 The next item of business is a debate on motion number 2364, in the name of Angela Constance, on working together to prevent and eradicate hate crime and prejudice. Would all those who wish to speak in this debate please press the request to speak buttons? I call on Angela Constance to speak to and move the motion. I want to start today's debate by simply stating that there is never any excuse for hate crime or prejudice and, as a Government, we are absolutely committed to tackling it, wherever it happens, whenever it happens and whoever it happens to. Those who do not experience it may not always see it, but the reality is that an attack on one is an attack against all of us. I know that that view is shared across this chamber. The report of the independent advisory group on hate crime, prejudice and community cohesion was published recently. I want to extend my thanks to Dr Duncan Morill and the other members of the group for an insightful and cross-cutting report, with recommendations that reach across Government and society. We accept the recommendations that are made within the report, and we will use them to inform an inclusive and wide-ranging programme of work. Today is an opportunity for Parliament to inform and shape that work as we move forward together. In reading the report from Dr Morill, I was very struck by the personal testimony of those who experience prejudice and hate. It is imperative that we do not lose personal insights and experiences when we discuss our approach, our policies and our laws. We know that there are people who experience that persistent, sometimes described as low-level abuse and harassment, and that they experience it many times a day in public on transport at schools, at home or at work. That experience of those personal testimonies is reflected in the breadth and depth of the recommendations that Dr Morill and his colleagues made in his report. Those experiences are traumatic to individuals, and they are deeply damaging to communities and community cohesion. Whole communities can end up isolating themselves from society and enjoy less of an opportunity to interact and engage with other opportunities, therefore leading to weaker integration and interaction across communities. It is quite simply not good enough that people in our country are experiencing this, so I repeat that wherever it happens, whenever it happens and whoever it happens to, it needs to be tackled and needs to stop. Hate crime is a criminal act, committed on the basis of prejudice, and the crime must be dealt with. We also need to tackle the root causes of hate crime, which is prejudice and inequality. Without doing so, we will not be able to achieve truly cohesive communities where individuals and groups can live their lives in peace, benefit from diversity and work together to build a better society. As we know, prejudice acts as a barrier to cohesion, while hate crime is quite simply an attack upon it. Scotland is a diverse multicultural society, and this diversity is a strength. Those are the words, and we need to make them a reality. We have a proud history of welcoming people of all faiths and nationalities to Scotland from the Irish immigrants in the 19th and 20th century to Italians during the pre-war period from the Indian and Pakistani community post-World War 2 and, of course, more recently, Syrians fleeing war and terror. Scotland's response to those coming here has demonstrated the best of this country in stepping up to the plate and reaching out to people who need our help the most. We know that attitudes have changed. The most recent Scottish social attitude survey published in September says that there have been decreases in discriminatory attitudes among Scots towards all equality groups. Nearly 70 per cent of people surveyed felt that Scotland should do everything possible to eradicate prejudice, and we should certainly celebrate that change in attitudes. However, there are also concerns, and it is important to look at some of the granular detail in evidence that comes from the Scottish social attitude survey and other places. We know that around a fifth of people in Scotland still think that it is acceptable to sometimes hold prejudicial views. Many people are still expressing concerns about the impact of immigration. Some say that they would not want a member of their family to marry someone from a certain background, and attitudes towards transgender people and gypsy travellers are just quite simply not improving fast enough. Although I remain confident that the upward trajectory of more positive attitudes will continue, I know, however, that that will only happen if we take a multi-disciplinary, multi-faceted approach. We must continue to talk up the benefits of equality, diversity and inclusion in our society, and we must never hesitate to shine a light on prejudice where it exists. In Scotland, we are fortunate that we have not seen a rise in hate crime following the EU referendum, unlike other parts of the UK. However, we must remain absolutely vigilant and avoid complacency and recognise that developments have caused anxiety amongst 181,000 EU nationals who have made Scotland their home, and we understand that. I want to reiterate what the First Minister and many members across his Government and Parliament have made crystal clear that Scotland is your home, you are welcome here, and we value your contribution that you make to our country. Our country, which is now your country, should be our very strong message to EU nationals living in Scotland, and those who have made their life in Scotland through choice or circumstance from further afield and across the planet. There is, of course, one simple step that the UK Government could take right now to ease the minds of EU nationals, and that would be to guarantee the residency status of those EU nationals who have made Scotland their home, which is why we will continue to call on the Prime Minister to do the right thing and to give this guarantee. However, we must also recognise that tackling hate crime is about more than reporting a crime to the police, crucial that reporting crimes to the police is, and that is particularly important when we consider the work that we need to do to encourage and support people to report crime. The point that I want to make is about the importance of equality. Equality is at the heart of our mission to create a fairer Scotland, and it is imperative to create a fairer Scotland for all who have made their lives in Scotland. Since 2007, we have invested over £195 million through the equality budget to promote equality and tackle discrimination, and we have strengthened the law to tackle hate crime and are engaging with communities all over Scotland to work with them to make their lives better. We will make sure that our education system plays its full part in ensuring that we tackle discrimination in all its forms, and we will ensure that all teachers get equality training. We are also refreshing our approach, as many members will know, to the national anti-bullying strategy, which will include an explicit commitment to address prejudice-based bullying in all its forms. We have brought forward a race equality framework. We are taking radical steps to advance LGBTI equality. We are working very hard to level the playing field for disabled people, and we will be introducing the disability delivery plan in the very near future. We want to advance opportunity from everyone. This is a sign that I hope of the society that we aspire to be, one where no one is held back, and one where Scotland's core values of equality, fairness, social justice and dignity are translated into real life and real action for everyone who lives here. The advisory group's report makes crystal clear that this is everyone's business and that it is not just for government or for Parliament important, although our responsibilities are. An important recommendation from Dr Morrow's report was for public education to be undertaken to improve understanding of the nature and the extent of hate crime. I think that this is critical to addressing the underreporting of hate crime. We will bring forward a campaign next year to raise awareness of the impacts of hate crime and the support that is available in communities for those who experience hate crime or prejudice or those who fear it. As I said earlier, I will bring forward a fuller response to the advisory group's report, setting out an inclusive and wide-ranging approach to tackling those issues. It is incumbent upon us all to challenge prejudice, discrimination and hate crime. We are accepting the amendments lodged today by both Annie Wells and Pauline McNeill. The motion commits us to work together, and we must work together if we are to create a Scotland, one Scotland, where there is simply no place for hatred or prejudice. I want to end by quoting Nelson Mandela, a man who challenged hate throughout his life. He once said that no-one is born hating another person because of the colour of his skin, or his background, or his religion. People must learn to hate, and if they learn to hate, they can be taught to love because love comes far more naturally to the human heart than its opposite. I hope that in that spirit that we move forward with the debate today, which will inform all our actions to create that fairer, more equal Scotland. I have great pleasure in moving the motion in my name. I now call Annie Wells to speak to and move amendment 236, 4.2, up to eight minutes please, Ms Wells. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. We are all in agreement today that hate crime in Scotland, as well as across the UK, should never be tolerated and that, as politicians, we should do all we can to ensure that everyone living here feels welcome. That is EU and non-EU nationals. I have just started, if you let me just make some progress, please. Hate crime is not limited solely to race and nationality. Hate crime, in fact, comes in many forms, many of which are on the increase and are vastly underreported. As well as those that are racially aggravated, we see hate crimes based on religion, disability, sexual orientation, transgender identity and those that are classed under the Offensive Behaviourate Football Act. First, I want to ask why it is that the SNP became so obsessed with linking hate crime to Brexit when, this summer, Police Scotland reported that, in Scotland, it has seen no increase in the number of hate crimes reported. In fact, hate crimes fell in the aftermath of the EU referendum. I, in no way, want to undermine the importance of the debate today and raise crimes generally. There have been alarming incidences of racially aggravated crime reported in my constituency, as well as in other parts of the UK, but I feel that it is important to make the point on behalf of the 1 million people in Scotland and the 17.5 million people in the UK as a whole who voted to leave the EU. It is dangerous to continually link the Brexit vote with hate crime, and it completely undermines those that voted that way. I just want to make progress, please, thanks. Voting to leave the EU and hate crime are not mutually exclusive, and I would like to remind the equality secretary and the First Minister before wagging their fingers at the UK Government and the Scottish Conservatives to look within their party to Alex Neil in the secret view who voted to leave the EU on the 23rd of June. That is before I mention the estimated 400,000 SNP supporters who backed Brexit. I am proud that this country is one that tolerates one another's beliefs and actively celebrates society's diversity. As the Government's motion rightly points out, Scotland does have a long history of welcoming people of all nationalities and faiths. In Scotland, figures from the Office of National Statistics showed that over 7 per cent of the Scottish population were born outside the UK and that nearly 6 per cent held non-Dritish nationality. The Prime Minister has already spoken on that issue, stating that she fully expects and intends for the status of EU citizens to be guaranteed. The only situation in which that would not be the case would be if the future rights of UK citizens were not protected elsewhere in the EU. At the Conservative Party conference only last month, Ruth Davidson made a positive case for making sure that EU citizens are made to feel welcome in the UK. Why does the SNP continue to scare monger over that issue? Gillian Martin Does the member have any idea when Tilly's Amaze is going to give them the confidence and say that they are welcome and the fact that EU nationals living in Scotland and the rest of the UK are going to be able to continue to live and work here? Annie Wells The question from the member. As I say, we haven't actually done anything to do article 50 yet, so we don't know what the other EU countries are going to say either. What we can say is that the Prime Minister has spoken and actually stated that it is her full intention and expectation that EU citizens will be protected, and that is what I can say on that. I don't think that any of us in here can actually say any more at the moment because nothing has been done. Moving away from racial aggravated hate crime, I would like to bring the attention to other forms of hate crime that have been so conveniently ignored by the SNP. The report by the independent advisory group welcomed by Angela Constance raised a number of issues regarding Scotland's tackling of hate crime, namely that whilst racial aggravated hate crime has not increased, the number of hate crimes reported relating to disability and sexual orientation are rapidly on the increase. The Hate Crime in Scotland 2015-16 report noted that whilst race hate crime has decreased by 3 per cent, since last year, sexual orientation hate crime has risen by an alarming 20 per cent. That is backed up by TIE research, which reported that 64 per cent of LGBTI youth reported being bullied as a result of their gender identity or sexual orientation, and that a shocking 37 per cent has attempted suicide at least once the result of the bullying. Whilst I welcome the great work between the equality network and Police Scotland, in a programme that intends to provide training for police officers as LGBT liaison officers, more needs to be done. When the report states that schools need to be better equipped to tackle LGBTI bullying, the Scottish Government should at the very least open the debate to inclusive education as a legislative measure. We need more than the First Minister tokenistically attaching herself to LGBTI campaigns and then doing nothing in the way of actually following policies through. Furthermore, I also want to talk about crime directed at transgender people specifically. The advisory report also flags important issues regarding transgender people. A hate crime, which, according to statistics analysis, is notably under-reported by people in Scotland when compared with England. Another figure that will raise concern, I am sure, is that disability hate crime has risen by an alarming 14 per cent in the last year alone. Another form of hate crime that continues to be under-reported. QC Frank Lohland warned the SNP-led Government in 2014 on that issue, warning that not enough was being done in terms of the law enforcement and that disabled people were not confident enough in the system to report those crimes. Another issue that I would like to raise is online bullying. For an issue that we all agree has grown exponentially in the last decade, why are we still awaiting the Scottish Government's updated internet safety action plan, which was last published in 2010? With the SNP rhetoric and its obsession with trying to link racial hate crime with Brexit, it is no surprise that the participants in the study felt that some types of hate crime received more attention and were better understood than others. That is why I call on the SNP Government to stop the Brexit bashing and the end goal of which we all know, and address the hate crimes that it is so conveniently turned a blind eye to. Disability hate crime is on the rise and sexual orientation hate crime is on the rise. The motion that is put forward today is raising a very important issue today regarding the plorable acts of racial hate crime, but please do not try and capitalise on a trend, not even seen in Scotland to try and further the case for your independence drive. I move the amendment in my name. I recently had the pleasure of discussing the equality agenda with Tim Hawkins from the equality network. He reminded me of how far we had come on in lesbian and gay equality, but how far we still had to go on respect of transgender and bisexual people. I want to begin by thanking them and the whole of the third sector for the work that they do every day, not just to promote equality but the basic support that they provide for fighting for justice on behalf of minorities and underrepresented people in Scotland. Just to demonstrate how far we have to go in every area of equality law, the crime statistics for disabled people are horrifying. I have to say, as much as I will have some criticisms of the Scottish Government, it is not the Scottish Government that I will be laying any blame at the door of when it comes to the question of how disabled people have been treated in Scotland. Reports indicated that disabled children and young people are three to four times more likely to be abused or neglected as they are non-disabled peers. The attacks on disabled people generally have increased by 14 per cent, as has been said before. Staggeringly, though, half of disabled women have experienced domestic abuse, so we have quite horrific figures in relation to disability. Islamophobia has tripled. A majority of Scottish Muslim pupils have experienced Islamophobia and are frequently called things like terrorists, the Taliban and even Sikhs, and Hindu pupils often suffer the same abuse for reasons that I am sure I do not need to go into. A third of transgender people go through abuse, but alarmingly 80 per cent of that is not reported. According to the equality network, only one in 10 hate crimes are reported. However, for the first time, lesbian and gay and bisexual people were satisfied with the police response and were dissatisfied. It is important to note that there are areas of progress. However, under reporting is the theme that is prevalent throughout this report that we are discussing this afternoon. Third-party reporting appears to be completely underused, which is why Labour believes that the Scottish Government must do more to resource that system generally, so that people have confidence in the system to come forward. However, we also want to encourage more diversity within the justice system so that people can feel better represented. Skills are at the forefront of teaching children that difference is to be understood and respected. That needs to be applied in wider society, too. We live in extraordinary times when the question of race has probably never been so topical, where the equality agenda itself has never been so diverse and, indeed, no more extraordinary than today, as we are only just waking up to smell the napalm. This morning, David Duke, former Grand Wizard of the Clue Clocks clan, tweeted, God bless Donald Trump. It is time to do the right thing. It is time to take America back. I am sure that, like many others in this chamber, we are bleary eyed watching what I think is the dreaded American result here. However, my former brilliant intern Rachel Craig posted on Facebook this week that, as a young Jewish woman, she is proud to be American. She said that prejudice is not fun. We are a country of immigrants, and there is no room for Trump rhetoric. It is the antithesis of the principles of which America was founded. However, I think that the global backdrop is entirely relevant in assessing current attitudes to race and immigration such as the refugee crisis. In my opinion, foreign interventions have had a direct impact on the refugee crisis. I said in my very first speech standing right here in this new Parliament that even the brilliant Stephen Hawkins could not explain the horror of the Trump phenomenon because we had better, but I said that we better tried to understand it. Unfortunately, it might happen. Today, the world will be dealing with the consequences of failing to try to understand some of these seismic events. The Scottish Government motion focuses on the independent advice group report on hate crime. The motion proclaims that Scotland has a long history of working in people of all nationalities. That is generally true, and we are all proud of our local government colleagues in the role that they have played in Glasgow in particular. The city that I represent has recently accepted 35 young people from the Calais camp. However, I do think that we need to recognise that the story is not always as we would like it to be. As many former Irish Catholic immigrants have historically faced direct discrimination in Scotland, we must have honesty in our appraisal of difficult issues in the debate. However, in celebrating our achievements, we must note that Scotland has half the number of foreign born that England has, but yet with similar attitudes to immigration, according to BBC and a new government poll conducted last year, found that exactly the same percentages as the rest of the UK thought that immigration was an issue at 49 per cent and that they want to see less of it. It is uncomfortable breathing admittedly. There are, of course, many myths around immigration and there is no correlation, for example, between high levels of immigration and lower wage growth. However, according to Ipsos Murray, people think that there is twice as many immigrants in the UK than there actually are. British people also think that the number of Muslims is four times the figure that it actually is. However, those misrepresentations present clear issues for the informed level of public debate, according to the head of Ipsos Murray. In moving the Labour amendment, we want to add a few points that we think of worthy of mention, the role of the media, encouraging more diversity in the criminal justice workforce. In fact, I think that the recent decision to allow Muslim women to wear the hijab is part of the police uniform. That is a positive step, but only if it encourages those women to come forward and serve in our police force. We will be supporting the Government motion this evening and, in fact, we will also be supporting the Tory motion, although I am not sure that Annie Wells's speech spared a complete relation to the amendment itself. Just to end on a point, one area where I think that Annie Wells makes a valid point is that there are some headlines that suggest that heat crimes have reduced in Scotland since Brexit. It is true that race crime has decreased by 3 per cent, which is to be welcomed. However, I think that it is way too early to draw any conclusions from that, and I think that we should refrain from drawing any direct conclusions from it. In closing, I welcome the debate this afternoon. We will be voting with the Government and with the Opposition benches this evening. Thank you very much. I now move to the open speeches of around six minutes. I have a wee bit of time in hand that can make up for the interventions that people take them, but do not go over the top, Mr Dornan, to be followed by Margaret Mitchell. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I just do not understand why you named me there. Before I make the contribution that I wanted to, I spoke to Annie Wells on the way into chamber today and said that I would try not to be having a go at her speech. Unfortunately, there are two aspects of it that I think that I do have to. One is that you seem to be saying that when we were attacking the impact of Brexit, there were attacking people who voted no, and there has never been any suggestion that that is the case. What we have been attacking is the language that was used by certain people who were campaigning for no, mostly down south, which has caused, in my view, some of the culture that has been created over the last year or so. There are two separate things as well. You also criticised the Scottish Government for the lack of action and the First Minister for signing up to something and not doing anything about it yet. At the same time, the LGA in May said that Scotland was the best place in Europe for gay, bisexual, lesbian people, etc. Although we are 94 per cent on their measure, the UK as a whole has dropped under Malta at 82 per cent, so I do not really think that that argument stands up. If you want to give me an intervention, I am more than happy to take it. Annie Wells, thanks for taking intervention. The fact that I was making about the LGBTI stuff is the inclusive education in schools. It is a campaign that has been running for over a year, and they have had lip service from the Scottish Government on that for over a year. I want not just a word on a paper, but to see some proper action on inclusive education in schools. James Dornan. I support the campaign for more inclusive education in schools, but to sort of conflate the First Minister with a campaign that has been going for a year, which is starting from there and expecting an end result within that short period of time, I think, has been a wee bit unrealistic. If I am correct, I think that they are already having close conversations with members of the Government, so I think that there are plans afoot there to do whatever. I am not aware of what is happening. If there is one thing that last year has reinforced us and it sort of falls on from the discussion that we have just had there, for us as politicians it is important to have careful use of words. Just comparing the language of the First Minister in the morning after Brexit, as the cabinet secretary just talked about, about the fact that Scotland is your home, your contribution is valued, to some of that xenophobia. We can, frankly, racist language being used by politicians down south, which unfortunately never finished after horrendous yes to Brexit vote in June. Last month, the hashtag, We are Scotland, swept across social media. That was in response to that xenophobic and divisive suggestion by the Home Secretary, Amber Rudd, that businesses should list any foreign workers and also be encouraged to hire British workers in order to reduce net migration. Those proposals were met with anger, not only across Scotland but across the business community as well. I am happy to take an intervention. Liam Kerr I seem to recall that 50 per cent of SNP members supported those measures, so I accept why he might not particularly appreciate them. It seems that members of his party did. James Dornan I am now thinking of getting up here and just saying anything that comes into my head, because there is absolutely nothing that I know of that is anywhere close to the reality that you have tried to espouse here. The business community was outraged and senior figures commented that the plans were completely irresponsible and would damage the UK economy because foreign workers were hired to fill gaps in skills that British workers could not fill. Damaging and divisive were the plans that Amber Rudd's own backbenchers were deeply critical and sceptical. The response from our First Minister was that she would absolutely stand full square beside any company that refused to comply with any request to publish details of foreign workers. Since then, Amber Rudd has somewhat backtracked in those proposals, but for me the damage is already done. When senior politicians are spouting such xenophobic rhetoric, we should not be surprised when we see a rise in hate crimes that are targeted at non-UK nationals who choose to live in this country. The reports of members of the Polish community have been attacked so brutally that they had to be hospitalised and in one tragic case died. They should send a massive warning to the UK Government that action to encourage inclusivity of our communities is what is needed, not deeply divisive policies, which can only harm the colourful tapestry of life in this country. In sharp contrast, there was deeply heartened by the response of the Scottish people that we are Scotland-tag was not simply a three-worded sentence. It was used as a way for people up and down this country to tell their story, to tell others why they came here, what makes Scotland their home and how much they love being Scottish. Clearly not the weather. Regardless of their varied and diverse ethnicities, Scottish nationals also responded with statements of warmth, of welcoming and of thanks for those foreign nationals who chose to bring their skills and culture here and in return greatly enrich their economy, culture and communities. The truth is that, after the Brexit vote, things were so bad that people were contacting our office that my colleague, my Westminster colleague Sean MacDonald and I had to send a letter out to all the EU nationals in our constituency to just make them aware that we were aware of the concerns that they had, that we considered ourselves lucky that they had made, in our case, Glasgow their home, and that we were happy to make sure that we could try to welcome them for as long as we possibly could. The unfortunate thing is that it is not in our hands how long that is. It is in the hands of a Government such as yours. There is no member in this Parliament that surely can deny that one of the catech fallouts of Brexit has been the rise in hate crime. The charity meant—but it is not just Brexit. The charity meant that, while UK-wide particularly noted to rise in hate crime towards members of the Muslim community after the Paris attacks, it seemed to devastatingly trigger an upsurging crimes aimed at people of the Islamic faith, graffiti in business, verbal attacks in the street and, in some cases, worse. While the figures of hate crime across the Paris attack were much larger UK-wide, the victim trends were similar across the board, and Muslim women were particularly singled out because of how easy it was to identify them if they were wearing a hijab, etc. Islamophobic hate crime is not the only religious-based problem in Scotland. I will not go on to the age-old one that we have had here for a long time, but there has been a number of anti-Semitic incidents across the country, and verbal attacks in neo-Nazi solutions are just not acceptable in Scotland in 2016. No person, be it a Muslim, Jewish, Christian or indeed any other religion, should live in fear of physical or verbal abuse because of their beliefs. While Scotland woke up to one of the biggest election shocks in recent history this morning, we must accept the democratic will of the American people. However, already there have been reports of fear and alarm pouring out of the Muslim and immigrant communities across America, social media posts of people removing their hijab in order to protect their safety. Colleagues, that kind of fear and intimidation has no place in us open and inclusive Scotland. I am confident that everyone in this chamber will support me and support the Government motion. There will be no building of walls here in Scotland, so let's send out the message loud and clear from this place. Scotland is your home and your contribution is valued. Today's debate on preventing and eradicating hate crime and prejudice provides a welcome opportunity to raise awareness about and endeavour to address this fixing issue. Sadly, an array of attitudes and behaviours exist, which can be categorised as hate crime. However, in the time available to me, I want to focus on three particular aspects. The first is termed revenge-porm and involves sharing of intimate images without consent. This is an issue that the last Justice Committee tackled in its final bill of session 4 in March this year, when it was described as one of the most insidious crimes and one that can have far-reaching and lifelong consequences for its victims. Members of the committee heard from witnesses giving evidence that it can have a devastating and humiliating effect on people's lives. Witnesses also stated that a specific offence to tackle this issue would, to quote, send out a clear message that society does not tolerate that kind of behaviour, clears up uncertainties about whether that behaviour is legal or not, and might have a deterrent effect. It is therefore welcome that once the act comes into force, it will criminalise the non-consensual disclosing of or threat to disclose intimate photographs or films, thus providing a deterrent to the misuse of modern technology for the dissemination and promotion of revenge porn. The activities that can be described as revenge porn have quite rightly received a considerable amount of media attention over the last few years. By contrast, the second form of hate crime that I want to highlight involves disabled people and is one that has been less prominent in the public eye, yet it is very much present in society today and includes wide-ranging instances of ridicule and abuse directed at disabled people. Those targeted include the elderly, an old woman relying on a walking stick, being without any provocation. That is not right. The subject of a torrent of abuse and having her handbag knocked off her seat while travelling on a train, veterans with disabilities being openly mocked and jeered and those with learning difficulties being made fun of and bullied. Christina McKelvie I am really pleased to hear Margaret Mitchell call out some of the crimes that people with disabilities face. I wonder if, in the light of that revelation from Margaret today—I know her long-held commitment to it—will she commit to signing the motion that I have in Parliament this week, the report from the UN condemning the UK Government on its treatment of people with disabilities? Margaret Mitchell I will look at addressing that wherever it goes. I will make a point of looking at the member's debate, but it is unfortunate if we seek to make political points out of what is a subject that we have been so far united in condemning. There are instances clearly that this kind of abuse of disabled people is a form of hate crime, which is not only totally abhorrent, but is perpetuated by cowards. That is surely, therefore, a compelling case to be made for such verbal abuse to be prosecuted as a priority. Furthermore, it is worth pointing out that, at present, there is no statutory aggravator for an offence aggravated by prejudice relating to either age or gender—a situation that needs to be explored further. Turning now to the third aspect, I want to cover the subject of religious hate crime. This is traditionally a persistent form of hate crime in Lanarkshire, West and Central Scotland areas, and here there are encouraging and successful initiatives in those areas. Those initiatives are aimed at tackling sectarianism and include remarkable projects such as the one run locally by the Macon Trust in Lanarkhall. The project, which has been running for many years, sees children and young adults of all religions coming together to participate in harmony on collaborative activities. Despite that, it remains deeply depressing that reported instances of religiously motivated hate crime continue today in 21st century Scotland. One particularly vile example took place a month or so ago and involved the targeting of the Coatbridge Senataph, where vandals sprayed pro IRA graffiti on the memorial. This deeply offensive display of wanton vandalism united the whole community of Coatbridge together with people in neighbouring communities in the condemnation of this act. Whilst there is certainly a balance to be struck between giving the vandals responsible air time, it is important that those acts are publicly condemned. As 11 November approaches, this type of crime is put in stark contrast with the reverence and respect that millions of people throughout the UK show when they attend Remembrance Sunday services every year. I look forward to being my respect this Sunday at the same Coatbridge Senataph, which is one of countless memorials located in villages and towns nationwide, which serve as a constant reminder of the debt of gratitude that we owe to those who have paid the ultimate sacrifice for our freedoms in present and past conflicts. In conclusion, there has to be a two-pronged approach to preventing and eradicating hate crime. The first prong involves awareness raising, condemnation and education. The second prong is when all else fails to ensure that those entrenched incidents of this unacceptable type of behaviour in whatever form it exists are disposed of with the full force of the law. Here, as the law society points out, what is clearly required is a review of the crowded landscape of legislation, statutory aggravators and common law, as it applies to hate crime at present. Christina McKelvie, followed by Johann Lamont. Presiding Officer, the rise of hate up to and since the Brexit referendum has caused us all to rethink our place in this UK. It has reminded us that we cannot be complacent in anything that we do, and now we all know who the next president of the United States is going to be—a right-wing reactionary who mocks people with disabilities and believes that he can do what he likes with women and creates an atmosphere of fear of immigrants and immigration. I am reminded of those famous words written in 1883. Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free. The Richard refuse of your teeming shores. Send these, the homeless, the tempest-tossed to me, and I lift my lamp beside the golden door. 27 years ago today, the fall of the Berlin wall will be breaking walls down, not building new ones up. Nowhere near as elegant, but with the same message at its heart, I reiterated this message at the SNP conference this year following one of the most right-wing reactionary negative hate-filled Tory conferences that I have ever heard. Those have come to our shores to seek a better life belong here, just as much as anyone else. If you have chosen Scotland as your home, you are Scotland. If you have chosen Scotland as your place to study, you are Scotland. If you have chosen Scotland as your place to have sanctuary, you are Scotland. If you have chosen Scotland as your place to bring up your children, they are Scotland. If you have chosen Scotland as your place to do business, you are Scotland. We, all of us, share in the riches of this one planet. What right has any one of us to exclude someone else for doing the same? We are a country that stands opposed to hatred and stands firm against abuse, but in that opposition we must be consciously aware of our own surroundings, of our own context. Everyone in this chamber right now is quite rightly held to a higher standard, a more intensive level of public scrutiny, but that doesn't excuse the violent, hateful abuse, and that is often directed to public officials, especially through Twitter and other social media. I've experienced it, no doubt many in this chamber have experienced it too, and be subject to various forms of abuse of allegations, sexual harassment and hate crimes. The Minister for Transport had the ultimate reply to someone who told him, go back to where you came from. His reply was, I write, I'll be on my way back to Glasgow then. The most uniquely Scottish reply, sharp, braw and based in absolute truth. This truth was revealed in the prosecution services report that brought together figures on race crime and on crime motivated by prejudice related to religion, disability, sexual orientation and transgender identity. In 2015-16 there were 3,712 racial charges reported, a few percent down on the year before and the lowest number reported since 2003-04. That's progress, but it's still an awful lot of people abused. Sexual-orientated aggravated crime saw 1,020 charges reported. That's an increase of 20 per cent. That's in line with an overall annual increase, hopefully through more reporting since 2010. Those attitudes, those reprehensible crimes that pit fellow Scots against each other are nothing more than their differences, is utter tribalism at its worst. Tribalism can become very ingrained very quickly. It's passed down as an accidental by-product of one's environment. It's an attack upon anyone who doesn't quite fit into someone else's preconceptions of what that person should be. Being deaf, blind, in a wheelchair, special needs, elderly, gay or trans ben, gender means nothing to some small-minded people who will object to your differences, including the president-elect. A healthy society, we celebrate difference, and we know that people of every kind of background add to that rich tapestry that is human kind. I stress the word kind because I want a caring, compassionate Scotland that does not want to victimise anyone. Victimisation is born out of fear. It is the school bully syndrome, you lack the confidence and security in yourself, so you hit out at others, and those who use that fear to incite hatred are the most reprehensible in my view. Riding ourselves of this kind of prejudice and hate crime centres on a shift in culture. We need to do more at school, with families and communities to build people's confidence, especially young people, so that they're able to shake off generations of being told that they're a useless waste of time, will never amount to anything and might as well accept that a life on benefits is all they're good for and maybe get on one of those poverty porn TV shows. I believe that's where attitudes start to go wrong. If you're brought up in that kind of environment where your only own kind, whatever you conceive that to be, is acceptable, then what inevitably follows is going to be strife, pain, anguish and of course criminal behaviour, a culture of hate. It is beholden in every single one of us to route out those old patterns and to place them with relaxed, open, friendly and a non-discriminatory set of values. As recent events have shown, there is no place for complacency, so this is clearly an area where more effort needs to be put in, that there are a range of actions that can be undertaken to try to eradicate this particular form of prejudice, but once again it must all start at home and in the nursery school. We need to teach our kids that the world is full of different kinds of people, just as it is full of different kinds of cultures, religion and race. And it's a reason that I support the Tai campaign, the work that they have done to ensure that they challenge homophobia in all of its forms and I would urge the Scottish Government to support it too. It's through that diversity, Presiding Officer, it's through that difference that makes Scotland flourish and I call on all of us and our Scottish Government to do what it can to eradicate hate-based discrimination. Here's to difference and welcome to you all. Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. We live in fragile times and I can't be the only person who feels that in 24 hours it's even more fragile still. I'm happy to speak in this debate, taking the opportunity to emphasise the importance of recognising the existence of and affirming the need for us all in Scotland and beyond to tackle hate crime and prejudice. I was privileged to attend the launch of hate crime week in Glasgow and in particular I would mention among wonderful inspiring speeches the Purple Ponchos, a theatre group from the Centre of Inclusive Living who were in your face with brilliant sketches condemning discrimination and mocking those who wish to mock the disabled. The consequence of Brexit are not yet fully to be understood and while we know that many people who voted leave did not hate and were not bigots, there is a fear, as some have suggested, that troublingly perhaps Brexit did not create division but revealed it and that those that do feel hate now feel emboldened to shout their hatred more loudly than in the past. We must fear the division which now seems ever more evident in our world and that matters for the future feels so much more insecure now than it has in my adulthood. I always believed that my children now, in the beginning of their adulthood, were living in a world that is much safer than mine. I now fear for their generation that they are not living in a safe world but in a frightening one. I don't want to overstate or suggest that we're on the edge of a precipice but I did want to share my thoughts about the importance of vigilance and energy in understanding and tackling hate crime and discrimination. I hope that you will forgive me if I share with you a powerful experience that I had, which had an unbelievably powerful impact on me of a recent visit that I had the privilege of making to Bosnia as the guest of the charity Remembering Srebrenica Scotland visiting Bosnia to learn more about the genocide that took place there only 21 years ago. Bosnia is a beautiful country, it's people welcoming. Sarajevo, a city with a proud history of a diverse population, of diverse faiths living together side by side. Bosnia as part of the republics of Yugoslavia was within our very recent past a holiday destination for people from across Europe and beyond. In our recent visit we learned of the horrors of war of a city under siege for 47 months of the abuse and slaughter of innocent victims. We heard of the inability of the United Nations soldiers to intervene, to act when they saw the systematic killing, the ethnic cleansing driven by the desire to eradicate a people because of their background and their beliefs. Learning about the genocide by the Serbs and seeing the mass graves, the overwhelming grief of families, the courage of those who are still taking on the forensic work of identifying the remains of loved ones, who are still seeking to heal the wounds of war are important in themselves, for it is a stain on all of us that the genocide unfolded as international communities stood by, almost shrugging its shoulders, seeing the war as something inexplicable, a civil war among those who somehow historically were always that way. That was to our shame then, and we need to do all we can to support the work of the Remembrance of Srebrenica Scotland to talk about the genocide denial and make sure that our young people understood what happened on our continent. To be opportunistic, I hope that the minister will be willing to meet with me to talk about precisely how we could support that work. However, I raised the experience of that visit, and if you have ever given the opportunity to do that, I urge you to do so. I raised it here not to overstate the challenges that we face but to reflect on the central lessons for all of us of what we heard from the mothers of Srebrenica and from those courageous young men who gave testimony to their survival of the genocide. They spoke of how their crisis did not emerge in one day. They spoke of the horror of their experience of realising that their school friends, their neighbours, those with whom they had lived in comfortable coexistence, now wielded guns against them. The horror of the understanding that that emerged step by step slowly over time with the denigration of people, the scapegoating of them, the dismissing of them, and it is those steps that lead to the chaos that drives people to the inhumanity of genocide itself. That is why we need to confront hate crime, ensure that people are supported to report it, and that those who would seek to divide our communities are left in no doubt that such behaviour is unacceptable. We do need to educate our young people about the danger of the word hate against any group, whether it is on the basis of their identity, their faith, their sexuality, their gender or disability, and we must also guard against complacency. I know that across this Parliament there is a unity and a yearning to tackle this issue, that we seek communities where we celebrate our diversity rather than defining ourselves by our differences. I also know that in my city, in communities across Scotland and indeed across the United Kingdom and far beyond, there are inspiring examples of kindness, compassion, empathy and determination to tackle the discrimination that too many of those who seek refuge with us or face discrimination because of the groups that they are part of would want to be part of, not least because of the courage of equality of the groups themselves in speaking out and demanding justice. I say this gently and trust that we can all reflect on it. We must not rewrite our own history to feed a narrative about the perceived difference of Scotland to its neighbours in the debate around Europe. Scotland has been welcoming, but even a cursory look at our history is to understand that that has not always been so. While we know that many Scots look horrified at the denigration of immigrants across Europe, we know that immigrants and EU citizens in Scotland are not always immune to that abuse. We also know that there are many across the United Kingdom who are equally repulsed by the language and vocabulary of the bigots and races as we in this country are. In conclusion, we should not underestimate the significance and importance of this report and of this debate and I wish all power to the Government in the actions that it will take and I will support them and my party will do in taking this forward. Of the need for the police, the justice system, our public services and education to look forward to being part of a system that is fairer to all. In this very fragile world, we need to stand strong in our love of and commitment to humanity, otherwise this world will become more fragile still. Hate is a much used word. I would say that it is a misused word and we have talked about hate crime in here a lot. We talked very recently about hate crime and maybe the question is, are things getting better? Perhaps in some ways they are. At some point, we have to understand the statistics and the same thing that has happened with rape and sexual abuse, child abuse, the willingness of people to come forward will be reflected in increased numbers. The last time we spoke, I talked about newspapers and the role they have played and whilst we might not purchase these newspapers, they are very visible for everyone to see on the newsstands. As I said then, while they have clearly passed some legal test, they certainly have spectacularly failed any moral test, as far as I am concerned. They have painted a picture of intolerance and normalising hate. We have seen a rise in abusive crimes against homeless people and are manifesting itself in a different way with the spikes that have been put down to stop rough sleeping. We have seen the vilification of various groups and I have got these in heavy inverted commas in this sheet here. Asylum seekers, refugees, junkies, scroungers and the disabled, gypsy travellers, as the cabinet secretary mentioned, who systematically still encounter abuse, transgender people and Islamophobia still remains a major issue. I am going to hopefully speak with some good grace about the Conservative party amendment, good grace that I think was singularly absent from the proposer. The Scottish Greens will be supporting that amendment, the Labour party amendment, at decision time tonight. However, like the cabinet secretary, rather than the words there, I would like to be able to share with my neighbours who are EU citizens their guarantees that they are respected, so the Spanish neighbour who has been here 15 years, who is a valued member of the community, to say, no, you are valued and you can stay here. That is sadly lacking at the moment. What we have seen is the rise of the right across Europe and people have talked about and Christie McElvie talked about the social media. We have to be aware of the relatively innocent-looking social media comments from people like Britain First, which are luring people in and if you scratch at the surface you see the hate that they are. I would join with Christie McElvie in roundly condemning the disgusting abuse that female colleagues particularly get, and I think that any sane person would do likewise. The motion is about a report that talks about the definition of hate. In relation to the language used, the report says that the use of language of hate sometimes leads to a lack of recognition of what has transpired, a situation in which neither the victim nor the accused recognises what has happened has been based on hate. It recommends the development of clearer definitions and terminology and education to improve the understanding of the nature and extent of crime. I welcome the cabinet secretary's comments about teacher training, which is absolutely vital, and as others have talked about, it is about LGBTI and disability training. Dr Morrow in the report talks about public education, and again I welcome the campaign next year. I am happy to lend support to that. It has also been touched on by a few people the criminal aggravations and there is an on-going debate about whether gender should be included in that in the report. It says that the Scottish Government should consider whether the existing criminal law provides sufficient protections for those who may be at risk of hate crime, for example based on gender, age or membership or other groups such as the refugees and asylum seekers. My colleague Patrick Harvie and a member's will in 2008-2009 argued that, before too long, we would need some form of consolidation act to ensure that the various strands of hate crime were made coherent and, more importantly, administrative problems from the piecemeal approach would be overcome. That is a position that was also adopted by the chief officers and the Justice Committee in 2009. I am grateful to the various organisations that have provided briefings for us. One of them, the Law Society, picks up on that point and says that there could be potential benefits and consolidation of all hate crime, statutory aggravations and a substantive statutory offence within one piece of legislation, and that would lead to ease of use and simplicity of reference. I hope that that is something that will be picked up on. In the Lord Advocate's guidelines, which are mentioned in the report, there is a talk of the perception that associates itself with this crime. That is very important for the individual, and that comes from knowledge. Also, the Law Society highlights the learning possibilities from post-legislative scrutiny. Of course, laws are one thing. It is the lived experience of citizens that is very important. The report talks about those in terms of experiences that can be one-off and open or hidden and frequent. Of course, there is a range of experiences. What I found very compelling was the example that was given by Enable in relation to the bullying and the quote from the individual. That day in the bus, no one came to my aid. The whole bus was full, but no one helped me, and after that day, I closed myself off and did not leave home for a month. It may be very difficult for individuals to challenge, particularly in a physical way, but we must challenge. The Call of Urtunities Committee in the last session looked at the issue of loneliness and isolation, and, although it was a small part of what came up, bullying was a feature of that. Similarly, in the research of the Equalities and Human Rights Commission, it says that we hope that this work will help to inform many reforms of personal and social education correctly moving forward. The equality network, similarly, provides as many of the people who gave us briefings a number of statistics. They talked about the percentages of LGBT respondents at 64 per cent target of hate crime with trans people. That was up to 80 per cent of the target of hate crime. The most depressing thing on the statistics was the phrase, those are high percentages but not out of line with other recent surveys. That is deeply depressing, I have to say. In relation to the areas where there were challenges, one of them was public transport. It is important that providers of public transport are aware if I can make a plea that driver-only operated trains would help that. Clearly, there is a very important role for the guards, the health and safety person on the train. Social media has been touched upon and clearly we need education associated with that. The workplace is another place where bullying takes place. I would simply say that it reminds employers of their duty of care to their staff. I would also say that the experience will show that there is an important role for unions and staff associations in the workplace, in support of avoiding incidents cropping up like that. Peer support is clearly important. Closing remarks of a mate, Presiding Officer. Hate crime, of course, is not something that is simply associated with urban areas. The complications of hate crime are a reprehensible thing, regardless of where it takes place. There are additional features if it takes place in a rural area, where often, particularly if it is an ethnic minority individual that is the recipient, they are isolated often from that wider community and family support. I will conclude with a phrase. No two individuals are ever the same. Embrace individuality and help put an end to hate crime. That is no philosophy. That is actually on Police Scotland's website and I think that it is commendable the role that they and third party reporting organisations have played. It is important that we all stick together on this and encourage people to come forward. George Adam, to be followed by Alex Cole-Hamilton. Thank you, Presiding Officer. There is absolutely no place for hate crime or prejudice in our Scotland of the 21st century. No more can we, or will we indulge the bigots as a practicer in tolerance and bigotry, only to accuse each other of being more intolerant and more bigoted than they are. We must show that there is a better way. At a time when other parts of the world are becoming insular and some nations views are hardening, we need to show leadership and that there is still a bright light out there. We must show that progressive politics can show a way forward. It is only correct that someone in Scotland must be empowered to achieve their potential irrespective of race, faith, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability. Everyone has the right to be safe and feel safe within their communities. Scotland, we all know, has a very long history of welcoming people of all nationalities and faiths as Cabinet Secretary for Communities, Social Security and Equalities, Angela Constance, said previously, as a nation, we have a long history of welcoming people of all nationalities and faiths and we are committed to supporting their integration into our communities. That has assumed an even more importance in the aftermath of the EU referendum. I will need to look at the 1,000 refugees who have settled here since October 2015 to see our openness and willingness to help people to integrate and become part of Scottish life. We have seen the success of this locally in our constituency in Paisley as families have been welcomed within our community. However, I have had countless EU citizens come to my constituency office after the Brexit result, asking me what their future holds. They have committed themselves and their families to our nation and contributed to it. We need to ensure that, as a nation, we continue to be welcoming and open and not descend into the hate and blame culture that has happened in other parts of the United Kingdom. However, we cannot remain complacent. We must always look to be better. The Scottish Government's report on 2015 considered the issues of hate crime, prejudice and community cohesion, and some of the recommendations came forward for improvement. That brings us to today. There are many forms of prejudice that can be abusive and lead to hate, but it can also be a physical barrier. It can be the fact that a disabled person has difficulty gaining assets to most aspects of life that others take for granted. Whether that is access to employment, a building or transportation, they are all connected because without one you cannot achieve the other. If we use—my wife Stacey, many in here will know that she has mobility problems, since she has multiple sclerosis. When we go out, we tend to go to places where we know that there will be access. If we use our manual chair, things tend to be easier—not for me, Presiding Officer, but we all have to have a fitness programme. However, with the manual chair, we can access a train without help, and I can, nine times out of 10, find a way to push our way just about anywhere. Of course, that is not the point. The point is, how does Stacey and others manage that on their own? How can we ensure that all our people have access to all the same buildings, services and access to employment? Stacey often says to me that people with disabilities tend to be forgotten. They have a very active network of organisations working to improve things, but they tend to be very reasonable. Unlike other groups, they try to find solutions to problems in a very practical and reasoned manner, but the problem with that is that they tend to be taken for granted by transport companies, entertainment venues and public organisations. How many times have we seen a wheelchair user denied access to a bus or having to organise a journey by train four hours before they actually have the journey? No spontaneity for the average wheelchair user, no wee quick train journey down to lards on a lovely summer's day and no chance of being late for work in making a last-minute dash, but there are solutions. One solution would be for access panels throughout Scotland to become a statutory organisation in the planning process. Getting them at a planning level to ensure that buildings can be fully accessible, you could also ensure that transportation organisations consult with them regarding service plans, running stock, whether it is rail or road. The reason why I welcome that debate is that it gives me an opportunity to discuss those issues and ensure that the voice of my disabled constituents is heard. All of that is on the backdrop of Tory's so-called welfare reforms. The UN Committee for the Protection of People with Disabilities has an inquiry into disability rights and welfare reform. It said that the roll-out of those welfare policies includes the issue of statements by high-ranking officers that the reform is aimed at making the welfare system fairer to taxpayers and more balanced and transparent and transparent and reducing benefit fraud. Persons with disabilities have been regularly portrayed negatively as being dependent on making a living out of benefits, committing fraud as benefit claimants, being lazy and putting a burden on taxpayers who are paying money for nothing. The inquiry collected evidence that persons with disabilities continue to experience increasing hostility, aggressive behaviour and sometimes attacks on their personal integrity. The inquiry also found no substantiation of the alleged benefits frauds by persons with disabilities. A more cynical man, Presiding Officer, than me, would call the reforms a form of discrimination and prejudice. Some may even go as far as say a hate crime. The type of Scotland that I want to live in is one that does not care where you live or come from, what lifestyle choices you have made or even what football team you support. The Scotland that I want is one that tolerates everyone and offers opportunity for all. It will not happen overnight, but it is a challenge that we must face to ensure that we pass on that bright light to the next generation of young Scots. We must continue to believe that, during these dark times, there is always a better way forward. Alice Crawl Hamilton, to be followed by Ash Denham. Thank you, Presiding Officer. This is not the speech that I planned to give this evening, nor is it one that I wanted to. I reflect that, despite the rankaw and deep divisions that often characterise debates in this place, there is a real connection tonight, both on the substance of this motion, the amendments and the sheer revulsion at the result that we have witnessed in America today. Yesterday, I described Brexit as a multifaceted act of political vandalism. It is certainly that, yet it has as nothing to the jarring, visceral and largely unexpected, lurch to the politics of prejudice that our American cousins have embraced. Members across this chamber will have shared my view and watched aghast as state after state, to end its back on an offer of hope and inclusivity, to embrace a prospectus of cold misogyny, racism and discrimination. Now it is not statesman-like or diplomatic for a parliamentarian to rail against the victor of such an important international contest, but I feel neither statesman-like nor diplomatic when it comes to addressing the hate-filled doctrine that has swept much of the continental United States these past 24 hours. It is a doctrine that represents the very antithesis of the government motion and the amendments before us this evening, and it is a doctrine that relies on the demonisation of the other, the threatening outsider, a doctrine that plays to the very worst demons of our souls. Seizing on the realities of huge swathes of the American population who, when asked by pollsters, would say that folks like me were better off 50 years ago, Donald Trump's task was blindingly simple—find any number of groups among the dispossessed and the marginalised to blame for that, play to every fear, stereotype and prejudice and do so with abandon. The politics of prejudice represent the very worst tendencies in the conduct of human affairs. They thrive on a primeval reversion to tribe that seeks out weakness, difference and nonconformity and then endeavours to drive them out to persecute and malign. We may unite in condemnation of its emergence in America today, but we do well to reflect on its existence in these islands as well. If the calamity of last night's events induced us to answer one challenge in ourselves, then the eradication of prejudice wherever it may be found in our nation must be that. If we accept that the prejudice stems from the stigma attached to a group for its differences, a reinforcement of stereotype and a subliminal attempt to further marginalise it, then we do not have far to look. That challenge exists, for example, in the bigoted and inaccurate remarks about gay promiscuity in discussions about licensing for prophylactic HIV medication. It is so effective that it is akin to a vaccine and, had it been discovered in the 1980s, it would be in the water supply. That stems from a popular prejudice from school and bullying in school, and that is why most parties across the chamber, all parties across the chamber, have rightly supported the TIE campaign for inclusive education. That challenge exists in the hate crime and abusive language, barriers to employment still faced by those affected by disability in our society. That challenge exists in the racism faced by refugees, by gypsy travellers and by migrants, yes, even here in Scotland. However, prejudice also germinates wherever we create a different class of person, by dint of culture or by policy among our talented female workforce, still paid measurably less than their male counterpart, still managed out or passed over as a result of pregnancy and still excluded from boardrooms across Scotland. In our young people, whose hourly rate of work is still valued less at entry level than that of older workers of the same experience, and who are still seen as being responsible for antisocial behaviour in our communities when they are more likely to be victims than culprits of that. Finally, in our prison population, where disenfranchised women in the democratic process while incarcerated and set to an immediate disadvantage in terms of housing and employability on liberation, it is incumbent on us as legislators and as opinion-formers and leaders to root out those folds and tears in the fabric of our society where people are forgotten and marginalised and subjected to prejudice and ultimately hate and bring change through policy and by example. Bobby Kennedy said, each time someone stands up for an idea or acts to improve the lot of others or strikes out against injustice, they send forth a tiny ripple of hope and crossing each other from a million different centres of energy and daring. Those ripples build a current that can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance. I hang on that last sentence and I see the prescience in that tonight. Such comfort in this dark awakening for our world. So let us unify today in the best way that this chamber does across these benches. Let us support the motion and amendments before us today. Let us and this be the catalyst for our fight against prejudice at home and by so eradicating it here. Turn our eyes west and the challenge of its revival overseas. Politicians have a voice and the things that we say and do can shape the way society thinks about the issues of the day. That is a benefit but it is also a responsibility and we should use our platform wisely to point the way to a better society wherever possible. During the EU referendum, some politicians were not wise and they were not careful, fanning the flames on immigration in order to generate votes for the leave campaign. Nigel Farage's breaking point poster was a low point in a campaign that I feel had no high point. A tactical decision was made to turn what should have been a vote on the EU into a vote on immigration. A UN body has commented that British politicians helped fuel a steep rise in racist hate crimes during and after the EU referendum campaign. The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discriminations said that it was deeply concerned that the referendum campaign was marked by divisive, anti-immigrant and xenophobic rhetoric. They stated that many politicians and prominent political figures not only failed to condemn it but also created and entrenched prejudices, thereby emboldening individuals to carry out acts of intimidation and hate towards minority communities and people who are visibly different. Hate crime in England has gone up as a result. In the week before and the week after the 23 June vote, a year-on-year increase was recorded around about 42 per cent. John Burnett, a researcher at the Institute of Race Relations, said that the upsurge in attacks against Eastern Europeans should come as no surprise given the way that they have been portrayed repeatedly as scroungers, as cheats and ultimately as a threat. That depiction, which intensified in the build-up to the referendum, of course predated it. The hate crimes are a product of a politically constructed climate, which has been years in the making. Contrast that with the Scottish Government making clear, both before and after the EU referendum, that EU citizens are welcome. The First Minister said on the day after the referendum to EU nationals living in Scotland, that you remain welcome here. Scotland is your home and your contribution is valued. There seems at the moment to be no evidence that the increase in hate crime that we have seen rising in England is replicated in Scotland, but one point of caution on that is that, as it is reflected in the report by the independent advisory group, some victims simply do not wish to report those crimes to the police. I have anecdotal evidence of that myself. A family business in my constituency recently received a series of anonymous letters telling them to go home, and they have also experienced people on the street saying the same things to them in person. They have not reported any of this to the police and told a neighbouring shop owner that it will pass. The report found that many people who experienced this type of hatred or prejudice on a daily basis said that they felt it would just be impossible to report them all to the police. Other participants reported that people subject to repeated incidents of prejudice or hate crime internalised that behaviour as simply normal. It was an experience of their everyday life, and they developed coping strategies to deal with those that do not include contact with justice agencies or support services. Police Scotland, as we know, is working on encouraging victims to report either directly or through an online form on their website or through a network of third-party reporting centres that they have the responsibility for supporting and maintaining. The report found that the Scottish Government continues to articulate a clear commitment to building a positive country that celebrates diversity and that the authorities are committed to taking hate crime seriously and to responding to it. The report also found that the global and the media context is a crucial driver in shaping the perceptions of safety for particular communities such as the Muslim community or the Jewish community. The experiences of and anxiety about hate crime were both heightened during or following particular high-profile international events and that the public narrative around migrants or asylum seekers had had significant consequences for people in local communities. That just underlines the point that although the Scottish Government, with its partners, are committed to advancing equality, to eradicating prejudice by doing things such as strengthening the law, running education programmes and other things such as working towards all new police and fire service recruits receiving equalities training. The wider context is not under the control of the Scottish Government. The comments, the speeches and the leaflets by politicians create a climate that has real consequences for real communities. I hope that the xenophobic rhetoric emanating from the UK political discourse is ended now before more harm is done. Jamie Greene will be followed by closing speeches. I joined this Parliament having had quite a wide and varied life and career experiences and the majority of which have been very happy and positive ones, but, like many, I have come across and also experienced a wide range of prejudices. As a young man growing up in the west of Scotland, sectarianism was fairly rife in our communities. Whilst I did not understand what the murals on the walls at the end of the gable meant, I did know that on one street you were green and on another you were blue, and God forbid you get that wrong. When I went to high school, I discovered that being called gay was not a compliment. There were virtually no ethnic minority students in my school, and I used to wince on the way home as I heard the abuse that the owners of the local convenience shop had to endure day in, day out. Naturally, I thought as I moved into adulthood that life would be different because adults know better, right? But I've sat in recruitment meetings in my career and heard words like, well, we have a pile of responses to the job ad, so let's just take out all the ones with foreign-sounding names and that will make life easier for us. I have friends who have been beaten black and blue as they walk home from a night out or abused in a supermarket for holding the hand of the one they love. I guess the point of those anecdotes is to demonstrate that prejudice and bigotry is often borne out of just plain ignorance, as well as a deep, genuine hatred passed on from one generation to another. Hate crime often derives from prejudice, but prejudice often derives from stigma. As co-convener of the Parliament's new LGBTI cross-party group, I hope that the chamber will forgive my indulgence as I focus on the subject. As my colleague Annie Wells pointed out, according to the Crown Office, sexual-orientated, aggravated crime is not only rising but is the second most common type of hate crime in Scotland. At Warringly, the Equality Network's 2015 Equality report points out that 97 per cent of LGBTI people in Scotland have personally faced prejudice or discrimination. Let's take a moment to think about that, 97 per cent. That means that nearly every single LGBTI person in this country faces or has faced some form of harassment or discrimination that could be homophobic comments through to physical violence or discrimination when accessing services or in school or in their place of employment. As I said to the Parliament's Standards Committee just last week, it is true that LGBTI acceptance has soared in our society. Scotland is a very inclusive place, but that alone does not equate to true equality. As a society, we are still very quick to label people and put them in boxes. A recent review of evidence on hate crime and prejudice from the Scottish Centre for Crime and Justice points out that the list of protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010 do not always line up with the definition within Scotland's hate crime law. As policy makers, our task is quite complicated. It is more difficult than just making a list of people not to discriminate against. When we categorise people, even to protect them, we are tributing labels that cannot, in their very nature, be applied to everybody. Therefore, the language that we use when discussing hate crime is very important. Let me explain what I mean by that. When we discuss, for example, how to protect minorities from hate crime, we are addressing the symptoms of prejudice. We are not removing its root causes. We must stop painting a picture that the LGBTI community, as many other so-called minority groups, are legal and cultural exceptions to the norm, but instead work towards a system of law that works for everyone by default. We must do everything within our power to drag the whole legal, educational and public service system into the 21st century. That means not just paying lip service to these communities. So what can be done? There is plenty of legislation passed by Holyrood and Westminster for the prevention and eradication of hate crime, but the Law Society of Scotland has pointed out that it is scattered across numerous statutes. The Law Society further points out that if the law were consolidated in one place, it may improve clarity and access to justice for all. I think that is something that we should consider. But hate crime rarely happens in isolation, yet we still know so very little about it and the people who perpetrate it. I think that much more research is needed on how hate crime intersects with other social issues in society, such as poverty, ethnicity and religion. There needs to be far greater efforts to open the channels of communication between those communities and public authorities, which is why I am encouraged, for example, that Police Scotland are training more than 60 officers to work with the LGBTI community to help to prevent hate crime. But this is no time to pat ourselves on the back and say, job done. The quality network points out that we need to find out whether restorative justice is being used effectively for different types of hate crime. Tackling online hate crime and criminalising threatening communication, especially are two areas in which I think Scotland has more room for improvement. In closing, hate crime is everyone's problem, whether it is anti-Semitism, anti-Islamic sentiment, homophobia, biphobia, transphobia or sectarian bigotry. We, as members of this Parliament, have a role to play in this. I am in my final closing seconds. We have a role to play in this in the language that we ourselves use and how we treat each other when we have political differences that give way to heated debate, both in here and online. The more we work together, intact and prejudice, the more inclusive our society becomes and the greater the opportunities will be for everyone. Given the events that have unfolded across the last 24 hours in the United States, let me join those across the chamber who have spoken about the relevance of us having this debate today. President-elect Donald Trump is certainly not the outcome that I hoped for. The news that Trump would become the next United States president filled me with sadness and disbelief. Disbelief because Trump has led a hate-filled and fear-based campaign filled with misogynistic and racial rhetoric that has only served to divide people. For all of us who care about equality and fairness, today is a dark day. It is upsetting to know that a man who, during the course of his campaign, has espoused such backward views about women's rights, has said that he would ban Muslims from entering his country and has mocked people with disabilities that he can still become leader of the United States and have those sentiments seemingly condoned beggars' belief. I know that there will be many Muslims, LGBTI people, other minority groups and women in America today who will be worried about the future direction of their country. If the US election tells us anything, it is that issues of prejudice towards minority groups remain very much live issues in the Western world and should be a stark warning to all of us against any sort of complacency. I welcome the recent report by the independent advisory group on hate crime, prejudice and community cohesion, which highlighted this very issue. The report tells us that so much of the experience of hate crime remains hidden to the public, with many victims deciding not to report due to fear of further violence or retaliation, and with many others describing what looks like a degree of acceptance of certain abuse due to a feeling that it is simply part of life. Hate crime is not an inevitable part of life. Prejudice and social isolation of certain groups has long-term damaging impacts on society, and tackling those issues must be a priority concern for us all. A zero-tolerant approach will help to give victims the confidence that they need to come forward and report by giving them certainty that their reporting will make a difference, and its support will be given to them. Scotland's Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service already take a zero-tolerant approach, and Scottish Labour wants to see this extended across our justice system and beyond. The report also makes a series of recommendations about the scope of hate crime, particularly in relation to the category of gender. Consideration of misogynistic hate crime was recently adopted by police in Nottinghamshire, and I have previously asked the Scottish Government about whether it considers police Scotland to have adequate powers to handle such instances of crime. I look forward to the Government's response to those issues in light of the report, and I hope that the minister will be today able to outline that response alongside a deadline for action in response to its recommendations. Persecution of minority groups in Scotland is a real and growing problem. Race crime remains the most commonly reported hate crime in Scotland, and it is growing across the UK. Disability crimes, as we have heard, have increased too. They have more than tripled since 2010 and are up 4 per cent on last year. Instances of hate crime based on a person's sexual orientation have more than doubled since 2010, increasing 20 per cent in the last year alone. That situation is simply unacceptable. One family within the central Scotland area has recently brought to my attention the situation of their teenage grandson, who has been bullied at a school near to where I live due to a physical disability. The family were happy for me to mention that today, but to say no more of fear of his identity being revealed. We have also heard shocking details of those who have been victims of homophobic bullying in schools via a time for inclusive education campaign, including from my friend and colleague Councillor Jed Killan at South Lancer Council, who has spoken about his own experience of being bullied at school simply for being gay. Today, I have had in my mind during this debate my young constituent and my friend, Jed Killan, and others have shared their lived experience with me, because there are real people behind those hate crime statistics and real lives that are affected by instances of prejudice-based bullying. In a specific relation to issues of homophobia, LGBTI groups and a particular anti-campaign have been keen to address the occurrence of bullying and harassment in schools. I have been pleased to hear several colleagues refer to the anti-campaign today, including Annie Wells and Alex Cole-Hamilton. I was particularly pleased to hear Christina McElvie, who is a big supporter of the anti-campaign, add her voice and asked the Scottish Government to do all that it can to support the campaign. Far too many young people in Scotland are reporting issues of bullying due to their sexual orientation, and it is simply the case that no young person should be made to feel isolated or ashamed or persecuted because of their sexual orientation. The anti-campaign research is remarkable and sobering to anyone who reads it, including information that more than half of teachers have not even heard of or read current Government guidance designed to tackle homophobia in schools, as well as survey data from pupils showing that 27 per cent of LGBTI students had attempted suicide at least once. The Scottish Government should act on the powers that it has to influence how the teaching curriculum and training materials are exercised when it comes to education on this matter. Taking forward a strong ethos of equality, starting with our young people, is a good place to start towards the permanent eradication of such prejudice from our society. Building those positive attitudes throughout society will complement the work that our justice system, particularly Police Scotland and third sector support groups, carry out on a day-to-day basis in tackling hate crime where it occurs. I echo the calls from the advisory group on enhancing resourcing third-party resourcing centres and recommendations at Police Scotland review action steps to improve their effectiveness. I also hope that the Government will consider its role in working with partners in the justice system and on education to improve how hate crimes are recorded. I hope that the minister will be able to provide some clarity on those issues in closing. Donald Trump's election—I hate to come back to him again—reminds us that views that we might have hoped were consigned to the past are not necessarily as unacceptable in today's world as we would like to think. There can be no room for complacency. It is my hope that we can positively take forward the issues that are raised in today's debate by working together across this chamber in order to enact real change in people's lives during the lifetime of this Parliament. I call on Douglas Ross to close with the Conservatives. People are not born full of hate, they are not born homophobic or racist, they are not born with despicable demeaning views on the disabled. They learn it somewhere, they learn it perhaps in their communities through entrenched historical views that hopefully someday soon will disappear. That sprung to mind when the cabinet secretary quoted at the end of her contribution, and I will come on to that further in my contribution. However, I was encouraged that perhaps those old-fashioned views are leaving us when I attended the Scottish Youth Parliament's reception in the Scottish Parliament last night when MSYPs from Murray and from Shetland showed me their recent responses to surveys about young people's opinions in local communities and about the priorities young people want to include going forward. Emmy Mane from Murray and Kelvin Anderson from Shetland both told me how high up tackling hate crime was on their agenda in Shetland and in Murray and with young people across Scotland. That is something that can give us some encouragement today when we have heard some pretty horrific things throughout our communities. I am pleased to close for the Scottish Conservatives this evening. I thank all members for their contributions. There is a clear consensus in the chamber today that hate crime must be overcome once and for all. Prejudice and bigotry of any kind has no place in our society, and I welcome the Scottish Government's commitment to tackle this pernicious problem. I want to dwell on a short time on some of the contributions that we have heard today. Mr Dornan spoke about his experiences in Glasgow. Margaret Mitchell looked at three specific aspects during her contribution, and she gave us a stark example of unacceptable behaviour and vandalism and graffiti of the cenotaph in Coatbridge and how that offensive action spreads through the community and is completely unacceptable. I enjoyed listening to Johann Lamont's contribution about the purple ponchos and particularly her very compelling and moving account of her recent visit to Bosnia, where she visited and saw the horrors of war that have been experienced there. John Finnie and Christina McKelvie both mentioned the impact of social media and the unacceptable hate that can be filled on there, particularly with politicians. John Finnie made the point about female politicians, and I totally agree with that. No one would condone what is done online to politicians, but some people see us as fair game. Whether you agree with that or not, who are definitely not fair game are our staff, who are often included in some of the vile hatred online simply because who they are employed by and what they do in this Parliament, and I think that that is completely unacceptable. I know that we all as individuals give our support to our staff, but we maybe do not say it enough in the chamber. George Adam, surprisingly, I was shocked to mention Paisley. I think that he tends to do it every now and then, but he also mentioned his wife Stacey and the experience that she has going around. I was also quite interested to hear Stacey's view that people with disabilities tend to be forgotten. I hope, from the contribution by Mr Adam today and the debate that we have had, that Stacey and others do not feel their Scottish Parliament, because they are an important part, an integral part of Scotland's life. It was useful to get that contribution from Mr Adam. Jamie Greene mentioned the LGBTI cross-party group, and how great it is that the Scottish Parliament now has a recognised cross-party group. He also said that acceptance has soared of the LGBTI community, but that does not equate to true equity and equality. I think that that is something that we have to remember. I join the cabinet secretary in extending my thanks to the advisory group led by Dr Duncan Morill, which looked extensively at the current state of hate crime, prejudice and community cohesion in Scotland since it was convened last year. His team's report highlights a number of concerning issues in this regard, not least that many people in minority communities have accepted that a certain amount of abuse is almost part of life. We have heard many worrying statistics in the chamber today, and the rise in charges involving disability, sexual orientation and transgender identity, although disappointing, may at least demonstrate that some victims are more willing to come forward. That is the point that Monica Lennon mentioned earlier. Many others, for many reasons, do not come forward. It is therefore incumbent on us, all as parliamentarians, to issue a clear call that their experiences will be taken seriously as they progress through the criminal justice system, and while they will be taken seriously, we also need to ensure that they are handled sensitively. The introduction, as Annie Wells and Jamie Greene mentioned, of LGBTI liaison officers by Police Scotland is a positive step in that direction, and it is particularly welcome that those officers have been trained by the equality network, helping officers to become alert to the particular nuances of those incidents. Dr Morill does, however, emphasise that, while the justice system can punish and deter hate crime, it alone cannot instigate the required cultural change that will, and I quote, ensure positive and informed attitudes and behaviour within society. I refer that back to my earlier remarks. That is an important point, and it reinforces that a criminal remedy must be part of a multi-pronged approach to tackling hate crime. Central to this strategy is to increase awareness of what a hate crime actually constitutes, given that both the perpetrator and the victim may not recognise that their experience or actions are based on or motivated by hate. I think that I will have—sorry, how long do I have? I told—seven minutes in total, so another minute in that. Okay, thank you. Dr Morill and his team therefore recommend that the Scottish Government should take the lead in developing a clearer definition of hate crime, which should be accompanied by greater public education. Those are recommendations that parties across the Isles can support, and we will work collaboratively with our SNP colleagues and others in those areas. I very briefly want to mention the EU. Ash Denham acknowledged that, in the intervening period since the EU referendum, incidents of hate crime in Scotland have not increased, and we welcome that. It would be remiss of politicians to try and establish a direct link between incidents elsewhere and the referendum outcome. The Scottish Government, Police Scotland and the Crown Office Procurator Fiscal Service have repeatedly sounded cautionary notes about forming conclusions on monthly fluctuations in the figures. However, we need to send out a strong unequivocal message that both non-British EU nationals and non-EU nationals living in Scotland are welcome here, and they should be afforded the same dignity and respect that they have always been. We heard that from those benches yesterday during the health debate, and I reiterate that today. To finish, both the cabinet secretary and Alex Cole-Hamilton delivered quotes as they concluded their speeches, so I will do the same. Martin Luther King said that darkness cannot drive out darkness, only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate, only love can do that. There have been many positive contributions today, and I hope that the consensus in this chamber sends some positive life to the people of Scotland that their Scottish Parliament shed some light on the darkness of the unacceptable hate crimes. I call Annabelle Ewing to wind up the debate. I would like to welcome the positive contributions today to the debate from members right across the chamber. What we have seen is that there is broad consensus in this Parliament that not only hate crime and prejudice and, indeed, as Margaret Mitchell referred to specifically, sectarian behaviour are not acceptable in Scotland, but that we must, each of us, do all that we can to prevent and eradicate such hateful behaviours. We must, as Christina McKelvie said, be on our guard, be vigilant. For everyone, it has the right to be safe and to feel safe in their communities. There is no excuse for any form of hate crime. It is never acceptable, and it will never be tolerated in this country. Scotland is a diverse, multicultural society, and this diversity, Presiding Officer, is a strength and not a problem. Indeed, as has been highlighted in the chamber this afternoon, Scotland has a long history of welcoming people of all nationalities and all faiths, including those seeking refuge and asylum from war and terror elsewhere in the world. That is who we have been, that is who we are and that is who we continue to want to be—an open, inclusive and respectful country, a civilised country in, as Johann Lamont said, an increasingly frightening and fragile world. I am sure, in response to Johann Lamont's point, that the cabinet secretary would be happy to meet with her to discuss her ideas for ways in which we can all move forward together. Of course, on the international plane, we had many references today, as I am sure you can appreciate, Presiding Officer. We had a contribution from Alex Cole-Hamilton, where he also referenced perhaps challenging events that are happening first of Scotland. We had from Ash Denham a very eloquent plea about the importance of the language used by politicians because we all have a responsibility to set the tone. Before picking up on some specific points raised in the debate, I would like, at the outset, to stress a few things about reporting, because that has been a common theme mentioned by many members. I would like to say that anyone who believes that they have been a victim of hate crime should report that to the authorities. Police Scotland supports a national third-party reporting infrastructure to facilitate the reporting of hate crime. I would like to say to Pauline McNeill that Police Scotland has been reviewing this network to ensure that there is adequate geographical coverage across Scotland as well as the provision of sites that cater for particular community needs. The staff on those sites have also received additional training from local officers to ensure that they can assist a victim or witness in submitting a report to the police. In addition, I would say that hate crime can also be reported online through the Police Scotland website. However, I undertake to ensure that we, after the debate, ask Police Scotland what more they can do in this regard. As a general comment on picking up some of the points that Monica Lennon made, I would say that we continue to reflect on Dr Morrow's recommendations in the round, and that work is on-going. In terms of reporting, I was very concerned to note the comments from the quality network further to their submission in today's debate. They pointed to the recent survey that they had carried out of the experiences of LGBTI people in terms of hate crime, and they found that some 70 per cent of LGBT and some 70 per cent of trans victims of hate crime did not report any incident that they experienced to the police. More work is obviously needed here, and I will ensure that the concerns raised particularly by the quality network further to their recent survey, which also covered the experience of the broader justice system, are in fact brought to the attention of the police and the relevant services so that we can reflect on what more we need to do to meet this clear gap in how people feel about the system that is there for them. Of course, awareness raising also plays a critical role here, and that is why I hope that all members will welcome the cabinet secretary's announcement today of a new awareness raising campaign on the effects of hate crime on individuals and communities, which is to be launched next year, and hopefully the whole chamber can get behind that important campaign. Picking up on some of the specific points, in addition to the reporting of hate crime, I would like to focus on a few in the time that I have available. I perhaps will not get round all the points, but if members wish to write to me, I will be happy to respond if I do not get round to their specific point. On LGBTI issues in general, we will continue to work closely with all our relevant organisations to ensure that we better understand and indeed seek to address the key priorities for those communities. Of course, the Scottish Government is fair to say that it has made significant progress over recent years, but we are by no means complacent, and we recognise that there is always more to be done. I would like to welcome Jamie Greene to his new role as co-convener of the LGBTI cross-party group, and I am sure that he will do an excellent job of work on that important CPG. I will take a brief intervention. I ask if you could give the chamber an update on the TIE campaign, because several members have raised the issue today and shown a lot of support, and I just want to find out if the Scottish Government is moving towards supporting the campaign. In fact, I was just about to get to that very place. I would say that it is the Deputy First Minister's education sector who is carefully considering what more the Scottish Government can do in relation to the campaign, and we will continue our work there. I would also point out—I am advised by the cabinet secretary—that, in respect of the respect me national anti-bullying campaign, it is being actively refreshed to ensure that it includes prejudice-based bullying in whatever form that takes. That work is also on-going, and I am sure that the member will welcome that. I also mentioned the important issue of disability hate crime and the under-reporting that we are still seeing in that regard. There are a number of reasons for that, and we continue to work with disability organisations. However, I would have to say a point picked up by some members in this debate, including George Adam, that an impact of the UK Government's approach to welfare reform has been the negative stereotyping of disabled people as benefit chiefs and scroungers through press reporting, and that has had a consequence. That has seen an increase in disability harassment incidents as reported by disabled people themselves to our external partners. As the cabinet secretary said, we hope soon to bring forward a disability delivery plan to advance equality for disabled people, including a commitment to work with disabled people's organisations such as enable to continue to tackle hate crime, including on the key issue of bullying, as was highlighted in the enable's helpful briefing for the debate today. Of course, mention has also been made, Presiding Officer, of the recent UN report. I think that it was George Adam and Christina McKelvie who has, in fact, a motion down on that very subject in Parliament at the moment. Of course, the UN report has highlighted the conclusion reached that the UK Government, in fact, has breached the rights of disabled people. We await with interest to hear what the UK Government plans to do about that. Mention has also been made of Brexit and the position of EU nationals in Scotland. I would entirely agree with James Dornan's comments about the very significant anxiety that was felt by EU nationals in our country. I would also entirely agree with John Finnie's statement to the effect that the UK Government should take a lead here now. It has a responsibility to set the tone and, by any effect, condoning a bargaining chip approach, which has not been challenged by Conservative members today in the debate, is sending a very dangerous signal to society at large and a very worrying signal to our EU nationals in our country, who have chosen Scotland as their home and who we value very much indeed. Scotland has been on a journey, but we agree that we have much further still to go if everyone in Scotland is to enjoy true equality and equality of opportunity. The reality is that we are all human beings and we have fundamental rights. It does not matter where we came from, it does not matter who we love, we all deserve to be treated with basic human dignity to get on in life and to enjoy everything that life has to offer. Vigilance is indeed required at all times, and this Government is committed to doing everything that it can to ensure that Scotland continues on this journey so that equality becomes a reality for everyone. That concludes our debate on eradicating hate crime. The next item of business is consideration of business motion 2411 in the name of Jo Fitzpatrick on behalf of the parliamentary bureau setting out a business programme. I would ask any member who wishes to speak against the motion to do so now, to press the button. I would ask Jo Fitzpatrick to move the motion. Formally moved. And no member has asked to speak against the motion. I'll put the question to the chamber. The question is that we agree motion number 2411. Are we all agreed? We are. The next item of business is consideration of two parliamentary bureau motions. I would ask Jo Fitzpatrick to move on block motions 2272 and 2276 on approval of SSIs. Moved on block. Thank you. There are five questions to be put today. The first question is that amendment 2364.2 in the name of Annie Wells, which seeks to amend motion 2364 in the name of Angela Constance on eradicating hate crime, be agreed. Are we all agreed? We are all agreed. The next question is that amendment 2364.1 in the name of Pauli McNeill, which seeks to amend the motion, be agreed. Are we all agreed? We are all agreed. The next question is that motion 2364 in the name of Angela Constance, as amended, is agreed. Are we all agreed? The motion is therefore agreed. The next question is that motion 2272 in the name of Jo Fitzpatrick on approval of an SSI be agreed. Are we all agreed? And the final question is that motion 2276 in the name of Jo Fitzpatrick on approval of an SSI be agreed. Are we all agreed? Thank you very much. That concludes decision time and we'll now move to members business. We'll take a few moments just to change seats.