Airdrie & Coatbridge Advertiser
TALKING POLITICS Finding a way forward to end sectarian behaviour
Since returning from the Christmas recess, the Scottish Parliament and the justice committee in particular, have been busy dealing with a full legislative programme, as government and members’ bills complete the stage one, two and three process.
At the end of last month, the Scottish Parliament debated stage one of the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Repeal) (Scotland) Bill, and voted by majority to approve the general principles.
Introduced as a member’s bill, it scraps the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act which was hastily introduced in 2011.
It was forced through Parliament with the votes of the SNP who were the majority government at the time.
All the opposition parties were against the Act, viewing it, amongst other things, as a knee-jerk reaction to a televised and highlypublicised spat between rival football managers at an Old Firm game.
Furthermore, while it is widely assumed that the Act seeks to tackle sectarianism, there is in fact no mention, let alone a definition, of sectarianism in the legislation, which it is fair to say has remained highly divisive and contentious.
I was born and brought up in Coatbridge, educated at Coatbridge High School and, after teacher training college, I taught in different schools in Airdrie, Coatbridge and throughout Lanarkshire.
So, I am fully aware of the issues surrounding sectarianism, highlighted as predominately affecting the west of Scotland, central belt area – which blight local communities and must be tackled.
However, I do not believe the Act, and in particular the new offence it creates which covers “offensive behaviour at regulated football matches”, is the way forward.
Quite simply, this unfairly targets football supporters and criminalises behaviour at football games that would not be an offence in any other sport or indeed, public entertainment forum.
The offence of incitement to religious hatred and its sentencing powers are covered by breach of the peace, the Communications Act 2003 and the Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010.
Repeal would not, therefore, result in behaviour or actions currently prosecuted under the 2012 Act becoming legal.
The bill has also been criticised for being poorly drafted, resulting in its inconsistent application by police officers.
It is for these reasons all the opposition parties support the Repeal Bill.
I firmly believe there are better ways to tackle sectarianism. These include, for example, education and publicity campaigns and also by promoting projects such as SACRO’s Tackling Offending Prejudice (STOP) service.
Despite this service providing diversion from prosecution and working with people to help identify their own attitudes and behaviours in an effort to effect longlasting change, it has hardly been used in relation to sectarian behaviour at football.
Looking forward, if the 2012 Act is repealed, I hope the public will see the Scottish Parliament operating at its best with politicians working together to put an end to sectarian behaviour.