Our statement in response to this evening's developments on the Stage 2 amendments to the Hate Crime and Public Order Bill relating to freedom of expression. murrayblackburnmackenzie.org/2021/02/01/deb…
We are concerned that one important decision has already been made behind closed doors – namely that for everything other than religion, there should be one generic freedom of expression provision.
This contrasts substantially in both parliamentary process and substantive content, with the tailored freedom of expression provisions in the 1986 Act, introduced after intense discussion and amendment in the Lords.
Without a substantial debate at Stage 2, all the further discussion between parties will also be in private before Stage 3.
If politicians are worried about being labelled transphobic, or even just hurtful, simply for arguing in the Parliament that it should not be criminal in itself to state that sex is immutable or other statements in the Kerr amendment...
... it is hard to see how those outside the Parliament can be confident in future that the law will have their back, if they wish to.
We have updated the blog to expand the quote from Patrick Harvie MSP, part of which we had originally missed. He has also commented: "it's not just about ensuring "no group feels targeted", it's also about ensuring that no form of bigotry is legitimised or protected."
We have been told that, although the decision has already been taken that most of the of the amendments relating to freedom of expression will not be moved (= put forward for a vote), there will still be a general debate on this issue.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
