The BBC, The Telegraph, The Mail, The Express, The Scotsman, The Times, The Sun The Daily Record and The Huffington Post have all run stories suggesting that when it comes to online abuse from pro independence accounts it is the responsibility of the pro independence First Minister Nicola Sturgeon to deal with it.
Weirdly, online abuse from pro union accounts has been largely ignored and nobody has suggested it is the responsibility of any pro union politicians to sort it out. This is especially puzzling when a survey on the subject has shown that more abuse comes from Unionist accounts.
Over the past week we have seen Tory List MSP Adam Tomkins actually act in a way that could only possibly encourage such abuses.
Tomkins has chosen to wade into a local council planning or licencing issue by accusing members of Glasgow City Council of being ‘partisan one sided’ against a football club and who knows what else.
Despite the death threats and abuse those people have suffered following his accusations, Tomkins claims to be ‘holding the council to account’ not ‘exploiting sectarian division’.
But then, if that was true, when he feels the need to call the SNP ‘partisan one sided’ what does he mean? ‘Partisan one sided’ to whom? …Celtic? …Catholics? …Fenians?
Tellingly, Tomkins chose not to question the decision in isolation. Neither did he give an explanation of why it was wrong.
When he says ‘Rangers does have political support. We will ensure the Club is properly and fairly treated at all times’ he is suggesting that the GCC won’t. Grim stuff, but again, the implication is clear and goes much further than holding anyone to account over one decision.
All kinds of wrong
Then there’s the facts. Despite Professor Tomkins claims, Glasgow City Council, through Glasgow Life, was not even against the Ibrox fanzone. They listened to the concerns of the local Ibrox and Cessnock community council, who were. Some of those local people voicing concerns must, of course, be Rangers fans, Protestants, Unionists themselves. Tomkins either got the facts wrong or he lied.
Alex Cole-Hamilton, Murdo Fraser, Frank McAveety, Pauline McNeill and Anas Sarwar joined in too. Each, apparently, failing to notice any of the abuse and threats heading in the opposite direction.
Inciting hatred is obviously not a responsible way to hold a Government or Council to account. It’s the lowest form of politics and this appeal to that particular dark Unionist element on the margin of society is not the first of its kind from the Scottish Tories.
Earlier this year Ruth Davidson along with her Tory pals at The Scottish Daily Mail, The Scottish Daily Express and the Daily Telegraph stoked things up a notch with some false and incredibly stupid grievances around a fake story about the Union Jacks at royal residences.
The response, predictably, was rage from those same people. There’s no doubt that the Conservative and Unionist Party know exactly what they’re doing when they ‘Ulsterise’ debate.
David McDonald, the Deputy Leader of Glasgow city council was subject of threatening posts about being ‘Gutted on the street’ and ‘Stabbed on sight’.
So why has nobody in the Tory Party Scottish leadership been asked to make a comment on the abuse and threats routinely dished out by their supporters. Why is nobody under media scrutiny over the issue or under pressure to criticise the behaviour. Why is nobody at Rangers Football Club?
The Tories, UK wide, are famous for practicing ugly politics. The PM, Theresa May, has even acknowledged that they are known as the ‘nasty Party’.
Dog whistle politics is nothing new from them but sometimes as with the “Are you thinking what we’re thinking?” campaign they make it too obvious. Tomkins has been way too obvious and he’s been caught out.
Of course, Tomkins is not such an idiot that he’d really believe Glasgow City Council leader Susan Aitken is actually biased against a football club.
So the question then is why would a member of a Party desperate for votes in Glasgow make such statements?
You can make up your own mind. But don’t Tories seem a lot more interested in the symbolism of being seen as staunch supporters of an Ibrox fanzone than they are in the life expectancy and life chances of the average Rangers fan who’d attend it.
