OPPOSITION attempts to derail the Scottish Government's bid to stamp out football-related sectarianism have failed.
All four of Holyrood’s opposition parties and Independent MSP Margo MacDonald claimed the SNP Government was using its majority to force through a “rushed, flawed piece of legislation” which risked doing more harm than good.
However, Community Safety Minister Roseanna Cunningham said the Scottish people wanted a solution to a problem most are “sick to the back teeth of”.
The SNP majority at Holyrood ensured the flagship Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications Bill would continue its parliamentary progress.
Opponents said all political parties wanted to root out sectarianism but claimed the SNP Government had failed to make the case for the introduction of new offences which could lead to five-year jail terms and bans from football grounds.
They said concerns had been raised about the Bill by the Law Society of Scotland, the Scottish Human Rights Commission, the Scottish Justices Association, anti-sectarianism organisations, football supporters groups, religious organisations and children’s charities and “their powerful voices deserve to be listened to”.
A joint statement added: “We have come together to send the strongest possible message to the SNP Government to stop, take a breath and talk to other parties, to the clubs, and to the many others concerned about these proposals rather than using their majority to force through this flawed legislation.
“Our fear is that the Government’s response is driven by a desire to be seen to be doing something, not by any evidence this plan would actually work.”
The opposition MSPs said a more effective response would include greater use of existing laws, working with football authorities and promoting positive interventions in communities and the education system.
The debate -- based on the Holyrood Justice Committee report on the Bill -- was introduced by its convener Christine Grahame. She said that while there had been division on its merits, members were united on the need for action and there was a greater sense of urgency on the part of the football authorities and clubs.
She said: “I don’t think anyone in this chamber wants the game to be conducted in what one witness described as a Mary Poppins atmosphere, so sanitised as to be sterile of emotion or passion.
“While the forces of law enforcement have a key role to play in ridding our game of bigotry, so to do the clubs and the footballing authorities.”
Labour spokesman James Kelly claimed events over the summer, including convictions for sectarian singing and inappropriate comments on social networking site Facebook, demonstrated the proper use of existing laws.
He said: “It begs the question why was this legislation needed when the current legislation was being used so effectively?”
Tory spokesman David McLetchie said: “We should be wary of legislation which, in the broadest sense, impinges on our legal liberty to speak freely and voice opinions, even when they may be robustly or sometimes even coarsely expressed.”
Labour’s Graeme Pearson, a former match commander with Strathclyde Police, wanted progress on the Bill held for a year to give football authorities responsibility for “bringing good conduct to the clubs”. He said: “Ensure sporting authorities deal with sectarian behaviour by withdrawing season tickets, using closed turnstiles for matches or, like Turkey, having only women and children as spectators. Use fines and, worst of all, deduct points.”
Ms Cunningham claimed there had been “virtually nothing constructive” said by the opposition in the debate. She claimed existing law was not adequate and with further stages of the Bill still to come there was scope for Parliament to shape legislation to create “a Scotland we all want”.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article