By Bill Heaney
It wisnae us! It was the polis what done it.
That was Scottish Government Minister Siobhian Brown’s reply to the monstrous suggestion that “£60,000 of public money was squandered on the ludicrous hate monster campaign, which was patronising, embarrassing and offensive”.
Tory Justice spokesperson Sandesh Gulhane accused the SNP of “treating the Scottish public like children” by using the “hate monster” in its publicity material.
Mr Gulhane added: “During our debate on repealing the Hate Crime Act, Stuart McMillan MSP argued that the new law implements a higher threshold for criminality than the long-standing stirring up of racial hatred offence.
“Either the Scottish National Party’s own MSPs do not understand the act, or they are right and the act makes it harder to prosecute actual hate in the form of racism.
“Which is it,” he asked the minister.
Ms Brown replied: “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.”
Her SNP colleague, Rona Mackay, of Strathkelvin and Bearsden, said: “The 2021 act has been the subject of much misrepresentation and inaccurate commentary, some of which appears to have been deliberate, which has caused confusion about what the act actually does.
“Can the cabinet secretary say any more about the steps that are being taken to ensure that accurate information about the act is available to the public?”
Siobhian Brown replied: “I have noted the misinformation on and misrepresentation of the act, and that many commentators have ignored the people in our communities whom the act seeks to protect.
“The Scottish Government published a new fact sheet, which, alongside existing information on the act, provides further clarity and factual information on what it does and, importantly, what it does not do.
“We are also undertaking a series of engagements across communities in order to listen and to raise awareness of hate crime.”
But Sandesh Gulhane, pictured right, persisted in asking why the government has reportedly spent nearly £400,000 of public money to promote Scotland’s new hate crime laws.
Siobhian Brown explained that £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.”
Sandesh Gulhane was unimpressed.
The SNP’s Michelle Thomson asked for clarification on the situation regarding people being reported but not prosecuted for hate crimes.
Had there been talks with Police Scotland about the recording of non-crime hate incidents?
To go with story by Katie Paterson. Angela Constance – Minister for Drug Policy Picture shows; Angela Constance – Minister for Drug Policy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has appointed a dedicated Minister for Drug Policy. Angela Constance has been appointed to the role, subject to parliamentary approval.. Scotland. Supplied by Scottish Government Flickr Date; 21/12/2020; f5cf36d8-381e-4ad1-a2b7-bfcc4f9670ce
Minister Angela Constance, MSP Michelle Thomson, Pauline McNeill MSP and Siobhan Brown.
The Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs, Angela Constance, told her: “The United Kingdom-wide practice of recording non-crime hate incidents dates back to recommendations in the 1999 Stephen Lawrence inquiry report.
“The College of Policing recently published updated guidance on the matter for England and Wales, and, although the guidance is not directly applicable to Police Scotland, it is currently reviewing it.
“If there are proposed changes, they will be subject to consultation.”
She added: “How hate crime is investigated and recorded is an operational matter for Police Scotland.”
Ms Constance said however that she had discussed the issue with the chair of the Scottish Police Authority and will do so again, and I will raise it with Chief Constable Jo Farrell next time they meet.
Police Scotland Chief Constable Jo Farrell.
Michelle Thomson said: “The cabinet secretary is correct in saying that my concern relates to Police Scotland and the fact that, at the moment, we appear to have an unclear process—at least in the eyes of the public—as to what is termed a non-crime hate incident.
“My concern is that a number of people may have sought a subject access request notice and found themselves egregiously believing that their name has been recorded.
“Has the cabinet secretary explored that possibility with Police Scotland as part of her deliberations, or does she intend to do so?”
Angela Constance told her: “I have to be clear that this is an operational matter, but I would hope that my conversations with the SPA and Police Scotland will cover a range of matters, many of which have been raised directly with me.
“I agree that clarity on these matters is important. My understanding is that Police Scotland considers the work to review the guidance and the code that was published by the College of Policing to be a priority.
“It is progressing matters and will come to a conclusion shortly. Thereafter, if there are any changes, it will consult with its officers, stakeholders and staff associations.”
Tory lawyer Murdo Fraser (Mid Scotland and Fife) said: “In her response to Michelle Thomson, the cabinet secretary indicated that Police Scotland is still applying its pre-existing policy on recording non-crime hate incidents. Can she clarify that that policy is being applied on an even-handed basis? Evidence would suggest that that is no longer the case.”
But Angela Constance averred: “I state unequivocally that I have faith in Police Scotland as an organisation that has human rights at its core and that will apply the law and its own procedures fairly and without fear or favour to any party.
Labour Justice spokesperson Pauline McNeill said: “There is some confusion on the matter, and I am further confused by the cabinet secretary’s answer. She said that the police apply the law.
“Is hate incident reporting the law or is it a process?
“If it is a process, given that England and Wales dropped it last year, and given that I have already raised the matter, does the cabinet secretary share my concern about that?
“Is the Government content that putting something into someone’s record that is not required by law complies with human rights law—or am I confused? I think that we need to get the matter resolved as soon as possible.”
Angela Constance told her: “The matter is being considered as a priority by Police Scotland. It is important to acknowledge that, although the original ruling and the information that has come from the College of Policing are not directly applicable to Scotland, it is imperative that we look at those in order to evaluate them and consider them.
“However, non-crime hate incidents are separate from the hate crime legislation, and Police Scotland has been clear that those incidents are predicated on the vulnerability of the complainer and are used primarily to determine what care and support can be provided to them.
“Those incidents are not recorded against the alleged perpetrator of the NHCI. They can be recorded on a vulnerable person database, but there is no direct link between the database and systems used for disclosure checks.”