CALL me Voltaire (for it’s not really his quote either). I disapprove of what the republican protesters said during solemn moments of mourning; but for democracy’s sake, I defend to the death their right to say it. But ironically, those opposed to our monarchical constitution might have been better off focusing their efforts on the unchecked executive power being pushed by our democratically elected leaders.
A 22-year-old was arrested for holding an anti-monarchy sign. The same thing happened to a voice in the crowd who labelled Prince Andrew a “sick old man.”
It’s of very poor moral judgement to heckle a hearse. But is it of sound judgement for a police officer to throw a heckler to the ground and arrest him for simply voicing dissent?
The incident is telling. It’s not that our government is aggressively pushing a pro-monarchy agenda. The mechanics of State have simply become instinctively opposed to any potentially offensive opinions.
Holyrood has undoubtedly set the tone of this censorial climate. First we had the Hate Crime Act, which would censor open conversation about sensitive topics around the family dinner table. And now, the government have announced support for criminalising speech that “influences” near abortion facilities. It’s a measure billed to target harassment – a worthy cause. But harassment is already illegal. In practice, the new legislation would go much further, banning legitimate offers of help and even silent prayer.
Criticism even of this policy proposal has been silenced. A “summit” was held on the matter, but only stakeholders who support the initiative were invited to join. Then the SNP spokesperson at Westminster called to have me deplatformed after I raised concerns about the idea on the BBC. Furthermore, MSP John Mason was disciplined by the party for “verbalising” his beliefs that offers of help made to women outside abortion facilities should not be banned.
Over-zealous opinion-policing isn’t unique to Scotland. Across the UK, street preachers have been amongst those facing arrest for voicing their beliefs. If not jailed, the arrest has a chilling impact, dissuading others from the bother of speaking up.
If it’s a UK censorship competition, England is holding their own. Westminster recently passed anti-protest legislation that could disproportionately criminalise a grandmother flyering to “save the whales” in the same breath as ambulance-blockers. Being a “serious annoyance” now carries a penalty. And it doesn’t end there. Yet another anti-protest bill is pending. This one would allow restrictions against those even “associated” with a protest – perhaps a charity worker sitting behind a desk, miles away from a demonstration.
A nation unable to take offence is a weak one. A policy unable to withstand criticism is an inadequate one. And a police force unable to protect fundamental freedoms in public debate is a failing one.
We don’t need to compete with England about who can more vigorously suppress protest. Our authorities could learn from the example of our late Queen, who knew her reign was legitimated by free and open public discourse.
Lois McLatchie is a writer for ADF UK, an international Christian think-tank and pressure group
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel