SCOTTISH Green MSP Gillian Mackay has said she will oppose all amendments that could weaken her Member’s Bill for Safe Access Zones.
The bill, which passed its stage one vote by an overwhelming majority, will create 200-metre safe access zones, or “buffer zones”, to stop anti-choice campaign groups from protesting outside abortion service providers.
Mackay was speaking ahead of stage two scrutiny of the bill on Tuesday, which will see the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee considering and voting on amendments from across the Holyrood chamber.
READ MORE: Buffer zones bill could be 'unworkable' if silent prayer not banned, charity warns
The Humanist Society Scotland urged MSPs on the committee to reject proposed amendments 22-25 from Scottish Conservative Lothians MSP Jeremy Balfour, which the group says would create huge loopholes, allowing harassment of abortion service users and healthcare staff to continue
Mackay described Balfour’s proposals as “wrecking amendments” that could “undermine or weaken protections for service users and staff”.
According to the Humanist Society:
- Amendment 22 would create an exception for anti-abortion activists providing “chaplaincy services at protected premises”. The group said: “Given the track record of misinformation and manipulative tactics from anti-abortion activists, Humanist Society Scotland strongly opposes any move that could formalise their role inside or outside abortion facilities.”
- Amendment 23 would allow anti-abortion protests to take place when a clinic is closed – meaning staff who arrive early or leave late, and patients with appointments at the start or end of the day, could face protests.
- Amendment 24 would explicitly exempt silent prayer from the bill. The bill does not outlaw any specific acts within safe-access zones but focuses on someone’s motivation to impede, alarm, or distress patients and staff.
- Amendment 25 would introduce a “defence of reasonableness”, asking courts to consider whether an individual was exercising their human right to freedom of expression. However, the UK Supreme Court has already ruled that safe access zones are a proportional and legitimate restriction on freedom of expression.
Mackay said: “We are at a crucial point in terms of introducing my bill and ending the terrible harassment we have seen outside hospitals and abortion service providers all across our country.
“It is really important that we make this the most robust bill it can be, and I am happy to meet with any MSP and to support any constructive amendments that will strengthen it and ensure greater protections.
“I will oppose any proposals that will create loopholes and exemptions or allow the protests to continue. That’s not what I want from the bill, and ... it would be a betrayal of everyone who has had to pass a gauntlet of protesters to access healthcare.
“I am grateful to everyone who has done so much to get us this far, especially to people who shared very difficult stories with me in the hope that nobody else will have to endure what they did.
“Fundamentally my bill is about ensuring everyone can have safe access to the healthcare they are entitled to. There’s been a really strong sense of collaboration and cross-party support at every stage of this process, and I hope this continues.”
Fraser Sutherland, chief executive of Humanist Society Scotland, said: “We urge committee members to reject all of these amendments. The bill must fully protect patients exercising their right to an abortion and the staff providing this vitally important healthcare. Robust and workable safe access zones cannot come soon enough.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel