Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Bill (Emergency Bill)
Good morning. The first item of business is consideration of motion S4M-00377, in the name of Roseanna Cunningham, to treat the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Bill as an emergency bill.
09:15
The Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Bill was introduced in Parliament on 16 June. Rule 9.21 of the Parliament’s standing orders provides that bills may be considered under emergency procedure. I propose that the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Bill be considered under the emergency procedure, under rule 9.21.
The reasons for considering the bill under the emergency procedure were discussed at the Justice Committee when I appeared before it earlier this week, and there has been significant media coverage of the issue, but I hope that it is helpful to Parliament for me to set out the Government’s reasons for proposing that the bill be considered under the emergency procedure. I make it clear that the Government does not make the proposal lightly and we do not propose that the process should be used as a matter of course. However, we believe that the bill is exceptional and justifies the use of the emergency procedure.
The bill is a specific response to a particular problem that was brought into sharp focus at football matches and on our televisions earlier this year. I was ashamed to witness such behaviour and I am sure that my views are shared by many in the chamber. The Government reacted quickly to those events by calling a football summit and thereafter establishing the joint action group, which is addressing a wider range of actions and strategies to tackle sectarianism and offensive behaviour over the longer term. The group will report to ministers in July. However, the Government believes that we need to move even faster than that. We believe that it is right that we should give a clear signal to the police, the courts, the football authorities and the clubs, and to the fans and the wider public, that offensive and sectarian behaviour around football matches is simply not acceptable. It is time to end this blight on our national game.
We also believe that it is right that we tackle the wider issue of people sending threatening communications. The scenes at the old firm game were bad enough, but when they were followed by hateful and vitriolic posting on the internet and by the sending of bombs and bullets through the mail, it was clear that we had to act, and act quickly. We believe that the bill must be in place for the start of the new season so that the law is clarified, the police are given additional tools to deal with such behaviour and everyone is clear about our intentions and determination to deal with the issue right from the outset of the season.
Will the minister give way?
I am approaching my last paragraph.
I welcome the support that we have had for the bill, most notably from the police, who will have to respond to the legislation and deal with offenders. The police are clear that we should have the new powers in place by 23 July. That is why we have brought forward the bill quickly and why we are asking Parliament to respond accordingly. It is a short bill, and it is clear and focused on the particular issues that I have outlined. Of course, it is only the first part of a wider and long-term strategy. I therefore call on the Parliament to support my proposal that the bill be taken under the emergency procedure.
I move,
That the Parliament agrees that the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Bill be treated as an Emergency Bill.
09:18
I rise on behalf of the Scottish Labour Party to oppose the motion in the name of Roseanna Cunningham. I make it clear that the Scottish Labour Party deplores any form of sectarianism. Of course we support the introduction of legislation to tackle the root of that very serious issue, but we must recognise the Parliament’s role in interrogating whether proposed legislation will be effective and will stand up to scrutiny. Proposals should be tested at every possible opportunity.
The way in which the Government introduced the legislation is unacceptable. We are concerned that we are not being afforded the opportunity to produce effective legislation. Is the Government suggesting that wider Scotland should not be given the opportunity to interrogate the legislation at every opportunity? The Government must realise that this is not its Parliament—it is the people’s Parliament. People in wider Scotland deserve their say and to be afforded that opportunity.
Given the importance of the issue, we propose using the recess period to give additional opportunities to scrutinise the proposals and to allow for proper consideration of the bill. That would enter into the spirit of what the Government’s business manager, Bruce Crawford, suggested in a recent article in the Sunday Herald, in which he called for more focused opportunities for pre and post-legislative scrutiny and committee inquiries. The Government should enter into the spirit of what it has proposed in press articles.
Why does the member think that there should be such a different attitude in England when Alex McLeish gets death threats because he is going to another club? Does the member think that the Westminster Parliament will rush through emergency legislation to deal with that?
We need to focus on the issues and major challenges that we face in Scotland. There should be opportunities for people in wider Scotland to contribute to what is an important debate. The process that the Government is following will not give the people’s Parliament that opportunity.
For once, I agreed with the First Minister when he said in his victory speech that the Scottish National Party does not hold a “monopoly on wisdom”. That was confirmed following the appearance of the Minister for Community Safety and Legal Affairs at the Justice Committee on Tuesday. It is time for the Government to recognise that this is the people’s Parliament and to give the people of Scotland the opportunity to contribute to this important debate.
09:22
I rise to oppose the motion. The First Minister told the country in his victory speech in May that the SNP had
“a majority of the seats, but not a monopoly on wisdom”.
He was right, but today those words ring hollow, because the SNP is attempting to use its majority to circumvent, marginalise and just plain ignore the wisdom of the Parliament, outside experts and the people of Scotland.
We are being asked to agree to a process that will result in two new criminal offences being created in slightly more than a week. We are being asked to create a new law with no formal consultation and no time for expert evidence or detailed examination of whether a law is needed, where it might be needed, how it will work, what it will cost or what wider implications it might have. There is not an emergency. We do not have wide, gaping holes in our laws that mean that criminals are getting off scot free. We have not suddenly discovered a new crime that needs to be addressed instantly, and it is disrespectful to the people of Scotland to suggest otherwise.
Parliamentary process is not meant to be played with at the Government’s whim. Pre-legislative scrutiny, evidence taking and committee consideration are not meant to be an inconvenience to Government; they are there to ensure that every decision that we make and every new law that we create is in the best interests of the people whom we are elected to represent.
Our code of conduct states:
“Members are accountable for their decisions and actions to the Scottish people. They should consider issues on their merits, taking account of the views of others.”
By using its majority to force through the bill at breakneck speed, the Government is not allowing members to consider the issue on its merits or to take account of the views of others. However, I can guarantee that we will still be held accountable by the people of Scotland. Making new laws is not a process that should be rushed. It is the most serious thing that Parliament does, and Parliament should be given time to do it.
09:24
We in the Conservatives have a great deal of sympathy with the sentiments that have been expressed by Paul Martin on behalf of Labour and Alison McInnes on behalf of the Liberal Democrats. However, we must recognise the political realities, which are that the Government is determined to enact a piece of legislation before the start of the new football season to address some of the problems that emerged in the course of the previous season.
That being the case, and given the Government’s majority in the Parliament, the choice before members is in reality between an expedited form of the ordinary bill procedure or using the emergency procedure and, as the cabinet secretary has proposed, having an emergency bill.
The difference between the two is simply this. If we had an expedited ordinary bill procedure, any amendments to the bill at stage 2 would be considered only by the members of the Justice Committee—nine members of the Parliament. If, however, we adopt the emergency bill procedure, stage 2 will be taken on the floor of the chamber and all members will have an opportunity to debate and vote on the issues.
Given the pace that the Government has determined for the legislation, it is vital that all members of the Parliament have the opportunity to consider and vote on amendments to the bill. In the circumstances, the process that the cabinet secretary proposes is therefore correct.
09:25
The minister tells us that it is time to end the blight of sectarianism. If members of this Parliament thought that the five sides of A4 that make up the bill would achieve that, we would want to see it passed quickly. However, I do not believe that these five sides of A4 will achieve that. Indeed, I go further: I think that there is a risk that the bill will do more harm than good.
When we legislate at such a pace, we make mistakes. It has happened before and it will happen again. If we let it happen with a bill that creates offences that could see people in prison for up to five years, there is a serious risk that, as has happened south of the border with other legislation, people will be convicted and imprisoned for trivial matters that we would not wish to see prosecuted. There is an additional risk that legislation that contains mistakes will result in people not being convicted—they will get through loopholes—when their behaviour has been serious.
If we get legislation such as this bill wrong, we will bring into disrepute the entire attempt to address sectarianism and wider hate crimes through legislation. We risk doing more harm than good if we pass legislation at this pace and do not take the time to iron out mistakes. Let us pause and take the time to hear from wider civic Scotland—as Paul Martin said—and to do our jobs as parliamentarians and scrutinise the Government’s legislation. When we have acted at this pace in the past, we have made mistakes, as anybody would. Let us not do the same with an issue as serious as this one.
Ms Cunningham?
09:27
I simply press the motion.
The question is, that motion S4M-00377, in the name of Roseanna Cunningham, to treat the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Bill as an emergency bill, be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Members: No.
The Parliament is not agreed. The division bell will sound and proceedings will be suspended for five minutes to allow members to return to the chamber.
09:28
Meeting suspended.
09:33
On resuming—
We come to the division on the motion. Members should please cast their votes now.
For
Adam, Brian (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP)
Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP)
Adamson, Clare (Central Scotland) (SNP)
Allan, Dr Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP)
Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP)
Biagi, Marco (Edinburgh Central) (SNP)
Brodie, Chic (South Scotland) (SNP)
Brown, Gavin (Lothian) (Con)
Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP)
Burgess, Margaret (Cunninghame South) (SNP)
Campbell, Aileen (Clydesdale) (SNP)
Campbell, Roderick (North East Fife) (SNP)
Carlaw, Jackson (West Scotland) (Con)
Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP)
Crawford, Bruce (Stirling) (SNP)
Cunningham, Roseanna (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP)
Davidson, Ruth (Glasgow) (Con)
Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP)
Don, Nigel (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP)
Doris, Bob (Glasgow) (SNP)
Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP)
Eadie, Jim (Edinburgh Southern) (SNP)
Ewing, Annabelle (Mid Scotland and Fife) (SNP)
Ewing, Fergus (Inverness and Nairn) (SNP)
Fabiani, Linda (East Kilbride) (SNP)
Finnie, John (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP)
Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP)
Gibson, Rob (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP)
Goldie, Annabel (West Scotland) (Con)
Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP)
Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP)
Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP)
Ingram, Adam (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP)
Johnstone, Alex (North East Scotland) (Con)
Keir, Colin (Edinburgh Western) (SNP)
Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP)
Lamont, John (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con)
Lyle, Richard (Central Scotland) (SNP)
MacAskill, Kenny (Edinburgh Eastern) (SNP)
MacDonald, Angus (Falkirk East) (SNP)
MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP)
Mackay, Derek (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP)
Mackenzie, Mike (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (SNP)
Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP)
Maxwell, Stewart (West Scotland) (SNP)
McAlpine, Joan (South Scotland) (SNP)
McDonald, Mark (North East Scotland) (SNP)
McGrigor, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
McKelvie, Christina (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (SNP)
McLeod, Aileen (South Scotland) (SNP)
McLeod, Fiona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP)
McLetchie, David (Lothian) (Con)
McMillan, Stuart (West Scotland) (SNP)
Milne, Nanette (North East Scotland) (Con)
Mitchell, Margaret (Central Scotland) (Con)
Paterson, Gil (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP)
Robertson, Dennis (Aberdeenshire West) (SNP)
Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP)
Russell, Michael (Argyll and Bute) (SNP)
Salmond, Alex (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP)
Scott, John (Ayr) (Con)
Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Stevenson, Stewart (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP)
Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP)
Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP)
Swinney, John (Perthshire North) (SNP)
Thompson, Dave (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP)
Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP)
Urquhart, Jean (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
Walker, Bill (Dunfermline) (SNP)
Watt, Maureen (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP)
Wheelhouse, Paul (South Scotland) (SNP)
White, Sandra (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP)
Wilson, John (Central Scotland) (SNP)
Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow) (SNP)
Against
Baillie, Jackie (Dumbarton) (Lab)
Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Baker, Richard (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab)
Chisholm, Malcolm (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (Lab)
Dugdale, Kezia (Lothian) (Lab)
Eadie, Helen (Cowdenbeath) (Lab)
Fee, Mary (West Scotland) (Lab)
Ferguson, Patricia (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (Lab)
Findlay, Neil (Lothian) (Lab)
Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Gray, Iain (East Lothian) (Lab)
Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green)
Hume, Jim (South Scotland) (LD)
Johnstone, Alison (Lothian) (Green)
Kelly, James (Rutherglen) (Lab)
Lamont, Johann (Glasgow Pollok) (Lab)
Macdonald, Lewis (North East Scotland) (Lab)
MacDonald, Margo (Lothian) (Ind)
Malik, Hanzala (Glasgow) (Lab)
Marra, Jenny (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Martin, Paul (Glasgow Provan) (Lab)
McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD)
McCulloch, Margaret (Central Scotland) (Lab)
McDougall, Margaret (West Scotland) (Lab)
McInnes, Alison (North East Scotland) (LD)
McMahon, Michael (Uddingston and Bellshill) (Lab)
McMahon, Siobhan (Central Scotland) (Lab)
McTaggart, Anne (Glasgow) (Lab)
Murray, Elaine (Dumfriesshire) (Lab)
Park, John (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Pearson, Graeme (South Scotland) (Lab)
Pentland, John (Motherwell and Wishaw) (Lab)
Rennie, Willie (Mid Scotland and Fife) (LD)
Simpson, Dr Richard (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Smith, Drew (Glasgow) (Lab)
Smith, Elaine (Coatbridge and Chryston) (Lab)
Stewart, David (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
The result of the division is: For 78, Against 39, Abstentions 0.
Motion agreed to,
That the Parliament agrees that the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Bill be treated as an Emergency Bill.