Face Coverings in Public Places
That the Parliament notes the ongoing debate across Scotland, and particularly in Glasgow, regarding the wearing of full-face coverings, including the burqa and niqab, in public places; recognises that legislation in Scotland already provides police with powers to require the removal of face coverings in specified circumstances where there are reasonable grounds to believe that they are being used to conceal identity in connection with criminality or disorder; notes the Scottish Government’s current position that existing police powers are sufficient; further notes that several European countries have introduced restrictions on face coverings in public places, and notes calls for the Scottish Government to set out its assessment of the potential benefits of introducing further restrictions on full-face coverings in public places, including consideration of public safety, individual liberty and community cohesion.
by BILL HEANEY
Reform Party MSP Thomas Kerr brought the above motion before the Scottish Parliament on Thursday.
He told MSPs: “I know that the debate has caused a bit of a stooshie, but, when we cut through the noise and the nonsense, at its heart is a simple belief that, in a free and open society, people should ordinarily be able to see one another’s faces. The ability to see the person we are speaking to is not some trivial social …”
Before he sat down, Thomas Kerr told parliament: “The ability to see the person we are speaking to is not some trivial social convention; it is fundamental to communication, identification, trust and public safety. That is why Reform believes that Scotland should introduce a clear and comprehensive ban on face coverings, including the burqa, in public places.
The burqa and other forms of full-face covering present a particular challenge because they entirely conceal the identity of the person wearing them. A modern democratic society depends on people participating openly in public life. Communication matters in our schools, universities, courts, public services and workplaces, and being able to identify the person standing in front of us matters.”
Putting the racism aside for a moment, I would draw the previous paragraph to the attention of Peter Hessett, the CEO of West Dunbartonshire Council, and Amanda Graham, the Chief Officer for Communications in Church Street.
Amanda Graham has banned The Dumbarton Democrat from speaking to the council’s communications officers to clarify details of important matters of public interest. This has been going on for more than five years. This ban flies in the face of democracy and is based on lies and/or errors of fact.
It’s high time it was lifted, and normal relations should be resumed as soon as possible. While they are at it, the Council should take note of the fact that the ban was imposed without the agreement of the elected members.
Lastly, the Council Chamber in Church Street is not fit for purpose in that people looking on from the public gallery cannot see the faces of people taking part in the debates there. It is often also impossible to hear what is being said in their name, which is against all custom and practice and democratic principles.
@@@@@
Wee Tommy’s Holyrood racism rant turned out to be a preview of what his leader had lined up for the weekend.
Reform would suspend the asylum system for a parliamentary term if in government
The party said all new asylum applications would be rejected and existing applications voided, with all claimants marked for deportation, which Reform said would effectively suspend the asylum system.
Reform would scrap the asylum tribunal system, which hears asylum appeal cases, and claimants in more than 90,000 outstanding appeals would be deported.
It said no grants of humanitarian protection or refugee status would be made.
Labour chairperson Bridget Phillipson, right, called the proposals a “clear sign of desperation and weakness”.
“Running away from basic decency by entirely abandoning those escaping war and persecution might look to Reform like a way of winning a bidding war with other parties on the right, but the vast majority of British people will reject it as an assault on our common values,” she said.
Conservative shadow home secretary Chris Philp said the proposals “largely copy” his party’s policies, arguing: “Only the Conservatives have a serious and credible plan to fix our borders.”
Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesperson Max Wilkinson said: “Reform and the Conservatives were the architects of the failed asylum system and now they will exploit it at every opportunity – including Farage’s latest announcement.”
Reform said it would pull the UK out of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), repeal the Human Rights Act 1998 and disapply the 1951 Refugee Convention to prevent legal challenges to its plans.
Fear not Editor about your ban from the council.
With the reorganisation that’s coming with 32 councils being condensed into 5 and with elected councillors being halved across Scotland, it doesn’t look like WDC will exist soon.
Not sure that the change will be good for democracy. Quite the reverse in fact. But no more WDC
Fear not Editor about your ban from the council.
With the reorganisation that’s coming with 32 councils being condensed into 5 and with elected councillors being halved across Scotland, it doesn’t look like WDC will exist soon.
Not sure that the change will be good for democracy. Quite the reverse in fact. But no more WDC