Chamber and committees

I thank Mr McMillan for that question. I know that he has been doing a lot of work on the matter over previous months. As I said to Mr Marra, I am considering options for more amendments ahead of stage 2 and reflecting on the views of stakeholders and MSPs with the intention of building consensus around reform. I will lodge amendments at stage 2 to deliver further improvements to the legal complaints system. As I said, my officials are working closely with the Law Society and the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission on amendments to make significant improvements.

The Scottish Law Commission has not yet published a report following its damages for personal injury consultation. It is expected in the summer and I look forward to receiving it. When I have had time to consider any findings and recommendations, I will respond and ensure that the Parliament is aware of my response.

Presiding Officer, £390,000 was invested in the hate hurts national hate crime marketing campaign, which ran from 11 March to 31 March 2024. It included a broadcast and print campaign.

The campaign aimed to raise public awareness of hate crime by showing the impact that it has on those affected, for example a disabled person or those affected by hate crime due to their race or religion, and to encourage those who are witnesses or victims of hate crime to report it. During the development of the hate crime strategy, we heard from people who felt unable to leave their home due to their fear of being targeted by hate crime. We want to have a society where everyone feels safe. No funding was spent to promote the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021.

First, the hate monster campaign had nothing to do with the Scottish Government; it was a Police Scotland decision. In relation to hate crime, we know that lots of incidents have been reported over the past three weeks. However, figures that were released yesterday show that 654 hate crime incidents have been recorded by Police Scotland, of which 51 per cent were on race.

Does Pam Gosal accept that the European Court of Human Rights explicitly ruled in 2013 that a fair trial can be delivered without a jury?

The Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021 will help us to target hate crime in Scotland and support those who are most affected by those crimes.

First, I will respond to some of the points that have just been made about the 2021 act. Over the past two weeks since its implementation, the Scottish Government has responded to numerous media statements in order to combat misinformation, which is still regularly regurgitated, including in this chamber. To dispel that misinformation, it would perhaps be beneficial for me to set out again what the 2021 act does. It is designed to consolidate existing legislative protections against offences that are aggravated by prejudice against the following five characteristics: disability, race, religion, sexual orientation and transgender identity. That is the exact same group of characteristics that are protected in England and Wales under the current hate crime legislation. This Parliament agreed to add the additional characteristic of age, which has been welcomed.

We know that the impact on those who suffer from hate crime can be traumatic and life changing, and we want to ensure that we can protect those who are affected. However, the Conservatives would have this Parliament remove those protections.

Hate crime, as set out under the act, is a behaviour that is both criminal and rooted in prejudice and where the offender’s action has been driven by hatred towards a particular group. However, the Conservatives would have this Parliament repeal the act.

—and, if it was repealed, as the Conservative motion calls for, it would put back in its place legislation that would, once again, make blasphemy a common-law offence. That is an offence that has not been prosecuted in Scotland for more than 175 years—once again, that is the Conservatives taking us backwards.

We are committed to providing people with the protection that they deserve. I say to those who have faced prejudice just because of who they are—due to their race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, transgender identity or age—that we stand with them, unlike the Conservatives, and that we will ensure that we have laws to protect them.

Let us all stop the gutter politics and the scaremongering and, as elected members, take responsibility to protect some of the most vulnerable people in our communities.

I move amendment S6M-12855.3, to leave out from “should” to end and insert:

“, as supported by the majority of the Parliament, will provide greater protections for those who are targeted victims of hate crime; notes that the Act was developed following a review into hate crime by senior retired judge Lord Bracadale, who recommended specific legislation to recognise the impact and harm caused by hate crime; further notes that around a third of hate crimes in Scotland involved a victim who experienced the incident at their place of work or whilst undertaking duties as part of their occupation, most of whom were working in retail or other service industries, and that a quarter of recorded hate crimes had a police officer victim, and recognises that the impact on victims of hate crime can be traumatic and life changing.”

It is important to highlight that, for the past year, I have regularly met justice partners, including Police Scotland, and we were not going to implement the 2021 act until Police Scotland was ready with the implementation of its computer system and with training. The date was, therefore, on Police Scotland’s terms.

I will come to Russell Findlay in a moment.

The 2021 act introduced new offences for threatening or abusive behaviour and for the communication of threatening or abusive material that is intended to stir up hatred against a group of people who possess or appear to possess particular characteristics. However, the Conservatives would have us take away such offences, which are perpetrated against people in our society.

I will take a brief intervention.

I apologise to Mr Findlay, but I am going through my speech. I am not actually sure what he just asked me for. [Interruption.]

The independent review—[Interruption.]