Op-Ed: The Joke that Duncs11 has made of Scottish Politics

By Captain_Plat_2258, MSP

So we've finally done it. It's finally happened. The Scottish Parliament passed a dog-whistling 'anti-racism' motion that's professing to address the blight of 'Anglophobia' in Scotland. I call it... 'the Tories are at it again'. I imagine my Julia-Gillard-riff in te reo is already well known in Scotland by now given the fact half the Conservative caucus decided to feign outrage and disbelief and even raised a point of order on a speech that was an obvious parody (and praised the original speech as a work of art for some reason, ignoring the reasonably disingenuous roots of the speech that I was riffing on). But no let's just pretend these allegations of reverse racism from the Tory benches are worth the time of day, which they're not. So what is discrimination, who suffers from discrimination, and why did the Anglophobia Motion receive so much backlash? We'll discuss all this and more, and how Scottish politics under the current First Minister is such that members literally across the aisle and all through the gallery laughed at a motion he put to the house. After that, we'll go over what Duncs11 and the Government really could be doing better with their time, along with why a motion that apparently addresses discrimination might warrant ridicule.

The motion in question calls for a number of things. For the sake of transparency, I shall quote the motion in its entirety here then unpack it.

This Parliament acknowledges that:

• Anglophobia is a form of prejudice against persons of, or perceived to be of, an English national background and/or identity
• As Anglophobia is prejudice against people of an English national identity, it falls under the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s definition of race discrimination - making it a form of racism.
• The Equality and Human Rights Commission’s report tackling racial harassment: universities challenged states that it found “anti-English sentiment at Scottish and Welsh universities” which “were part of a repeated pattern of harassment"
• The 2004 ’It's as if you're some alien...' Exploring Anti-English Attitudes in Scotland sociological study found considerable levels of anti-English racism were present in Scottish society and concluded “it can be stated that anti-Englishness does seem to be a feature of English people's lives in Scotland”.
• A feeling of Scottish exceptionalism sometimes leads to racism - including anti-English bigotry - being taken less seriously in Scotland than it ought to be.

This Parliament therefore:

• Unreservedly condemns Anglophobia and those who engage in Anglophobic behaviours
• Commits to ensuring that no form of racism will be tolerated in Scottish society
• Extends our deep and sincere apologies to those impacted by Anglophobic behaviour in Scotland

The first clause established what Anglophobia is, and I have little trouble with it. Within its definition, it makes sense. A form of prejudice against the English living in Scotland. It is upon the third clause we begin to have problems. I won't make too much reference to the irony that the Equality Act upon which the EHRC (cited in the second and third clauses) operates cites 'taking positive action to encourage or develop people in an under-represented racial group' as 'not racism' when the First Minister himself has referred to this as a form of racism, but I will talk a little about the report from the EHRC.

The report cited in the motion indicated that it found"anti-English sentiment at Scottish and Welsh Universities". Now unfortunately, the First Minister forgot a few crucial details. Mere paragraphs before the following information is shared;

"Around a quarter of students from an ethnic minority background (24%), and 9% of White students, said they had experienced racial harassment since starting their course. This equates to 13% of all students."

9% of white students versus 24% of students from an ethnic minority background. And yet the motion specifically speaks about anti-English sentiment with only a tiny clause about the far more prevalent and larger issues of racism seen in Scotland. The report also says in the exact same part as the quote about anti-English sentiment "We received examples of Antisemitic and Islamophobic slurs". It could be argued that non-white English people experience Anglophobia, but given how large the percentage of anti-minority ethnic discrimination is it's almost a certainty that the discrimination faced by non-white English people would be classified under racism specifically towards their race and not their nationality. And yet the First Minister cherry picks the examples of Anglophobia out of a report that explicitly shows that wider issues of racism are a far greater issue. Why? Well we'll get into that later, let's keep on analysing the motion.

The next clause cites a study entitled 'As if you're Some Alien, Exploring Anti-English Attitudes in Scotland' conducted by a number of lecturers and professors from across Scotland. Now this a very interesting read, it establishes there are levels of distrust and discrimination at some points in some English-Scots lives. However there are a number of conclusions within it that the First Minister neglects entirely. Here are some various quotes from the conclusion section, entitled "Understanding Anti-Englishness";

"It is important not to overstate this as for the majority it was clearly not an issue all of the time - as one respondent stated; 'I mean I'm not kind of stoned in the street or anything you know' (female 31)."

"Clearly some of the tensions and derogatory allusions discussed above arise from the long-standing political and economic relationships of the two countries. Although they are officially joint partners in a political union established in 1707, historically England has always been dominant (Devine, 1999; Smout,1994)."

"(This) relationship can usefully be understood as being essentially a colonial one (...) It also can provide an appropriate shorthand description of the attitudes of some individuals behaviour and isolated, often relatively petty, incidents."

"The position of English people in Scotland in terms of power and the extent of any social exclusion differs from that of other minorities who have experienced discrimination in housing, employment, and public services (Bowes et al., 1990). English people have not apparently been excluded in these ways. In this case, it would appear to be that Scots themselves at times feel 'excluded' and so anti-Englishness, and moral panics relating to this, can arise from long-held and easily aroused suspicions and resentments that English people are, in some way, 'colonising' and 'Anglicising' Scotland.

You see, even the study that is cited in the motion makes reference to why such a motion is a terrible idea. It specifically says 'don't overstate this', and indicates that anti-Englishness is not as intense in any way as the other forms of discrimination suffered by minority groups. It indicates that anti-Englishness arises in Scotland, just as it does in colonised nations of Africa and the Middle-East and among the indigenous populations of Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand, due to feelings that Scotland is losing its own national soul and is being 'Anglicised'.

It indicates in this way that it is not a problem solvable in legislation directly but rather through ensuring the Scottish people are shown that their culture is not being slowly assimilated into this vague sense of 'Britishness'. By ensuring that the United Kingdom truly is a 'Union of equals' and not the dominance of England over everybody else, which even this paper cited by the motion seems to think is happening. The paper also establishes that, while the vast majority of English people feel their identity is interchangeable with British, the vast majority of Welsh and Scots feel that they have a dual and distinct identity and that the Anglophobia that may arise within these communities really does originate from fear of losing their culture entirely into the amorphous blob of Britishness. As a woman from an ethnicity and culture that has experienced actual colonisation, I know the feeling; and I also know that it is necessary that the culture of Scots is not assimilated into 'Britishness' but rather is allowed to exist alongside every other culture in the Union.

See this is why I entitled this article what I did, because the hilarity of one of the only two academic sources cited in the motion actually disagreeing with the need for the motion and the position of the First Minister on Anglophobia is genuinely very funny. It shows laziness, citing a study but not reading it; or worse, reading it but not caring that its conclusions directly contradict your own actions. And it shows quite plainly that even the people calling out and researching Anglophobia believe that other racism and discrimination deserves more specific attention.

And now we come to the clause that truly soured my opinion of this motion. "A feeling of Scottish exceptionalism leads to racism not being taken seriously". This is directly at odds with the indications of the cited paper. It condemns the uncertainty and fears of a kind of 'neocolonisation' seen in Scotland as 'exceptionalism', while the paper in question directly states that Anglophobia arises from the fears of Scottish people that they may lose their culture entirely. This anti-Scottish attitude seen in the motion, this idea that the Scottish people all think they're 'better' than everyone else despite the academic proof to the contrary, shows the attitude of this government towards the constituent-state. Rather than have a constructive conversation about why Anglophobia may arise and how to create a society that benefits everybody, that doesn't leave English people discriminated against nor makes Scottish people feel left behind and pushed to prejudice - the government would rather just apply labels and move on.

This very same logic could have been used against my own people in the days of Māori rights activism, it could have been used to write off the works of anti-colonial writers. While I would not compare what's happening in Scotland directly to colonisation, it's clear that a wider discussion needs to be had about cultural erasure in the north of Britain and this government simply isn't willing to have it. This motion is a dogwhistle because it exists not to genuinely combat a problem but rather to divert from the issues that the Tories have done nowhere near enough to resolve. Furthermore, because it is typically only white English people who suffer from Anglophobia (rather than any other kind of racism), it could reasonably be compared to something like Pauline Hanson's 'It's OK to be White' motion in the Australian Senate. It took a balanced and sensible paper and polarised it into the very kind of action the paper itself warned against undertaking.

But how about we take this motion at face value. Ignore the contradictions and implications, and assume the motion is completely correct despite the fact it contradicts the evidence it itself provides. How does it hold up against the real world? According to information on wikipedia (which I source checked, don't you worry your sweet wee unionist head) a number of studies are cited in relation to Anglophobia in Scotland. One very interesting study from 2005 by Hussain and Millar of the University of Glasgow says;

"Only 16% of English people see the conflict between Scots and English as even 'fairly serious'."

The study goes on to say that Anglophobia is less prevalent than Islamophobia. This is important because Muslim people make up about 1.4% of the Scottish population, while an estimated 7% of the Scottish population is people born in England who have moved. That's a whole lot more people for less problem. Anglophobia, when you put it in perspective, is a hell of a small problem compared to the 2,880 charges of race-related hate crime recorded in 2018-19. It's a hell of a small problem compared to the 1,176 charges of sexual-orientation-related hate crime in 2018-19. It's a hell of a small problem compared to  529 charges of religious-motivated hate crime in 2018-19, the 289 charges of ableist-related hate crime, and the 40 charges of transgender-identity related hate crime in 2018-19 all recorded by the Scottish government. I personally don't think it's appropriate for the First Minister to be writing a motion specifically on Anglophobia when the working class of Scotland is still suffering on much larger scale than a few isolated incidents. When the top 10% of society owns more wealth than the bottom 40%, and the top 1% owns more than the bottom 50%, I don't think Anglophobia is our biggest societal problem. Neither do I think so when 35% of minority ethnic people are in poverty as opposed to 18% of white English in Scotland. Or when 1 in 4 children in Scotland are living in poverty, when we have poverty and inequality on the rise and have had for something around 20 years.

Dare I say that Anglophobia is not a problem of societal racism and not worthy of the special attention of the Scottish Parliament when we have yet to see a motion on racism, homophobia, religious persecution, ableism, or transphobia rise up in the chamber across Duncs11's Premiership. Instead we see a motion on an issue that he could cite an entire two cases of in his entire speech on the matter. Forget the fact that sexuality-based hate crime, gender-identity-based, and ability-based hate crime are all actually on the rise in Scotland. Forget the fact poverty and income inequality are massive issues that this government has made few efforts to solve. No no - let's make a motion about possibly the single least prevalent form of 'discrimination' in Scotland. Well congratulations, First Minister, you have finally become a minority - a minority of English people who genuinely believe anglophobia is some big systemic racist issue at all comparable to the struggles faced by oppressed groups currently and historically in Scotland, a minority that doesn't even include the authors of a paper you cited. Enjoy being the 16%. Believe me it's not all it's cut out to be.

If this is not bad enough, how about the response from members and the public? The Leader of the Liberal Democrats could only manage an exasperated scream when they saw the motion in question, another Lib Dem (ThatThingInTheCorner) said rightly that "calling anglophobia racism just laughs in the face of the people who are actually affected by racism and who are prejudiced against for their race", another Lib Dem said incredulously "how are you even real?", at least six people in the chamber affiliated with Change UK and the LPUK among others along with multiple people in the gallery audibly laughed, a former Tory Prime Minister simply joked about 'gamer moment's in response, a PAP member called the First Minister annoying and snide, Lib Dems and Labourites could be seen tapping desks together in the chamber for the first time in living memory. Essentially the only people actually defending the motion were elected Conservative MSPs and the two Libertarians in Coalition with them. Imagine a motion so awful even a former Prime Minister from your party cannot help but joke about it and the national leader of a former Tory Coalition partner literally screams at it.

In conclusion, there are greater issues in Heaven or on Earth than can be found on the agenda of the Scottish Government. While actually oppressed minorities are being discriminated against en masse throughout Scotland and the wider UK, while poverty still remains a major problem and we see massive homelessness issues throughout the constituent-state, the privileged few in the Scottish Cabinet would rather talk about anti-English hate with an ambiguous single clause about all of the other much more prevalent racist issues. They would ignore the results of studies they themselves cited, cherry picking clauses and ignoring the implications of the wider conversation that the study called for. It's really quite ridiculous that the government wouldn't even read the entire conclusion of a relatively short study, and would only use the last sentence to base their entire argument on.

Because the fact is while Anglophobia as a concept is to be condemned, and discrimination against people who themselves have done nothing wrong is to be condemned; English Scots enjoy a considerable number of privileges (as shown in the study cited in the motion) and do not suffer many of the drawbacks suffered by, say, people of colour or diverse gender and sexuality. They are not having trouble gaining access to housing, they are not under-represented on the boards of companies, they do not feel a chill run down their spine when they see a police car. Those are issues faced by people of different skin colour, different gender identity, different sexual orientation.

By creating a motion specifically targeting Anglophobia, the Scottish Government has flown in the face of not only studies they cited but also virtually every person who truly experiences discrimination and cultural assimilation in Scotland. That's why I voted against it, and that's why I refer to Duncs11 now as a joke - a joke that was laughed at by members of virtually every political party with relevance in Scotland. Because there are people in Scotland who truly face widespread systematic discrimination, who the very systems of Scotland were not designed to help.

There are people in poverty, suffering due to the inequality inherent in our society. There are people struggling to find access to housing, heathcare, education, etc. And those people are being overlooked by this government, overlooked by a First Minister who thinks the poor have had it too good for too long and who votes down legislation to make the lives of BAME people easier because of a factually incorrect assessment of racism based only on his own entitlement. Because make no mistake, when English BAME people suffer discrimination it is not because they are English. Anglophobia is an issue suffered by white English people (again, by the admission of both articles cited in the Anglophobia motion).

This is an important election coming up. An election that will decide the fate of Scotland. Will it continue to limp on with a government that overlooks the poor, and the less fortunate - a government that misrepresents information purposefully to their own ends and shoots down attempts to create a more equal society as (in direct contradiction with the Equal Rights Act) 'discriminatory in nature'? A government that cites an article from the EHRA that also directly contradicts many of their major policy points? Or will it say no more and make a commitment to tackle all forms of discrimination rather than cherry picking from academic works for political gain. Vote for Labour, or the Libertarians, or the Liberal Democrats, or Change, or the Socialists, or hell even the People's Unity Party. But don't let the Conservatives lie to you. Don't let them keep on turning away.

"On the turning away... from the pale and downtrodden... and the words they say which we won't understand. Don't accept that what's happening is just a case of other's suffering... or you'll find that you're joining in the turning away."                                                                                                                                                            ~ David Gilmour

Captain_Plat_2258 is a Member of the Scottish Parliament, and Spokesperson for Climate Change, Energy, and the Environment. A BAME person herself, she is outspoken on the issues facing minority groups and working class people in Scotland today. Her views do not necessarily represent those of The Independent.