Last Friday, we published our “Scottish Government Report on the operation of the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act 2012”. In doing so, we have fulfilled the requirement in section 11 of the act for us to report on the operation of the offences in sections 1 and 6 by 1 August this year.
Since June 2013, researchers at the University of Stirling and ScotCen Social Research have been carrying out an extensive evaluation of the act, and they have heard evidence from a wide range of stakeholders including fans, match commanders, police, prosecutors and football club representatives. The resulting independent evaluation covers section 1 of the act, on offensive behaviour at regulated football matches, and it is one of the pieces of supporting evidence that is central to our report.
The second piece of evidence that our report is founded on is an evaluation of section 6 of the act, on threatening communications, which was produced by the Scottish Government’s justice analytical services division.
Although the act is a high-profile and important piece of legislation, it is by no means the only measure that the Government has deployed to tackle offensive behaviour and crimes that are associated with different forms of hatred. However, I hope to set out why I believe that the act is a tool that should remain available to the police and the courts. I will also set out where I believe there is scope for improving the implementation and operation of the act. I am keen to work with all partners to do that.
The basis for moving forward is the evaluation’s recommendations and suggested improvements in how the act is applied and used. However, I am keen to supplement that by hearing from those who have an interest in the legislation, who want to respond to the recommendations and who have ideas for improving operation of the act. Our on-going aim is to learn from the evidence and improve implementation.
The work that has been undertaken by the independent research team indicates that the majority of the people of Scotland, including football fans, have had enough of football being used as an outlet for offensive, bigoted and abusive behaviour. Scotland is moving on from the prejudices of the past, and I believe that a clear majority supports the sentiment that Scottish football needs to move with the times.
The evaluation shows that hateful and offensive activity has been a declining phenomenon at football matches in recent seasons since the act was introduced, in terms of the number of charges that have been reported to prosecutors by the police. Updated hate-crime figures that were published last Friday indicate that such activity has fallen even further than was reported in the evaluation, with offences under the act having fallen by 28 per cent since the first year of operation.
I whole-heartedly welcome the decline in offences under the act. That decline reflects opinion that we have observed through other work that we have been doing, in particular in relation to tackling sectarianism: the public tell us time and again that they are tired of the worn-out rhetoric of bigotry, which has no place in modern Scotland.
The act has some harsh critics. Since taking on responsibility for my portfolio, I have been keen to understand the basis for that opposition and to consider how legitimate concerns can be addressed in order to improve implementation and operation of the act.
The act was not created in a vacuum; it resulted from circumstances that simply could not be tolerated and which needed a strong policy response. Members may recall that during the 2010-11 football season we saw an unacceptable level of sectarianism on Facebook, on internet forums, in blogs and on other social media, and that we saw a number of high-profile figures being targeted with parcel bombs and death threats, alongside increased patterns of violence and disorder at some football matches. When Parliament legislates, it chooses to communicate important messages. In response to those events, the act stated that bigotry, prejudice and the celebration of loss of life and of terrorist activity are unacceptable.
There is no question but that the vast majority of football supporters are well behaved and simply wish to support their teams and enjoy the match-day experience. I acknowledge that good behaviour and self-policing where it occurs—I have seen it at work. That positive behaviour is absolutely central to creating the atmosphere of friendly rivalry that allows everyone to enjoy our national sport without feeling abused, threatened or intimidated.
It is therefore unsurprising that the evaluation highlights findings from surveys of supporters of Scottish football clubs that were conducted as part of the research and which show that a majority of football fans hold views that are broadly in line with the act’s objectives. Football is not in itself responsible for giving rise to sectarianism or other forms of hatred that exist in society—to suggest otherwise would be wrong—but it is, regrettably, a means by which such hatred, abusive behaviour or sectarianism can manifest themselves. For example, recent research from a Scottish social attitudes survey by ScotCen Social Research found that 88 per cent of people identified football as a contributing factor to sectarianism in Scotland, and that 55 per cent highlighted it as the main contributing factor to sectarianism in Scotland.
In developing their evaluation, the University of Stirling and ScotCen Social Research consulted a wide range of stakeholders. That included an online supporters survey at the end of the 2012-13 season and a further survey at the end of the 2013-14 season, which attracted a total of 4,130 responses. The surveys sought views about match-day experiences since the legislation came into force, and supporters from all 42 professional league clubs were involved. The strongest representations came from Celtic, Hearts and Rangers fans. The results, which were validated through focus group work, demonstrate that 90 per cent of respondents to the fan survey found songs that glorify or celebrate the loss of life or serious injury to be offensive; that 82 per cent found songs in support of terrorist organisations to be offensive; and that 75 per cent found songs, chants and shouting about people’s religious background or beliefs at football matches to be offensive.
We have never promoted the view that societal problems can be eradicated through legislation alone; they are complex problems that can be addressed only through a range of activities. That is why the act is part of our broader work to tackle abusive behaviour and why it has never been intended as a single fix. However, I recognise that there are areas in which improvements could be made. After all, the legislation is still new, and it is important that we consider where it is not working so effectively, and that we take the appropriate steps to address that.
For example, although policing at football matches is an operational matter for Police Scotland, the evaluation’s finding that the relationship between the police, football clubs and fans could be improved is acknowledged. I am keen to see that happen and to work with all parties on positive engagement and on improving levels of trust. I know from my discussions with Police Scotland that it shares that ambition.
I was delighted to be able to announce last Friday that I have extended the diversion from prosecution programme—which is run by Scotland’s leading organisation for reducing offending in communities, Sacro, as an alternative to prosecution. I know that that chimes with concerns that have been raised by football clubs and other groups, including fans against criminalisation. Sacro’s programme, which will cover all Scotland, will ensure that, when appropriate, people will be kept away from the criminal justice system and given appropriate alternative education programmes to make them understand the impact of their actions; to steer them away from getting caught in a downward spiral in the criminal justice system; and to give them opportunities to make positive life changes. Clearly, it would be desirable to change behaviour, where possible, rather than giving first time and low-tariff offenders a criminal record.
Another area that I will be looking into is the application of football banning orders, their effectiveness as an intervention and what improvements can be made to the procedures to ensure that they remain an effective tool for dealing with a wide range of negative behaviours that are associated with football. That will be done in conjunction with the Scottish Court Service and the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. A short-term banning order may be an appropriate alternative in some cases, and prosecutors may want to use those as an alternative disposal.
The Lord Advocate will be updating his guidelines on the act to ensure that prosecutors are aware of the diversionary programme and are able to use it in all suitable cases. He will also be highlighting precedents that have been established through case law in order to clarify interpretation of the act and to achieve a more consistent approach to its application.
As well as taking the actions that I have mentioned, I am keen to hear more from people who have been critical of the act, so that I can identify and understand the legitimate concerns that they may have, and how best to address them.
Clearly, actions must be evidence based. Therefore, I am also committed to monitoring the act’s operation and the effectiveness of Sacro’s diversion from prosecution programme.
Other issues are highlighted in the evaluations, such as that 60 per cent of fans perceive that they have not yet seen an improvement in behaviour; the act’s comparatively low usage; and the duration of court cases, which is a concern of fans’ representatives. The implications of all the findings must be fully considered and, where appropriate, acted on.
I am satisfied that the evaluation meets our commitment to report to Parliament on the act’s effectiveness, and that it presents a strong, diverse and representative set of views, reflected through a robust and independent evaluation process. We have a thorough and robust understanding of the act’s impact in its first two seasons of operation. I thank the University of Stirling and colleagues in the justice analytical services division for providing a good basis for further progress.
Tackling all forms of abusive behaviour, including abusive behaviour in and associated with football, is a Government priority. It is central to building an inclusive Scotland where all can live and raise their families in peace without fear of threats, abuse or prejudice. The act remains an important tool for helping us to achieve that goal.