Humza Yousaf MSP- Chance to ask some questions on Offensive Behaviour Bill

[Fury 0]

Some of you on Twitter or other Rangers forums may know that I have been in discussion with Humza Yousaf MSP (Member of the Justice Committee) over some comments he made on the Call Kaye show on Radio Scotland a couple of weeks ago. The general nature of the comments can be found here:

 

http://chrisgraham76.wordpress.com/

 

He has now offered to do a Q&A about the new bill which I plan to do either in person or via email. I'd like to get as wide a cross section of questions as I can so please post anything on this thread that you want to know and I'll try to include it.

 

Please keep it clean and to the point - I know many are frustrated at the implementation of this bill but we have a chance to properly question one of the people responsible for it's implementation and perhaps get some key points across.

 

Thanks,

[stewarty 1,877]

Hi Chris,

 

I've been following some of the chat you've been having with Humza and would proffer the following questions:

 

1) Has he publically clarified his remarks to listeners to Call Kaye to ensure that no unintentional inference is drawn by its listeners?

2) Can he confirm what arrangements will be made to ensure the Justice Committee is actively monitoring any charges/convictions that result from the bill?

3) Will he support the inclusion of sunset clause to the bill and commit to formally review its effectiveness at pre-defined times?

4) What consideration has been given to unintended consequences that could arise?

 

I can think of alot more, but that'll do for a kick-off. Apologies if some of these have already been covered in your blog as I haven't got round to reading it yet!

 

Cheers,

Stewarty (@mister_bee_)

[Fury 0]

I should of course have added his correspondence to date as that will help people know where the situation lies. I'll do that in the next post.

[Fury 0]

Please read from bottom up as this in an email chain.

 

Dear Chris,

 

 

 

Many thanks for your reasoned response, my apologies for the slight delay in responding back to you – we’re in the process of moving offices and it’s all a bit hectic.

 

 

In respect to clarifying my comments to Rangers fans – I don’t think Call Kaye would have me back on air to simply clarify what may have been communicated/interpreted wrongly. I am more than happy to post a clarification on my social media sites i.e Facebook and any other forum, website (including my own when it goes live hopefully next week). In addition, I am happy to invite a group of Rangers fans to the Scottish Parliament, or meet them in Glasgow to clarify those remarks but perhaps more importantly chat to them about the bill and concerns they have.

 

 

 

In relation to the Bill, I don’t disagree that Police discretion can end up with decisions that on the face of it look arbitrary. However, if any Celtic song, or indeed a song from any other club, had lyrics pertaining to violence against Protestants, other supporters or for that matter anybody I would fully expect the police to take action – due to its potential to cause public disorder and offensive nature.

 

 

Also the key phrase in the legislation relating to offence is those behaviours that ‘a reasonable person would find offensive’ (and related to public disorder). The term ‘a reasonable person’ is a standard legal definition and understood that common sense would prevail. However, I completely understand your concerns because there are grey areas – just like with most pieces of legislation (breach of the peace perhaps being a case in point).

 

 

My understanding is that the chanting from Celtic supporters at Tynecastle a couple of weeks ago is indeed being investigated by the police – the fact that they felt unable to take action at the time perhaps underlines the need for this legislation (this was the case made by many of the officers giving evidence).

 

 

 

As I said and highlighted at the committee, the fact that the term Hun is seen as acceptable amongst certain (most?) Celtic fans shows that there is a lot of work to be done to educate folk about what is deemed as offensive to people’s race, nationality, faith and identity and the problem is not one sided as can often be misrepresented.

 

 

 

Happy to take questions from your blog – or as I say I’m always willing to meet in person with yourself or indeed a group of fans to discuss concerns surrounding the bill. If it would be worth doing I’ll pull in reps from the different Rangers FC supporters groups and some of the main RFC bloggers (such as yourself) and have a roundtable with police and politicians again in relation to the proposed legislation. If there are any amendments you think from your discussions with fellow supporters that you think would clarify and improve the bill I’m also happy to look into them.

 

 

 

Kind regards,

 

 

 

Humza

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subject: Re: Call kaye Interview

 

 

 

Dear Humza,

 

 

 

I appreciate you taking the time to respond to what I’m sure you agree is an important issue. I also note your apology and that your intention was not to state that the singing you were discussing took place at Ibrox. I think there are two issues that I would like to address. The first is your comments on the radio show and the second would be the wider points you have made about the Bill.

 

 

 

If we take your comment on the radio first. Whilst I think your apology is appropriate and I am happy to accept it, I think the damage was done on the show and your apology should therefore take place to the same audience. I know other fans have contacted you about this issue, and that you have apologised to them also, but I think you have to acknowledge that your comments were taken to mean that there was indeed sectarian and bigoted singing at Ibrox. Almost every Rangers fan I have spoken to – and there have been many – felt that you had made this accusation. I think it is also clear from Dr Stuart Waiton’s response to you during the discussion that he also felt you were making this accusation. So whilst I’ll take your explanation at face value I think it appropriate that you either appear on the show again to clarify your comments or have them read out a statement from you to that effect. That is really the only way that ‘neutrals’ who listened to the show might be better appraised of what you meant to convey rather than what you actually did convey.

 

 

 

If we take the wider issue of the Bill in general I am heartened to hear your condemnation of the word “Hun” and also that you are putting aside your football allegiances to ensure the Bill is not one sided. However, I think the SNP are having huge problems conveying what they are actually trying to do with this bill. Sadly, the terms being used and the framing of the bill is so vague that football fans have no idea how it will effect them. With that uncertainty comes opposition. It may well be that the SNP’s intentions are good but so far the implementation of this piece of legislation has left much to be desired.

 

 

 

I’d like to just give you one example of what I mean from your own comments. You state that “no fan, who does not have the intention of invoking public disorder, will have anything to worry about”. How is that going to be measured? If Celtic fans sit in their thousands at Ibrox chanting that Walter Smith is a “Sad Orange Bastard” then that is quite clearly both sectarian and offensive. However, creating disorder at a football match is virtually impossible. These events are highly policed and fans are segregated. It would be nonsense to suggest that those Celtic fans were trying to start a fight. Likewise the most publicised song which RFC fans have been criticised for is The Billy Boys. Now if we put aside an argument over whether the word fenian (now heavily in use by Celtic fans to describe themselves) means Catholic or the original meaning of Irish Republican, it’s quite clear to me that RFC fans singing that at a football match are also not intent on creating public disorder. So we have a situation where RFC fans will be arrested for singing The Billy Boys at a football match despite their intent clearly not being to start any kind of disorder but merely to offend their rivals. This already happens. Certain singing by RFC fans is already being punished whether it’s intent is to create public disorder or not.

 

 

 

I presume that your response will be that it is down to the police to decide but frankly that is where most fans have an issue. That means that from force to force and game to game decisions will be made in an arbitrary way. This leads to the ridiculous spectacle of the past couple of weeks where police wade into the crowd at Ibrox to arrest a man with a water bottle (who was allowed entry into the ground by another policeman) then the following day hundreds of Celtic fans at Tynecastle can chant IRA songs for 60 minutes without the police intervening at all.

 

 

 

I would be delighted to hear your views on this and if you would like to answer some specific questions for my blog then I would be happy to put across your view on it. I’m not against the legislation per se. I would like to be able to take my son to a Rangers vs Celtic game when he is older without having to explain to him what Oh Ah Up the Ra means and if this bill is the only way to achieve that then so be it – my concerns lie around the fact that no clear message is being given as to what is and is not acceptable.

 

 

 

I’ll await your reply on whether you are willing to issue an apology on the Call Kaye show. I hope you will because it would go a long way to restoring the faith that Rangers fans have in this whole process. On the other points I’d be happy to mail you some questions for my blog and perhaps try to get into the specifics a bit more to make things clearer for people.

 

 

Kind Regards,

 

 

Chris

 

 

 

 

 

From: Humza.Yousaf.msp@scottish.parliament.uk

 

 

Dear Chris,

 

 

 

Thanks for providing me with your email address.

 

 

 

Just wanted to try and clarify some of the inaccuracy surrounding what I have said. Let me say at the outset I’m happy to apologise for what is probably a miscommunication on my side.

 

 

Firstly, let me say at no point did I say there was sectarian or bigoted singing at Ibrox – that is an accusation I simply would not make.

 

 

I said there was offensive songs being sung, but did not mean specifically at Ibrox - though having listened to it again I understand it may have come across that way and I should have added ‘regardless of what football game you attended’ – happy to apologise for it coming out sounding the way it did. My point was a very general one, at every football match regardless of whether at Celtic Park, Easter Road, Tynecastle etc there will of course be offensive songs being sung and of course even at Ibrox. This may be about a rival player's height, colour of hair (red in particular!) or any other offensive chant such as those often sung towards Aberdeen fans and a certain barnyard animal (as mentioned at the Justice committee by the Aberdeen Supporters Trust).

 

 

The point I was making was those offensive songs should not be prosecuted, they may be offensive and unpleasant but they should not, and under the new bill would not, be prosecuted. The freedom to offend is explicitly a part of the freedom of speech - though of course this is not an unfettered right. If anyone goes to a football ground and says ‘there was no offensive songs being sung’ I would be astounded and again I mean this not in the context of sectarian songs but songs that would no doubt offend others. This is usually the point of most chanting at a football ground, to rile up the opposition etc.

 

 

This was certainly not a comment on sectarian signing at Ibrox and I congratulate Rangers on the laudable steps they have taken in tackling this problem, they have done a lot more than most clubs and I'm happy to state that publicly.

 

 

As I have said previously, I hope football fans, of which I am one, are able to have a mature and reasoned debate whereby we can agree that there is clearly a problem in and around football matches by a minority of fans. Unfortunately, their actions are tarnishing the majority and bringing our national game into disrepute – with the ridiculous spectacle of UEFA fining our nation’s football clubs while Scottish footballing bodies look on at the side-lines.

 

 

In addition, as the accusation has been made, my own football association has no bearing on how I tackle this issue - I do not see it as 'an old firm' problem. For example I was very critical of the use of the term 'Hun' by many Celtic supporters, for which I was lambasted by many supporters of my own club telling me not to 'step foot in Parkhead again'.

 

 

 

http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/Apps2/Business/ORSearch/ReportView.aspx?r=6437 (click on "Offensive Behaviour etc" tab) and scroll down to 10.45)

 

 

 

I’d be more than happy to discuss this with you over the phone, blog on your site or even meet with a group of Ranger’s supporters to discuss their concerns about the Bill – if you think this would be advisable. I am happy to reassure anyone this is not a conspiracy against any particular club or supporters and no fan, who does not have the intention of invoking public disorder, will have anything to worry about.

 

 

 

Let me once again reassure you I certainly was not referring specifically to the game you were clearly in attendance at but having listened once again to my interview I can see how you might have derived that conclusion so therefore let me apologise again if the communication error was indeed on my side, it certainly was not intended to mean sectarian singing was taking place at Ibrox.

 

 

 

Kind regards,

 

 

 

Humza

[GovanAllan 0]

Still think he knew exactly what he was saying on the radio. But fair play to him at least he is actually wanting to talk to Rangers fans.

[Zappa 0]

Hi Chris and thanks for posting here to allow us to get involved.

 

Q1. How can the government possibly imagine that an Offensive Behaviour Bill could be enforced evenly and justly when one Steward, Police Officer or Judge's perception of offensive or threatening behaviour is undoubtedly going to be different from the next?

 

Q2. Given that violent, threatening and offensive behaviour occurs on a large scale throughout Scotland every day without consequences, how can the government justify ruining the lives of harmless football fans by making scapegoats of them in order to make a point about social behaviour?

 

Q3. Does the government not think that perhaps it would be better to invest the public's money in actually improving Scottish football (say at grass roots level) rather than demonizing and blackening the name of the sport when it's already on it's knees financially?

 

Q4. What organisation is pressurizing the First Minister and other members of parliament to create and pass these new laws?

 

Q5. Considering the unpopularity of the proposed new laws, surely passing them would be political suicide for the First Minister and his party or is that not important and the new laws must be passed no matter what?

[craig 5,199]

Re #1 Zappa, unfortunately that same thing could be said about an awful lot of legislation.

 

#2 is a very good point. More pointedly, why is it that football fans in general, and OF fans in particular, are being blamed for the social ills of Scotland. Surely any Offensive Behaviour Bill should be targeted at society as a whole and not just the "90 minute bigots" ?

 

#3 is a good question too and could go further by asking what they plan on doing to educate the younger generation to ensure that rather than criminalising this behaviour the givernment actually try to remediate it.

[Zappa 0]

Re #1 Zappa, unfortunately that same thing could be said about an awful lot of legislation.

 

It could indeed, but we're only talking about this new legislation and my question relates to the absurdness of trying to legislate on varying definitions of offensiveness when in actual fact defining what's offensive or not in the context of football matches is almost impossible because rival fans will always try to be offensive to each other.

 

#2 is a very good point. More pointedly, why is it that football fans in general, and OF fans in particular, are being blamed for the social ills of Scotland. Surely any Offensive Behaviour Bill should be targeted at society as a whole and not just the "90 minute bigots" ?

 

Exactly and I want to know how the government can justify such specific and unfair cherry-picking of social issues, when it's only going to target and criminalise a miniscule element of Scottish society for issues that are clearly widespread in Scottish society as a whole.

 

#3 is a good question too and could go further by asking what they plan on doing to educate the younger generation to ensure that rather than criminalising this behaviour the givernment actually try to remediate it.

 

They already have anti-racism and anti-sectarianism initiatives in the education system, but the government won't do anything to tackle the very obvious root-cause of childhood and teenage division in Scotland which is state-funded segregation in the form of religious faith schools.

[chilledbear 16]

Q1, 2 and 3

 

What is worse a MSP telling lies on Radio, or a 16 year old Schoolboy singing among 40,000 Rangers fans at Ibrox ?

[Frankie 8,182]

Great work Chris!

 

1. To what extent have G4S been involved in this debate - be it with the Joint Action Group or the Justice Committee? I can't see any submission from them on the issue or any explanation of how they intend to train their staff on dealing with the proposed Bill. That appears to be a bizarre oversight considering the scale of which they're involved with the game in our country.

 

2. It seems obvious that both Celtic FC and their support don't believe they have any problems whatsoever with regard to their supporters and 'offensive' behaviour. The club never comment on sectarian chants about huns or the IRA while their official fan groups gave evidence to you that they believe such terms/songs are acceptable. How do the Justice Committee and Lord Advocate intend dealing with such disingenuous behaviour?

 

3. One of my main worries about the new Bill is that lack of clarity. There is still no proscribed list of terms/chants/behaviour which is clearly defined as offensive so it appears that anything could be prosecuted in the future. How do the Committee and the Lord Advocate intend ensuring any new laws are applied consistently, fairly and neutrally given almost everyone involved in potential cases will have a background (religious, political or even just sporting) that may imply a lack of impartiality?