Abolish the Hate Crime Act
'I disapprove of what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it.' *


This is a link to the Scottish Parliament website about the bill




And this is a link to the final bill:



Humza Yousaf said the debate reflected, ‘parliament at its best’, in part because the law, ‘protects the most vulnerable in our society’. One problem with this outlook is that not all black, gay, disabled or elderly people see themselves, or are, especially ‘vulnerable’. But helped by this bill, this is how millions in Scotland will now be labelled. This is a new type of label or caricature that patronises many and flatters the few - like Yousaf - whose virtuous mantel of Protector of the Vulnerable, shines for all to see.

Here are two submissions to the consultation on the bill that oppose not only the 'stirring up’ of hatred section of the bill but also the very idea of ‘hate crime’ and 'vulnerable groups’.



Discussing children hearing racism in the home, Yousaf explained that for him whether
a racist comment is said in the house or in public it is the same thing. However, never before has this been how we understood public and private life. Indeed, policing people’s thoughts in their home has generally been associated with organisations like the Stasi in East Germany.

‘But just who do Humza Yousaf, or any of these elected officials, think they are to decide what constitutes a “legitimate” view? Who are they to outlaw any thought or opinion?’ Madeleine Kearns – LawLiberty.org


Scottish Conservative justice spokesman Liam Kerr argued that a, ‘fundamental right’ had been, ‘trampled on’. It is a danger to freedom of speech, he explained, as, ‘Criminalising what people say in their own home is too extreme’.


Historian and television presenter Neil Oliver explains the threat of being arrested for saying things in the privacy of your own home (34 minutes into this YouTube interview). He notes that saying something in the privacy of your own home that is then repeated at school by one of your children could, in theory end up in an arrest and up to seven years
in prison. 



The Conservatives were absolutely right to oppose this legislation. Unfortunately, their opposition was largely to the ‘stirring up’ offence, something that is essentially a speech or thought crime. However, perhaps less than a generation ago many politicians would have opposed the very idea of ‘hate crime’, because it undermines the universal nature of law by legally proscribing differences to people based on their supposed ‘vulnerability’. In other words, hate crime legislation actually helps to create differences between people by treating them differently rather than the same. 


‘The Hate Crime Bill is another ‘snobs’ law’. It represents the disconnected worldview of the modern illiberal elites. It is a threat to the most basic of freedoms — our freedom to think and to speak and to express ourselves as we see fit.’

Stuart Waiton



A campaign to oppose the new bill was established in 2020 under the banner
‘Free To Disagree’. 



Hundreds of submissions were also made to the consultation process of the bill, the vast majority of them opposed the bill and were largely ignored by our MSPs. This is a link to those submissions.



Below are a few of the many articles and comments made in opposition to the Hate Crime Bill. They come from a variety of individuals, organisations and perspectives, but all recognise the serious threat to liberty represented by this bill.


A veteran SNP politician says he considers the hate crime proposals to be ‘one of the
most pernicious and dangerous pieces of legislation ever produced by any government in modern times in any part of the United Kingdom’.



‘It would not be an exaggeration to say that what Scotland is ‘building’ is a totalitarian edifice.’

Theodore Dalrymple – LawLiberty.org



‘They [SNP] have become an enemy of free speech; legitimate enquiry and the right to say “No, I won’t have any truck with this”: the right and privilege not to conform.’

Kevin McKenna – Herald



‘Nationalist claims to be champions of democracy are equally thin on the ground. The SNP in government has launched numerous assaults on the Scottish people. To name only two, its failed Named Person scheme and its current Hate Crime Bill are authoritarian in the extreme.’

Alex Cameron



With a stroke of the legislative pen, Holyrood has made Scotland the most stringent regulator of speech in the United Kingdom.’

Jamie Gillies – The Critic



‘The Hate Crime Bill, if passed, would have consequences far beyond the regulation of what we can and cannot say. The worldview that has so far shaped this bill begins with the premise that Scottish society is fractured, broken and divided, and we need protecting from each other.’

Carlton Brick



‘… the SNP is engaged in reversing one of the greatest legacies of the Scottish Enlightenment’.

Graham Stewart – The Critic



Why is Scotland’s Hate Crime Bill so controversial? 



‘Yet this overlooks the mass of evidence presented over the course of the passage of the bill that demonstrates what is hateful, abusive, and reasonable is substantially contested in the context of discussing sex and gender identity’.

Lucy Hunter Blackburn


SIGN THE PETITION: Abolish the Scottish Hate Crime Act