Criminal behaviour under the new law would be based on offence caused, rather than intended – a significant difference to England and Wales.
The legislation is aimed at stopping prejudice, but it can easily be used to silence debates on gender identity.
Tightening the definition of a “hate incident” would help. Our new Attorney General has a lot of work to do if public confidence is to be restored.
Since 2016, the amount of “hate crime” has probably gone down. The number of UK residents from other EU states has certainly gone up.
I have a crime plan which will ensure that criminals on and offline are put under pressure, not victims. I will fight for London’s values of openness and acceptance.
The police should not arrest people for being offensive. Not just because burglaries and violence matter more. But because we need the freedom to offend.
We believe in freedom – which is why we’ve initiated this Global Disability Summit.
A focus on formal qualifications is a good start, but surely any programme is incomplete if it doesn’t tackle the underlying drivers of hate crime.
It is a serious issue – but by forever expanding the definition to include anyone who perceives that they have been insulted for any reason ultimately undermines our ability to address the most serious cases.
David Lammy and the Social Mobility Commission both made a big splash on the basis of weak evidence and flawed assumptions.
If the Government really is considering treating the intimidation of politicians in the same way as hate crime, it ought to think again.
And the physicist who reported the Home Secretary for ‘hate crime’, for wanting more British apprenticeships? He’s a fat idiot, yes. But mostly he’s a bully.
Evidence suggests that there was a post-June 23rd spike. But a relationship with the referendum is contestable. And the normal trend soon reasserted itself.