, Safer and Inclusive Communities”.
To be fair, I agree with the premise, as we all want people to feel safe in our towns, cities and communities. Where the Scottish Government is sadly misinformed, however, is in believing that warm, comforting words and a motion can resolve years of built-up tension in our society.
The motion before us lays it bare—it
“rejects attempts by the small minority of people who create fear, division and hostility within Scotland’s communities in person and online”.
The Scottish Government has to be clear about who it is referring to, because vague and unexplained criticisms do not bring people together; instead, they lead to disconnect, division and hostility. They create exactly the finger pointing that the Scottish Government claims that it wants to avoid. Instead of debating what we all want to achieve—which I think is clear—we should be debating how we achieve it.
I thank Ms Gallacher for her comments. Will she acknowledge that, when I say a “small minority”, I include people in this chamber, having noted the language that we have heard this afternoon—for example, calling people “strangers” and saying to people like me that immigrants have failed to assimilate and integrate—and I include people who have been out demonstrating, covering their faces and doing Nazi salutes? Those are the minority of people I meant.
Where is that in the motion? It is not clear. We are talking about various different people who are raising concerns about various different issues, but we should be debating how we achieve the differences that we want to make. That means perpetrators of serious crime not being released back into our communities prematurely under early release schemes. Our police officers need more support, not only to deal with workload pressures but to be visible, present and properly resourced on our streets. The Government needs a serious and credible plan to reduce the number of crimes involving sexual violence against women and girls.
I have spent a lot of time in the chamber over the years talking about the neglect that the SNP Government has imposed on communities such as mine in Central Scotland and Lothians West. We have seen the undermining of public services that are already under enormous pressure and which are clearly not working as they should. That typically happens in working-class communities, where people are struggling with the cost of living, childcare costs and the lack of good, skilled employment. Where is that reflected in the motion? Ministers cannot lecture communities about cohesion while failing to maintain the cohesion of the public services that those communities depend on.
I want to talk about two specific cases from my region, and I hope that they will give members an indication of why so many women do not feel safe in our communities. The first case relates to an individual, Robert Davie, who was found guilty of offences including rape, indecent assault and serious assault following a trial at the High Court in Edinburgh in 2024. Those offences took place against a woman in the Falkirk area over a period spanning the years 1994 to 2022—and that relates to some of what the minister said earlier about how violence against women and girls usually involves someone whom the woman might know. Robert Davie was sentenced to five years in prison and given an order for lifelong restriction. This is a man who has demonstrated that he is a real danger to women.
However, it is not always the case that women know who the perpetrators are. We also have the case of Muhammad Sheikhi. He was staying at the Cladhan hotel in Falkirk in 2025, when he targeted two women after they left two different nightclubs in the early hours of a Sunday morning. He was an illegal immigrant, and he sexually assaulted both women. He was subsequently arrested, jailed for four years and ultimately placed on the sex offenders register indefinitely, with an order preventing him from contacting the women for 10 years.
There remains a fundamental question about what happens next. If someone who is not entitled to remain in this country commits serious offences of that nature, the public—in my view, quite rightly—expects that individual to be denied permanent access to our country. People who commit serious offences involving violence against women and girls must face the most serious of consequences.
Those are two very different cases, but they have one thing in common: violence against women and girls. Standing here today, we must ask ourselves why women do not feel safe in our communities. Why do women feel the need to look over their shoulder when they are walking home at night? Why do young women have to think about whether it is safe to go out and enjoy themselves?
[Made a request to intervene.]
I am afraid that the member is in her last minute.
Incidents such as the ones that I have just described continue to happen. Community safety is not achieved through slogans or vague statements about division and hostility. I would much rather debate visible policing, effective public services, holding dangerous perpetrators accountable and, most importantly, how we protect victims. That is how we restore confidence in politics and trust in Government.
I move amendment S7M-01084.2, to leave out from first “supports” to end and insert:
“believes that the first duty of government is to protect the public and that public safety must never be compromised by political choices, financial pressures or a lack of capacity within the justice system; further believes that there must be consequences for committing crime and that those who commit acts of violence, intimidation, hatred, disorder and other offences must face swift and meaningful punishment; notes concerns that the scale and pace of asylum and immigration arrivals in some communities has placed pressure on local services and community cohesion, and calls on the Scottish Government to review the housing rules which have contributed to that pressure; gives its full support to the police and other law enforcement agencies in taking firm action against those who openly flout the law; rejects early release policies that put dangerous offenders back into communities because of pressure on the prison estate; calls for bail laws to be reviewed so that the protection of victims, particularly women and girls, is given greater weight; condemns unacceptable court delays that leave victims waiting years for justice and undermine confidence in the system; calls for sufficient police numbers and resources to maintain visible, effective frontline policing, and believes that safe and cohesive communities depend on upholding the rule of law and ensuring that criminal behaviour has consequences.”
16:15
Dignity, respect and safety—those words thrive at the heart of the motion. I speak on this matter not just as a bystander or an ally but—like Simita Kumar, who moved the motion—as someone who has personally felt the cold hand of those seeking to create division and hostility. As I look across the chamber, yes, I see allies and I also recognise people like me—people who look or sound different, who are the ones at the cold front of the necessity of this kind of debate.
When Holyrood magazine uploaded a video of my oath taking on its social media account—an oath that I proudly took in three languages—it gathered more than half a million views. For comparison, the maximum is usually 50,000. I wish that I could say that many of those views reflected joy and support of internationalism, but the cold shower that X can create is different, and people said, “Deport her”, “Another spy” or “Show-off”. I felt threatened and minimised due to my background, the way that I look and the way that I sound. It twisted my heart—it hurts.
When I first moved to Scotland, to a lovely wee village in the Mearns, the local mums warmly welcomed me—and they still count me as one of them, even years after I moved out. I have spent the past decade of my life here volunteering—as I always do—and contributing to my community, like many other people who come to Scotland. I hope that my background has brought opportunities to the people of the north-east and to those in this chamber.
Liberal Democrats value internationalism. It is at our core and is one of our founding values, alongside those of equalities, community and support for human rights, so it is second nature for us to support the motion in its entirety. We support having a fairer and more equal, tolerant and connected world. We fall fiercely against Brexit, understanding that a world that is more deeply connected with its neighbours brings not only peace but prosperity. Sadly, Brexit has opened a Pandora’s box. Some people felt that it was a justification to openly hate people who are not like them. That hate has been growing, fuelled by misinformation and tunnel vision.
Does the member agree that it is disingenuous to associate the legitimate cause of Euroscepticism with hate and division in society?
Frankly, I have felt that since Brexit happened. People in this country who are foreign like me have been feeling very different, so I am totally not going to change what I said.
The support of those diverse communities also plays a special role in my region. Migrants support our energy industries, our farms, our national health service and social care, our higher education institutes and our third sector. People who come to Scotland and who choose here as their new homeland all come with their own stories. When we label someone “a stranger”, what do we mean? We just mean someone we do not know. Yet, when the term is used collectively—“strangers”—that takes away the individual story behind every single person who comes to Scotland to start anew. To use it as a word of fear and anger removes all the curiosity and closes the open mind that we should have. It stokes the very division and hostility that we should be working to eliminate and that the motion seeks to address.
I close on a note about prosperity. Historically, in times of economic boom, the newcomer has been welcomed. Over the past two centuries, millions of Scots have travelled the globe, settling in North America, Australia, New Zealand and elsewhere. Tens of thousands of new Scots like me have moved to the United Kingdom in the past generation. We have settled here and contributed, and we have helped with our economy, our communities and our churches. In times of economic insecurity, such as exist today, an initial warm welcome can fade as people look for someone to blame for their issues.
I recognise that there are serious problems in people’s day-to-day lives and that tensions are understandably high as people face the rising cost of essentials, increased fuel bills and the struggle with youth engagement, to name but a few challenges. However, I urge my colleagues to be more specific with their language. A stranger is just someone you do not know, so, out of a wish to achieve dignity, respect, and safety for all, including all who may still be a stranger to me or to you, I support the Government’s motion.
16:21
I thank the minister for speaking so powerfully and for proposing the debate. This was a difficult speech for me to write—not because I did not have anything to say, but because I wanted to say everything. I am driven by a deep sense of what is right and by wanting to ensure that equality and fairness are at the heart of all that I do. I wish to stand up for what I believe in, and I will strive to ensure that Scotland is—and remains—a welcoming, inclusive and, most of all, safe space for everyone who calls Scotland their home. Community cohesion can happen only when we see each other not in terms of race, gender or sexuality, but as human beings.
I pay tribute to the brave young women who recently spoke at the festival of politics about their experiences in school and of having to deal, day in, day out, with misogyny—the age-old tactic of attempting to gain power and control over women. Although it may be dressed up all fancy and rebranded in its new title of the “manosphere”, let us not pretend that it is anything new. A minority of men are looking to assert power and control over women, and we absolutely must draw a line to say, “No more”. I welcome the announcement of a bill to tackle misogyny. It is incumbent on every member in the chamber to ensure that the bill is robust and that it delivers the tools that are required to bring an end to the violence, harassment and abuse in our communities.
I turn to the unacceptable racial violence that we have witnessed, which I believe is driven by a minority of far-right voices whose sole intent is to create division and fear. As with the dressing up of misogyny in its new form known as the manosphere, I firmly believe that the far-right rhetoric on asylum and immigration is nothing but racism that is driving hate and division. That is unacceptable. I thank the organisations that have shared with me their experience of what is happening on the ground, including BEMIS, the Council of Ethnic Minority Voluntary Sector Organisations and the Anti-Racism Observatory for Scotland. Those organisations are doing what they can, but they need our support to call out racism at every opportunity.
I turn to our LGBTQ+ community. I say to them: I hear how unsafe you are feeling, and I see it. As the minister has done, I want to share a small part of my story and in doing so honour my fierce and wonderful big sister, Nikki Grace Hagmann. Nikki is not here to tell her own story as, sadly, she died not long after her 40th birthday. I miss her every day. She taught me so much and, although losing anyone you love is hard, the loss of a sibling can be particularly tough. You lose the only other person in the world who knows and understands your shared memories of childhood and the peculiarities of your unique family.
I am talking about Nikki in this debate because she was trans and she was my sister—she was my family. She was not a faceless statistic, and her life mattered. The trans community is not feeling safe, and I do not believe that my beautiful sister would be feeling safe today, either.
It is important to acknowledge the calls on the Scottish Government to introduce its bill on ending conversion practices. I thank the minister for her commitment to engage extensively with a range of Scottish stakeholders on the issue.
I also want to use this opportunity to remind everyone in the chamber, and those who are listening online, that equality is not a pie in which sharing a slice means leaving less for anyone else. That simple truth seems bafflingly hard for some to understand, so let me repeat that thought in another way: a person does not lose their voice or freedom just because a new group or individual gains theirs.
At a time when people are too often dehumanised, reduced to labels and turned into targets, the need for community cohesion could not be more urgent. We need to think of one another not as strangers. We must learn one another’s names, listen to one another’s stories and recognise the hopes and humanity that we share. We must replace fear with understanding, hostility with solidarity and isolation with belonging. That is the Scotland that we must build together—a country where everyone is safe, everyone is valued and everyone has the chance to belong.
16:26
People in communities across Scotland do the work that the Government cannot, in many ways that are unseen and unheard. Volunteers, sports coaches, shopkeepers and neighbours—those community figures shape our lives and our communities. If they fail, it shapes the news headlines and the national data that is published years later.
In 2007, the Scottish Government created a performance framework that measured wellbeing in our society. Those indicators should be at the heart of our policy decisions. Instead, measures for community, culture and poverty will now be refreshed for a third time.
What does the data show us? One in five Scots felt lonely in the past week. Two in five do not have places to meet. Only one in five feels that they can influence decisions that affect their neighbourhoods. Many Scots feel disconnected from their communities and they lack hope and support.
That is why fewer than two thirds of Scots voted at the election. We must look again at the red tape that places limits on the lives of people in our local communities, and we must devolve decision-making powers back to those communities. If we do not address those challenges today, they will become the crises of tomorrow.
Sadly, the past decade has been a desperate one for Scotland’s public health. There have been alarming trends in economic activities, substance misuse, delayed discharge, shoplifting, poor mental health among our young people, and violence against women and girls.
Members have rightly mentioned hatred and violence in our communities. Voices that promote intolerance and conspiracy are increasingly hard to ignore. Last week’s protest in England and attacks closer to home in Glasgow and Edinburgh show the real-life impacts of anger that is being redirected towards minority communities. I am shocked by each new story of racist attacks. People in our communities should not live in fear. Scotland is a friendly and welcoming country, but sadly we are beginning to see such incidents happen more often.
I believe that our communities will not tolerate that kind of abuse directed toward our neighbours and friends. I promise that I will counter the misinformation that is used to incite those attacks, and that I will challenge those who profit from feeding division in our communities.
I call on the Government to publish the data that helps us to measure wellbeing in our communities and to renew investment in local authorities and public services to keep our communities running. I also encourage the Government to match the warm welcome that it gives to new Scots with action to integrate our communities.
16:30
Deputy Presiding Officer, before I begin, I take the opportunity to apologise to the chamber, as I will be unable to stay for the whole of today’s debate. I have secured prior permission from the Presiding Officer to leave early.
I thank Simita Kumar for her passionate, honest and hopeful speech. I am pleased to speak in support of the motion. Unlike what we have heard from some members, I note that this is a simple motion: it is simply about the kind of Scotland that we all want to live in. It is about feeling safe, respected and valued.
We cannot wait anymore until things go wrong. We have to act before we reach that point. For me, that means investing in communities.
These are lovely words and I do not disagree with the member. However, the reality is that we want to get to the substance of the policies that underpin public safety and, in those areas, the SNP Government seems to have very strange priorities: for example, responding to overcrowding in prisons by releasing dangerous people back into the community before their due time.
Surely the member shares the concern that many of us feel in this chamber about a reckless policy—which, by the way, the senators of the College of Justice have already commented on today.
I thank Mr Kerr for his intervention. I am a page and a half into a seven-minute speech, so I will continue.
I welcome the Scottish Government’s commitment to increase investment in the community cohesion fund, supporting grassroots initiatives across Scotland. Those initiatives are of critical importance because community cohesion cannot simply be delivered from the centre. It needs to be built locally by people who know their neighbours: that is, by community centres, youth groups, schools, sports clubs, charities and voluntary organisations; by the people who understand the challenges facing their own communities, because they live those experiences every single day. It is almost, as a famous American president once said:
“government of the people, by the people, for the people”.
We are lucky to have excellent examples of that sentiment in Glasgow Anniesland. The Whiteinch Centre is literally at the heart of its community, providing activities, support and volunteering opportunities that bring people together. It describes its purpose as creating
“opportunities and services that will sustain individual, family and community wellbeing”.
Kingsway Community Connections is another excellent example, with a vision of a proud, capable, confident, multicultural community. It works to build social capital, confidence, connection and a sense of belonging. Organisations such as Linkes, Temple/Shafton Youth Project and many others are doing similar work with young people, families and communities. I also acknowledge the invaluable work that many community councils do across Scotland. These are people who turn up consistently, rain, hail or snow.
That brings me back to something that I said in this Parliament last week during our debate on child poverty. I asked how we can ensure that the voices of our local communities are heard and how we can put their experience, knowledge and ideas right into the heart of Government thinking. I mentioned people’s panels and the potential for smaller, lower cost, locally focused panels. I believe that that principle applies just as strongly to community cohesion as it does to child poverty.
If we want stronger communities, we must listen to the people who make up those communities. If we want safer communities, we must listen to those who understand where people feel unsafe and why they feel unsafe. If we want to have more inclusive communities, we need to listen to those who experience exclusion. Our job is to listen, to provide support and to help turn ideas into action.
That brings me to the responsibility of every one of us in the Parliament. Every MSP has a duty to do their utmost to facilitate stronger, safer and more inclusive communities, not only by passing legislation or making speeches in the Parliament, but by going into our communities and bringing people together.
I intend to continue to do exactly that in Glasgow Anniesland. I am going to organise an event that will bring together community groups and organisations from across my constituency and create the opportunity for people to meet one another, to share their experiences and to identify challenges and, therefore, solutions. I really hope that the minister will be happy to receive a report on the outcomes of that event and to consider what lessons might be taken from it.
I urge every MSP to consider doing something similar. Let us imagine for a moment that every member brought together the organisations, groups, young people, community leaders and residents in their constituency. Let us imagine what would happen if we started hundreds of conversations across Scotland about what makes people feel safe, what makes them feel included and what they believe needs to change.
There will always be a small minority—
Will the member give way?
I am afraid that the member is concluding.
There will always be a small minority who seek to spread hatred, fear and division, whether on our streets or online; they will always be there. We should be absolutely clear that that behaviour has no place in Scotland.
However, the answer to division is not to focus on those who seek to divide us, but to strengthen the vast majority who want to live together peacefully. Let us listen to the people who know their communities best, from people’s panels and local conversations, to put lived experience at the heart of our decisions.
You must come to a conclusion.
If we build it together, we can create a Scotland where everyone is treated with dignity—[Interruption.]—everyone has a voice and everyone can feel that they belong.
Thank you, Mr Kerr. I am in the chair, and I am perfectly capable of keeping things in order.
16:37
In thinking about this debate, I kept coming back to one word in the title of the motion—the word “Together”, because what is at stake is the kind of communities that we want to live in, and what we should do when something starts to pull them apart.
I do not want to say that racism is somehow “back”, which I keep hearing. It never went away. What concerns me is that it feels more unmasked, people feel more emboldened, and we are hearing the dog whistles more openly. In the language that I am referring to, race might never be mentioned, but we know who is being described when the word “stranger” is used, and who people are being encouraged to fear. Behind that language are human beings who hear a conversation about whether they belong.
In my constituency, I have seen how quickly misinformation and prejudice can come together. Last summer, 122 young sea cadets arrived at a training centre in Boddam for summer camp, under the command of the royal naval reserve. A photograph of them was posted online, along with claims that immigrants were being secretly brought into the village. They were children. Nobody had asked who they were. They were looked at, labelled and turned into strangers, and, suddenly, there were concerns for their safety and they had to cut short their camp. That is where misinformation and racism meet, because the lie only works if people have already been encouraged to believe that the stranger is someone to fear.
I remember something similar happening when a photograph of young Afghan men who were living locally was shared on one of our community Facebook pages. Some of the comments really stayed with me. Those young men had travelled through countries and refugee camps and crossed here in dangerous conditions. They arrived knowing nobody, thousands of miles from home, only to read people making assumptions about them online. There is a human being at the other end of the dog whistle—the person who is told that they are a stranger in a place where they are trying to make a life.
Those same young men found something very different at Fraserburgh Cricket Club. When Omar was asked what he liked the most, he said:
“It’s our teammates, and just being part of the team.”
I could spend a paragraph defining “community cohesion”, but I think that Omar did it better.
Cohesion is what happens when labels fall away and people meet as neighbours, classmates, workmates and teammates. We saw that spirit, too, in Banff, when a divisive message was taken there and local people came out in greater numbers to peacefully reject it. Cohesion is not passive—it is correcting the false post, recognising the dog whistle and challenging it when it comes from a friend, a colleague or someone around our own family table.
It is easy to oppose racism when it belongs to somebody else. The real test is what we do when it enters our own circle. That is why education matters. The late Sir Geoff Palmer told the Parliament:
“Although we cannot change the past, we can change consequences such as racism for the better, using education.”—[Official Report, 21 September 2021; c 2.]
We need to help young people to recognise prejudice and misinformation, support schools and grass-roots organisations, and act firmly when hatred becomes intimidation or violence.
Political leadership matters, too. People have every right to be concerned about housing, public services and the cost of living, and our job is to answer those concerns honestly. However, refugees and migrants did not create those problems.
It is also fair to say that ordinary people are allowed to have legitimate concerns around the scale and pace of immigration to the country as well.
I would like to say that I thank the member for that intervention, but what does he mean by “ordinary people”? That is exactly the kind of language that I am talking about, which we must utterly reject.
Scapegoating refugees and migrants will not build a house—
[Made a request to intervene.]
Sit down.
Scapegoating refugees and migrants will not build a house, reduce an energy bill or shorten an NHS waiting list. When politicians take genuine frustration and give it a human target, that is not leadership; it is a cowardly escape from true accountability.
When I talk about unity, I do not mean silence or pretending that we all agree. I mean deciding that, whatever our disagreements, nobody’s humanity should be up for debate. If racism is becoming louder and more emboldened, our answer has to be more than warm words. It has to be truth, education, solidarity and the everyday courage to speak up in our homes, in our communities, online and especially in the Parliament.
[Made a request to intervene.]
Nobody should be made a stranger in the place that they call home. That is the Scotland that I believe in, and that is the Scotland that I will always stand up for.
I remind members that interventions in the last minute of a speech will not be taken.
16:42
The motion talks of “dignity and respect” and communities where people feel safe. Those are fine words until we look at what this Government has actually done to women. Sexual crime in Scotland is at epidemic levels. Recorded sexual offences are at the highest point since comparable records began in 1971.
Rape and attempted rape offences have risen sharply over the past decade. That is not a recording quirk; that is women and girls being attacked who are being attacked in their homes and on the streets in every local authority area. Glasgow alone recorded 485 rapes and attempted rapes in 12 months—one every 18 hours—which is up 43 per cent in five years.
I thank the member for taking the intervention, although I really wanted to make this point to Meghan Gallacher. Does the member recognise that most violent crimes against women and girls are committed by family members, spouses and ex-partners, and not by foreigners?
I did not say “foreigners”. Indeed, we have enough of our own home-grown rapists and abusers. Therefore, why is the Labour Government in Westminster importing more, and why is the SNP Government in Holyrood incentivising them to come to Glasgow with the offer of a free house—a house that should go to local people?
Will the member take an intervention?
No, I will make progress.
When those women seek help, they find that Scotland’s largest rape crisis centre, Glasgow and Clyde, has had its waiting list shut since February. Survivors wait more than 200 days; some cannot even get on the list. Funding stood still while the number of attacks rose. That is the Government’s idea of a robust criminal justice response.
Safer communities start with women being able to use a toilet, changing room, refuge or hospital ward that is female only. That is not extremism; it is the Equality Act 2010. As settled by the Supreme Court: sex means biological sex. If inclusive still means males in women’s spaces, ministers are not building safety.
Will Amanda Lindsay take an intervention?
No, I will make progress.
They are asking women to surrender their boundaries so that a slogan can survive. Even in hospital, where a woman is at her weakest, this Government has failed to enforce a Scotland-wide biological-sex definition of a single-sex ward. Women’s Rights Network Scotland found that hundreds of sexual assaults and a dozen rapes had taken place at those sites that bothered to keep data. The Patient Safety Commissioner for Scotland has told the Parliament that women in mental health units
“are locking themselves in … rooms”.—[Official Report, Health, Social Care and Sport Committee, 3 February 2026; c 8.]
That is not inclusion; it is contempt.
Victims of male violence do not need lectures about cohesion. They need single-sex provision, honest recording of sex and a state that treats their safety as non-negotiable. They need waiting lists that are open, streets that are policed and a Government that will say the word “woman” and mean it. Women who want female-only spaces are not creating fear. Parents who want girls’ toilets are not hostile. Campaigners who point at record rape figures are not a small minority damaging community relations; they are describing reality. We need an open debate about the erasure of sex and the collapse of women’s safety, without the threat of hate crime prosecution for wrongthink.
The motion for debate asks us to reject those
“who create fear, division and hostility”,
but the Government should look in the mirror. It is this Government that put a double-rapist in a women’s prison. It is this Government that left Rape Crisis lists shut in Glasgow while sexual crime hit a 50-year high. It is this Government that still does not defend sex-based rights, yet lectures the country about prejudice.
Please conclude.
Reform will back measures that tell the truth about sex and protect women and girls. We will not clap for a debate with a title that says “inclusive” if the policy still asks women to make themselves smaller while the number of rapes rises in every city. Stronger, safer communities are built on reality and not on the hope that nobody notices who is creating the fear.
18:47
Presiding Officer, I apologise for missing a section of the opening speech. I emailed my apology to the Presiding Officer’s office, but I now put it on the official record, too.
I am delighted to speak in support of today’s motion, and I am very grateful to the minister for lodging it, because some of the scenes that we have seen in recent times have been extremely concerning to many of our communities across Scotland. Many of our most marginalised and vulnerable communities have been bearing the brunt of the challenges that we face because of the dysfunctional and broken Brexit British economy that Scotland remains shackled to.
The blame for the problems that we face is far too often placed on those who have had no hand in creating them. In the Parliament, we have a particular responsibility to ensure that the way in which we debate and conduct ourselves helps to bring our communities together rather than to drive them apart, and we must not demonise the poorest in our society to score cheap political points.
It is worth remembering the four words on the mace at the heart of this building, which should guide everything that we do: wisdom, justice, compassion and integrity. It is far too easy for us to forget the word “compassion”. Our words and actions here at the heart of Scotland’s society have power and impact far outside these walls.
I had hoped that, in the debate, we could rally around our shared compassion to send a clear signal to those who look to us for leadership that we would not take the easy route out. Sadly, Thomas Kerr’s amendment and his recent contributions to public debate have left compassion far behind.
Will Alex Kerr take an intervention?
Not at the moment.
He has attempted time and again to drag into the sewer any discussion of the serious challenges that we face. To reiterate, given the privileged position that we have been afforded by the electorate in taking our seats here, our words have power. When Thomas Kerr lends his support to roving gangs of masked men in Glasgow, he is implicitly endorsing the outcomes from those groups: attacks on police officers, racist attacks and intimidation.
Reform and its masked goons claim to be standing up for the safety of women. The women to whom I speak are far more concerned about the presence of those gangs on our streets, stirred up by folk such as Thomas Kerr and his boss Malcolm Offord.
Thomas Kerr does not need to take my word for it. A woman who had been the victim of sexual assault in Glasgow spoke in the BBC’s recent documentary about Glasgow city centre—a documentary that Thomas Kerr is very keen to promote. Her name—not her real name—is Zoe, and she is in her 20s. She was sexually harassed on a bus as she travelled through the city centre. She spoke of her fears about how often such attacks are happening to women, but is deeply sceptical of what the gangs that are supported by Thomas Kerr and Reform say motivates them to come to the streets. In her words:
“They say it’s about protecting women and children, but it’s not. It’s about being racist. It’s about causing public disorder and being aggressive and violent and just going out and causing it, really.”
Voices such as hers are swept aside by Mr Offord and Mr Kerr. Is she not the right kind of woman? Is it best to leave things to the men who know what they are talking about, to determine what makes women feel safe? Is that right?
I am sure that Thomas Kerr, who was formerly in the liberal wing of the Tory party under Ruth Davidson, feels that his new political posturing is very intelligent. I hope, however, that he is still capable of reflecting, when he sees how his dog whistles have a real-life impact in normalising abhorrent behaviour such as a set of new affordable homes being burned down due to racist disinformation or a father being hounded for taking his son to the park. I expect that my plea will fall on deaf ears but I say to Thomas Kerr: if there is any compassion left in there, I desperately hope that we will see some of it.
I welcome the fact that, although the vast majority of members may disagree on exactly how we get there, we share a focus on bringing together all the communities that make up our vibrant and welcoming country. I strongly believe that the key to many of the deep-rooted problems that we face as a society is through supporting and empowering our communities. Simita Kumar’s powerful personal experience showed the worst of us but, as she spoke about it, it also highlighted the difference that our communities can make.
The work that is being undertaken by the Government through its public service reform agenda has a key part to play in putting our communities at the heart of how we deliver services in the public sector. Our communities know best who needs support and are able to deliver public services in a sustainable way that, often, cannot be matched by local or national government. The Government’s push to see our communities as partners has much potential in many areas.
Building cohesion among our diverse communities is just one of the many benefits that we could gain if parties across the chamber could work together on what is one of the largest and most challenging gauntlets that has been laid down before this building. I am proud to stand in support of the motion, and I pledge to work across party lines to tackle and confront the kind of unacceptable hate that has no place in Scotland.
16:52
I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests, in that I am the chair of Kincardine and Mearns Youth Clubs.
I welcome the opportunity to speak in the debate, because it addresses a fundamental expectation of any society: that people should be able to live in their communities with dignity, respect and safety, and free from violence, intimidation, hatred and disorder. I support the Scottish Government’s ambition to build stronger, safer and more inclusive communities, because people thrive when they feel that they belong, trust one another and have confidence that harmful behaviour will be challenged.
In my first speech in the chamber, I spoke about the communities of Angus North and Mearns. I said then that although our towns, villages and landscapes help to define the places that we call home, it is people who truly make our places special. Building stronger communities therefore means working alongside people and empowering them to shape the places in which they live. By “people”, I mean all who have chosen to call Scotland their home, as they are the people of Scotland.
We can see the benefits of that approach throughout my constituency and the rest of Scotland. I am the founder and chair of the Kincardine and Mearns Youth Clubs charity, and there is also MoHUB in Montrose and the Attic in Brechin. All those provide young people with safe and inclusive places to meet, socialise, develop skills and access support. Creating opportunities and fostering positive relationships helps to prevent youth antisocial behaviour and strengthens community cohesion before problems start to arise.
Connections between neighbours and across communities absolutely matter.
Will the member take an intervention?
No, I do not think I will.
A community cannot be truly safe until it is inclusive. I therefore welcome the Government’s commitment to tackling discrimination and inequality, including the discrimination that LGBTQ+ people continue to face.
Everyone should be able to feel safe, valued and respected, regardless of who they are. Likewise, a community cannot be truly safe unless it is safe for women and girls. Sadly, too many women and girls in Angus North and Mearns, and across Scotland, continue to experience gender-based violence and abuse. Police Scotland recorded almost 65,000 incidents of domestic abuse in 2024-25, and we know that many cases still go unreported. I therefore welcome the Scottish Government's recognition of violence against women and girls as a key public protection issue because, if we are serious about ensuring that people can live with dignity, respect and safety, tackling violence against women and girls must remain a national priority.
We must also be clear that there is no place in Scotland for hatred, intimidation or prejudice, for any reason. I say no to racial hatred; no to xenophobia; no to religious hatred; no to misogyny; and no to gender-based hatred, whether it is on our streets, in our communities or online.
Will the member take an intervention?
Absolutely not. When you lot start taking interventions, maybe we will.
I remind members to speak through the chair, please.
Apologies, Deputy Presiding Officer.
A small minority must not be allowed to create fear, division and hostility. We must challenge that behaviour robustly while continuing the longer-term work of building trust, strengthening cohesion and bringing people together. Prevention must be our first line of defence, but it must be matched by effective enforcement when harm does occur. I therefore support the Government’s efforts to reduce reoffending and tackle violence and knife crime through education, intervention and engagement, as helping people move away from offending benefits not only the individual, but their families and communities.
At the same time, people need confidence that criminal and antisocial behaviour will be dealt with effectively. The commitment to strengthen police powers to confiscate and retain e-bikes and e-scooters, for example, that are being used antisocially or criminally are therefore welcome. My constituents, including those using the Stonehaven boardwalk and those in Brechin and Forfar town centres, have raised genuine concerns about safety with me, and Police Scotland should have the powers necessary to respond.
It is good to see that a football banning orders bill is to be introduced in the first year of this session of Parliament to improve the effectiveness and response to football-related antisocial behaviour, so that true fans can feel safe attending their team’s matches.
Supporting victims must remain central to our justice system. I have spoken with victims of crime who have raised with me concerns about the victim notification scheme, as, despite asking to be informed of the result of a court hearing to ensure their own safety, they had to chase that information. It is currently an opt-in system; I believe that we should move towards an opt-out system so that victims do not face unnecessary barriers to receiving information about offenders after court hearings. Although I recognise that the Government has not yet reached a position on that, I welcome its commitment to consult on potential changes.
In conclusion, if we are serious about building stronger, safer and more inclusive communities, we must support Police Scotland and the other organisations and volunteers already making a difference; challenge those who seek to create fear and division, and who spread disinformation and dehumanise their targets; and ensure that everyone, regardless of their background, is treated with dignity and respect.
By working together, we can build a Scotland where people feel safe; where communities are united rather than divided; and where everyone can live free of prejudice, hatred and discrimination.
The rest of this Official Report will be published progressively as soon as the text is available.
Previous
Bluetongue Virus Serotype 3