Celtic Database at thecelticwiki.com
All
Celtic
World Cup 2018
Tickets/Travel
Wiki
General
Sport
F&D
Entertainment
Travel
Tipsters
Tech
| Welcome to Kerrydale Street. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you decide to register, please be aware that we don't accept email addresses from free web accounts like gmail, Hotmail, live.co.uk etc. Sorry, but almost all of the abuse and spam that we get is from free web accounts. The software on the forum will automatically block any requests using a free email account. Upon Registration, you will be given access to all our varied Forums, and you will be expected to comply with our fairly stringent Rules and Regulations. Meantime, enjoy your visit If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Supporters/Green Brigade Thread; OBFA Act Repealed | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: 15 Aug 2017, 01:23 PM (325,657 Views) | |
| Ned Rise | 11 Jan 2018, 05:57 PM Post #2861 |
|
These boots were made for hunbustin'
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Would it not be possible to just put a note up saying no more discussion rather than deleting posts? It's less annoying to read a couple of pages of arguments than getting stuck forever with these blank pages at the end of threads. |
![]() |
|
| Kingslim | 12 Jan 2018, 09:55 AM Post #2862 |
|
69 and counting
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Good afternoon Thank you for getting in touch with me regarding James Kelly's campaign to repeal the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act 2012. I welcome your support and enthusiasm and agree completely with your analysis of the Act. Not only is the legislation illiberal, it fails to properly tackle sectarianism, and creates tension between police and fans. It further duplicates powers the Police already have to deal with inappropriate behavior at football games and abuse online. The Law Society has established that all prosecutions brought forward in 2016-17 could have been captured by pre-existing legislation and that those committing religiously aggravated abuse can be prosecuted under section 74 of the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2003 in relation to religious aggravation. Furthermore as representations from Police Scotland have stated, more often than not, cases of threatening communications have been prosecuted using section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 rather than section 6 of the Football Act. The Football Act is the first ever piece of legislation to be passed without cross-party support, rushed through by the SNP Government using its majority in the last Parliament. The legislation has been widely condemned, by human rights groups, legal experts and fans organisations. The right place to be combating bigotry is in classrooms, not targeting loyal football fans in terraces for ninety minutes on a Saturday. The Scottish Government needs to invest in anti-sectarian initiatives and do more through education. Thank you again for your support, and I look forward to the day this illiberal and toxic piece of legislation can be struck from the statute books. Yours Sincerely, Anas Anas Sarwar MSP Scottish Labour’s Shadow Cabinet Secretary for Health Member of the Scottish Parliament for Glasgow (Labour) |
![]() |
|
| Broughtybhoy | 12 Jan 2018, 07:51 PM Post #2863 |
|
Occasional Substitute
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I got this response today from Kevin Stewart MSP (Aberdeen SNP): Thank you for contacting me regarding James Kelly’s Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act 2012 Repeal Bill. The Justice Committee has just finished taking evidence on the Repeal Bill and will publish their report in the next few weeks. The majority of football fans attending matches in Scotland are well behaved and simply wish to support their team but unfortunately offensive singing and chanting continues to be a problem in relation to Scottish football. We recognise that legislation on its own will never resolve any social issues but it does have an important role to play. Therefore the SNP does not support repealing the Act without a viable alternative being in place and I believe that Mr Kelly has failed to provide such an alternative. Repealing the Bill would send the wrong message to the public about what constitutes acceptable behaviour, a view supported by several organisations who gave evidence to the Justice Committee: · Stonewall Scotland said they “would be concerned that an outright repeal of the Act may send a worrying message that prejudiced based and threatening behaviour at football is acceptable.” · Victim Support Scotland said it “is opposed to the repeal of the 2012 Act unless there is a viable alternative to support victims of threatening communication and religious prejudice.” · The Scottish Council for Jewish Communities said they “are concerned that repeal of the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications Act would send exactly the wrong message.” The Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act 2012 is not restricted to football or sectarianism. The Act has two distinct elements - Offensive Behaviour at Football (Section 1), not restricted to sectarianism, and Threatening Communications (Section 6), not restricted to football or sectarianism. The Act is designed to give better and sharper tools to the police and prosecutors to allow a more effective response to an issue which, sadly, many appear resigned to accept as the status quo. It allows prosecutors to easily identify those individuals who use football as an excuse for abusive and offensive behaviour they may not indulge in elsewhere. Repealing the Act would leave a gap in the law meaning those who are victims of offensive behaviour would no longer be able to seek justice and those who commit offensive acts would not be held accountable for their behaviour. Section 1 of the Act strengthens the law by focusing on whether behaviour would be likely to incite public disorder, removing the requirement to prove it would cause fear and alarm to a reasonable person. Section 1 also has extra-territorial application, which makes it possible for a prosecution to be brought in relation to behaviour which takes place at matches played by Scottish teams abroad. Section 6 of the Act criminalises threats made with the intent of inciting religious hatred, something which was not previously covered in Scots law. Our concern regarding the impact on the law has been echoed by the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service who told the Justice Committee “…there would be a gap in the law" if the Act was repealed. There is also significant support for the legislation as shown by a YouGov poll on the Offensive Behaviour at Football Act conducted in 2015. The survey found: · 83% support legislation to tackle offensive behaviour at football. · 80% directly support the Act. · 82% believe that offensive behaviour at football matches is harmful. · 73% of the respondents who said they were “very interested” in football, directly support the Act. I would also stress that the legislation is just one of the actions being taken by the Scottish Government to tackle sectarianism and hate crime in Scotland. Since 2012 the Scottish Government has invested just under £13 million to tackle sectarianism, including funding for educational initiatives and academic research. In 2017 the Scottish Government commissioned an independent review of all hate crime legislation, including the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications Act, which is being led by Lord Bracadale. Several witnesses have told the Justice Committee that repeal of the Act should be delayed until Lord Bracadale has completed his independent hate crime review (Church of Scotland, Scottish Women’s Convention, Stonewall Scotland, Equality & Human Rights Commission, Scottish Council of Jewish Communities). I think this would be a sensible approach to take as it could allow amendments to be made to the legislation to make it more effective. While I understand your concerns regarding the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act 2012 and appreciate you contacting me, I believe it is a necessary piece of legislation and repealing it without a practicable alternative would set back our ambitions to eradicate hate crime across Scotland. I trust you will find this information useful however please do not hesitate to contact me again if you feel I can be of further assistance. Yours sincerely, Kevin |
![]() |
|
| AntonRogansRightBoot | 12 Jan 2018, 07:57 PM Post #2864 |
|
It's just there for standing on
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Got that exact same reply from Aileen Campbell MSP (SNP for Clydesdale) |
![]() |
|
| paul88 | 12 Jan 2018, 07:57 PM Post #2865 |
|
Getting on a bit
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Firstly I think we need to be clear about some of the problems we face as a society, especially in Glasgow and the West of Scotland. Sectarianism, anti-Catholicism, and anti-Irish racism have a long history in our society and sadly continue to be evident today. When the public are asked where they see these problems manifesting themselves, the clear majority say at and around football. So although I agree that we should not only deal with these problems in the context of football, I think we do have to accept that some people at football matches are more likely to express this kind of hatred than in other places. We have also seen other forms of hatred recently at football, e.g. the throwing of plastic eyeballs onto a pitch to mock a disabled player who has only one eye. I hope you would agree that this is offensive behaviour by most people's standards, even if there are other instances where we can disagree on what is and is not offensive. I have not heard of this kind of behaviour outwith football so again it is evidence that some people's behaviour at football is worse than in normal life. Yes, I do agree that we should all be able to go to matches and let off a bit of steam... I do that as well. However, to say that freedom of expression means that anyone can say anything at football however hateful it is, is going too far in my opinion. We need to get a better balance between freedom of speech and curtailing hatred. I do accept that this legislation was rushed and could have benefitted from a longer consultation period. There is still the potential to improve and amend it. However, if we repeal the Act, we would be saying that expressing hatred for Catholics, Irish, disabled folk, and ethnic minorities is acceptable. I do not want to send out that message and therefore I will argue for keeping the Act and opposing James Kelly's Bill. I hope that explains my position but please feel free to respond to me with any comments or we can meet up face to face to chat about it if that would be helpful. Yours sincerely John This was my reply from John Mason |
![]() |
|
| Kingslim | 12 Jan 2018, 08:06 PM Post #2866 |
|
69 and counting
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
What a load of guff. How many Aberdeen fans have been done for offensive behaviour? They’re just as bad as The Hun |
![]() |
|
| justinjest | 12 Jan 2018, 09:05 PM Post #2867 |
|
Club Captain
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
don't recall the YouGov poll - anyone take part / know the questions that formed the poll ? |
![]() |
|
| obi wan wanyama | 12 Jan 2018, 10:00 PM Post #2868 |
|
First team training
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Patrick Harvie replied to me saying he'd support the repeal of the bill. |
![]() |
|
| jamiebhoy76 | 15 Jan 2018, 09:07 PM Post #2869 |
|
Club Captain
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Christina McKelvie SNP MSP Thank you for contacting me regarding James Kelly’s Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act 2012 Repeal Bill. The Justice Committee has just finished taking evidence on the Repeal Bill and will publish their report in the next few weeks. The majority of football fans attending matches in Scotland are well behaved and simply wish to support their team but unfortunately offensive singing and chanting continues to be a problem in relation to Scottish football. We recognise that legislation on its own will never resolve any social issues but it does have an important role to play. Therefore the SNP does not support repealing the Act without a viable alternative being in place and I believe that Mr Kelly has failed to provide such an alternative. Repealing the Bill would send the wrong message to the public about what constitutes acceptable behaviour, a view supported by several organisations who gave evidence to the Justice Committee: • Stonewall Scotland said they “would be concerned that an outright repeal of the Act may send a worrying message that prejudiced based and threatening behaviour at football is acceptable.” • Victim Support Scotland said it “is opposed to the repeal of the 2012 Act unless there is a viable alternative to support victims of threatening communication and religious prejudice.” • The Scottish Council for Jewish Communities said they “are concerned that repeal of the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications Act would send exactly the wrong message.” The Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act 2012 is not restricted to football or sectarianism. The Act has two distinct elements - Offensive Behaviour at Football (Section 1), not restricted to sectarianism, and Threatening Communications (Section 6), not restricted to football or sectarianism. This is a critical aspect to the legislation that, in the evidence presented before the Scottish Parliament Justice Committee and in evidence published by the Scottish Parliament Information Centre (SPICe), highlights the clear need for a specific, codified piece of statute regarding threatening communications. In this respect, and in regard to the numerous, high-profile examples of online, hateful and threatening behaviour that was prominent pre-2012, there was overwhelming public calls for greater powers to tackle online abuse. As sourced from the Scottish Parliament Information Centre (SPICe): ‘in relation to electronic communications, case law has left some doubt about whether the offence of improper use of a public electronic communications network at Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 can be used to prosecute people who create offensive websites or “groups” on social networks, as opposed to sending threatening emails or other communications’. In this regard, there was a clear lack of legislation which left open the possibility of unchecked, violent and hateful electronic communications which The Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act 2012 was designed to impact upon. The Act is designed to give better and sharper tools to the police and prosecutors to allow a more effective response to an issue which, sadly, many appear resigned to accept as the status quo. It allows prosecutors to easily identify those individuals who use football as an excuse for abusive and offensive behaviour they may not indulge in elsewhere. Repealing the Act would leave a gap in the law meaning those who are victims of offensive behaviour would no longer be able to seek justice and those who commit offensive acts would not be held accountable for their behaviour. Section 1 of the Act strengthens the law by focussing on whether behaviour would be likely to incite public disorder, removing the requirement to prove it would cause fear and alarm to a reasonable person. Section 1 also has extra-territorial application, which makes it possible for a prosecution to be brought in relation to behaviour which takes place at matches played by Scottish teams abroad. Section 6 of the Act criminalises threats made with the intent of inciting religious hatred, something which was not previously covered in Scots law. It is deeply concerning that, if repealed, and no other alternative legislation is proposed from Mr Kelly’s Private Members Bill, there would be no lawful protection from those who incite religious hatred. Scotland has made great strides in combatting sectarianism and defeating prejudices within our communities. Should this Act be repealed, and with Section 6 specifically legislating against religious hatred, I would find this a hugely regressive, step for Scotland. Our concern regarding the impact on the law has been echoed by the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service who told the Justice Committee “…there would be a gap in the law" if the Act was repealed. There is also significant support for the legislation as shown by a YouGov poll on the Offensive Behaviour at Football Act conducted in 2015. The survey found: • 83% support legislation to tackle offensive behaviour at football. • 80% directly support the Act. • 82% believe that offensive behaviour at football matches is harmful. • 73% of the respondents who said they were “very interested” in football, directly support the Act. I would also stress that the legislation is just one of the actions being taken by the Scottish Government to tackle sectarianism and hate crime in Scotland. Since 2012 the Scottish Government has invested just under £13 million to tackle sectarianism, including funding for educational initiatives and academic research. In 2017 the Scottish Government commissioned an independent review of all hate crime legislation, including the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications Act, which is being led by Lord Bracadale. Several witnesses have told the Justice Committee that repeal of the Act should be delayed until Lord Bracadale has completed his independent hate crime review (Church of Scotland, Scottish Women’s Convention, Stonewall Scotland, Equality & Human Rights Commission, Scottish Council of Jewish Communities). I think this would be a sensible approach to take as it could allow amendments to be made to the legislation to make it more effective. Locally in Hamilton, Larkhall & Stonehouse I have worked with many organisations including Nil by Mouth, The Machan Trust, Show Bigotry the Red Card and local schools to tackle sectarianism in our communities. It is noted that the Stage 1 deadline from The Scottish Parliament’s Justice Committee for this Bill is Friday 26 January 2018. It is expected that the Justice Committee’s report would be published beforehand, in which the recommendations from the report will be studied carefully. While I understand your concerns regarding the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act 2012 and appreciate you contacting me, I believe it is a necessary piece of legislation and repealing it without a practicable alternative would set back our ambitions to eradicate hate crime across Scotland. I am more than willing to listen to any practicable alternatives should Mr Kelly be forthcoming with them. Sincerely, Christina Christina McKelvie SNP MSP Hamilton, Larkhall & Stonehouse |
![]() |
|
| Ned Rise | 15 Jan 2018, 09:47 PM Post #2870 |
|
These boots were made for hunbustin'
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Dear Christina, Did it 'even things up'? Yours etc. |
![]() |
|
| Dubz | 16 Jan 2018, 12:42 PM Post #2871 |
|
Getting on a bit
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I received exact same response word for word from Angela Constance MSP (SNP for Almond Valley formerly Livingston) |
![]() |
|
| damosuzuki | 16 Jan 2018, 12:57 PM Post #2872 |
|
First name on the team-sheet
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
^ I must be the only person left who thinks 'hate crime', is a load of bollocks. The SNP response is big brother stuff, but people just seem to accept that's the way it should be these days. There's something very below the belt about using the Jewish council, stonewall and Victim support to somehow justify excessive state power and social engineering at football, to criminalise young working class people. |
![]() |
|
| justinjest | 16 Jan 2018, 03:19 PM Post #2873 |
|
Club Captain
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I've decided to reply to the standard letter from the SNP asking for clarification on a few points. Will see if I get a real response this time. I also want to know about this poll - when did it take place, how many fans took part and how widely was it advertised and what were the questions. It's easy enough to formulate a questionnaire to get the results you want. All the replies I've received have gone on about how we need to tackle sectarianism - the SNP reply infers that the bill is there for that purpose and opposition to it is basically condoning sectarianism - I've pointed out that all those opposing the bill also want to see sectarianism eradicated, but that the bill is not helping that. |
![]() |
|
| Quiet Assasin | 16 Jan 2018, 09:44 PM Post #2874 |
|
..for the maintenance of dinner tables for the children and the unemployed
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Got a letter from the constituency SNP MSP. Suppose if you're going to reply with a load of shampooe the effort to send a letter looks slightly better than doing it by email. |
![]() |
|
| Colbhoy1888 | 16 Jan 2018, 10:25 PM Post #2875 |
|
First team training
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I got this response today from Ash Denham MSP (Edinburgh SNP) - seems standard drafted SNP response. Thank you for contacting me regarding James Kelly’s Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act 2012 Repeal Bill. The Justice Committee has just finished taking evidence on the Repeal Bill and will publish their report in the next few weeks. The majority of football fans attending matches in Scotland are well behaved and simply wish to support their team but unfortunately offensive singing and chanting continues to be a problem in relation to Scottish football. We recognise that legislation on its own will never resolve any social issues but it does have an important role to play. Therefore the SNP does not support repealing the Act without a viable alternative being in place and I believe that Mr Kelly has failed to provide such an alternative. Repealing the Bill would send the wrong message to the public about what constitutes acceptable behaviour, a view supported by several organisations who gave evidence to the Justice Committee: Stonewall Scotland said they “would be concerned that an outright repeal of the Act may send a worrying message that prejudiced based and threatening behaviour at football is acceptable.” Victim Support Scotland said it “is opposed to the repeal of the 2012 Act unless there is a viable alternative to support victims of threatening communication and religious prejudice.” The Scottish Council for Jewish Communities said they “are concerned that repeal of the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications Act would send exactly the wrong message.” The Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act 2012 is not restricted to football or sectarianism. The Act has two distinct elements - Offensive Behaviour at Football (Section 1), not restricted to sectarianism, and Threatening Communications (Section 6), not restricted to football or sectarianism. The Act is designed to give better and sharper tools to the police and prosecutors to allow a more effective response to an issue which, sadly, many appear resigned to accept as the status quo. It allows prosecutors to easily identify those individuals who use football as an excuse for abusive and offensive behaviour they may not indulge in elsewhere. Repealing the Act would leave a gap in the law meaning those who are victims of offensive behaviour would no longer be able to seek justice and those who commit offensive acts would not be held accountable for their behaviour. Section 1 of the Act strengthens the law by focussing on whether behaviour would be likely to incite public disorder, removing the requirement to prove it would cause fear and alarm to a reasonable person. Section 1 also has extra-territorial application, which makes it possible for a prosecution to be brought in relation to behaviour which takes place at matches played by Scottish teams abroad. Section 6 of the Act criminalises threats made with the intent of inciting religious hatred, something which was not previously covered in Scots law. Our concern regarding the impact on the law has been echoed by the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service who told the Justice Committee “…there would be a gap in the law" if the Act was repealed. There is also significant support for the legislation as shown by a YouGov poll on the Offensive Behaviour at Football Act conducted in 2015. The survey found: · 83% support legislation to tackle offensive behaviour at football. · 80% directly support the Act. · 82% believe that offensive behaviour at football matches is harmful. · 73% of the respondents who said they were “very interested” in football, directly support the Act. I would also stress that the legislation is just one of the actions being taken by the Scottish Government to tackle sectarianism and hate crime in Scotland. Since 2012 the Scottish Government has invested just under £13 million to tackle sectarianism, including funding for educational initiatives and academic research. In 2017 the Scottish Government commissioned an independent review of all hate crime legislation, including the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications Act, which is being led by Lord Bracadale. Several witnesses have told the Justice Committee that repeal of the Act should be delayed until Lord Bracadale has completed his independent hate crime review (Church of Scotland, Scottish Women’s Convention, Stonewall Scotland, Equality & Human Rights Commission, Scottish Council of Jewish Communities). I think this would be a sensible approach to take as it could allow amendments to be made to the legislation to make it more effective. While I understand your concerns regarding the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act 2012 and appreciate you contacting me, I believe it is a necessary piece of legislation and repealing it without a practicable alternative would set back our ambitions to eradicate hate crime across Scotland. Yours sincerely Ash Denham MSP |
![]() |
|
| Lawman | 17 Jan 2018, 12:14 AM Post #2876 |
![]()
Budapest's Green &White
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I got this response from my MSP John Mason Thanks for your email. Firstly I think we need to be clear about some of the problems we face as a society, especially in Glasgow and the West of Scotland. Sectarianism, anti-Catholicism, and anti-Irish racism have a long history in our society and sadly continue to be evident today. When the public are asked where they see these problems manifesting themselves, the clear majority say at and around football. So although I agree that we should not only deal with these problems in the context of football, I think we do have to accept that some people at football matches are more likely to express this kind of hatred than in other places. We have also seen other forms of hatred recently at football, e.g. the throwing of plastic eyeballs onto a pitch to mock a disabled player who has only one eye. I hope you would agree that this is offensive behaviour by most people's standards, even if there are other instances where we can disagree on what is and is not offensive. I have not heard of this kind of behaviour outwith football so again it is evidence that some people's behaviour at football is worse than in normal life. Yes, I do agree that we should all be able to go to matches and let off a bit of steam... I do that as well. However, to say that freedom of expression means that anyone can say anything at football however hateful it is, is going too far in my opinion. We need to get a better balance between freedom of speech and curtailing hatred. I do accept that this legislation was rushed and could have benefitted from a longer consultation period. There is still the potential to improve and amend it. However, if we repeal the Act, we would be saying that expressing hatred for Catholics, Irish, disabled folk, and ethnic minorities is acceptable. I do not want to send out that message and therefore I will argue for keeping the Act and opposing James Kelly's Bill. I hope that explains my position but please feel free to respond to me with any comments or we can meet up face to face to chat about it if that would be helpful. Yours sincerely John John Mason MSP for Glasgow Shettleston – BPA airson Baile Nighean Sheadna, Glaschu 1335 Gallowgate, Parkhead Cross, Glasgow G31 4DN 7 |
![]() |
|
| IainG | 18 Jan 2018, 11:47 AM Post #2877 |
|
Ah but I was so much older then,I'm younger than that now
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
MSPs on Holyrood's justice committee have recommended the repeal of the Offensive Behaviour at Football Act. A majority of members on the committee backed Labour MSP James Kelly's members bill, while stressing that they strongly condemn sectarian behaviour. SNP members do not want the legislation repealed, but are outnumbered by MSPs from opposition parties, all of whom are in favour of scrapping it. The first vote on the repeal bill will take place at Holyrood next Thursday. |
![]() |
|
| Ponder Stibbons | 18 Jan 2018, 12:07 PM Post #2878 |
|
Occasional Substitute
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I'm not keen on the waffle coming from many of them. It seems like they will amend bits of it but keep the most draconian and illogical parts. We can but hope they repeal it altogether and start again, if they must. Edited by Ponder Stibbons, 18 Jan 2018, 12:24 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| IainG | 18 Jan 2018, 12:10 PM Post #2879 |
|
Ah but I was so much older then,I'm younger than that now
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I feel if the Act is repealed there will be something new put in it's place. They will say public opinion is in favour. |
![]() |
|
| Frannie2k5 | 18 Jan 2018, 12:28 PM Post #2880 |
|
Do not be afraid
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
"There is still the potential to improve and amend it. However, if we repeal the Act, we would be saying that expressing hatred for Catholics, Irish, disabled folk, and ethnic minorities is acceptable. " From SNP MP John Mason. Naw it wouldny John. This is the standard cack spouted by the automatons, aka SNP MP's. Well-herded sheep. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Celtic Football Club Discussion Forum · Next Topic » |





![]](http://z5.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)




7:28 AM Jul 11