Scottish Government Equality Outcomes: Disability Evidence Review

9 Hate crime and good relations

9.1 Hate crime is described by the Scottish Government^[60] as "a crime motivated by malice and ill-will towards a social group". The Offences (Aggravation by Prejudice) (Scotland) Act 2009 provides for statutory aggravations for crimes motivated by malice and ill-will towards an individual based on their disability.

9.2 This section explores the nature and extent of hate crime experienced by disabled people, followed by related evidence on bullying and hostility, and it closes with a review of attitudes towards positive action.

The nature of hate crime

9.3 An EHRC literature review and survey (in England, Scotland and Wales), Disabled people's experiences of targeted violence and hostility^[61], finds that disabled people are at higher risk of being victimised in comparison with non-disabled people. Those with learning disabilities and/or mental health conditions are particularly at risk and suffer higher levels of actual victimisation. A typology of eight key types of incidents is identified, including:

• physical incidents
• verbal incidents
• sexual incidents
• targeted anti-social behaviour
• damage to property/theft
• school bullying
• incidents perpetrated by statutory agency staff
• the more recent phenomenon of cyber bullying.

9.4 This report also shows (in Chapter 4) that disabled people were four times more likely to be victims of sexual violence than non-disabled people; and four times more likely to have their property stolen with the threat or use of violence. Hotspots in terms of locations for experiencing abuse are identified and findings are summarised on the motivation of perpetrators and on the impact of violence and hostility. Reporting, redress and barriers to reporting are also considered.

9.5 The EHRC Triennial Review^[62] warns that trend analysis of hate crime is difficult because it is a relatively new concept, and its recording might be expected to fluctuate until it has become embedded in institutional practice. Moreover, analysis based on a single year is limited: the only types of offence with more than 100 respondents reporting that they had been victims, related to 'age' and 'race and religion'. Smaller numbers are estimated by British Crime Survey data to be affected by hate crimes relating to disability and sexual orientation. The Triennial Review states that we are unable to distinguish between the different experiences of people based on type of disability from the British Crime Survey data, although it cites Scope (2008)^[63] as evidence that people's experience varies by type of disability.

The extent of hate crime

9.6 In Scotland in 2011-12^[64], 68 charges were reported with an aggravation of prejudice relating to disability, 20 more than were reported in 2010-11 which was the first full year of implementation of the legislation.

9.7 Court proceedings were commenced in respect of 39 charges (57%) reported in 2011-12. In total 45 charges (66% of the 68 charges relating to disability) led to court proceedings, including those not separately prosecuted, but which may have been incorporated into other charges for the same accused. These percentages are lower than the corresponding figures for 2010-11 which were over 70%, although this is partly because eight charges (12%) reported in 2011-12 are still awaiting a decision.

Bullying, harassment and hostility

9.8 The EHRC's (2011) Inquiry into disability-related harassment^[65] across the UK looked at the causes of such harassment, and the actions taken by public authorities and public transport operators in an attempt to prevent and eliminate it. The Inquiry summarises its findings:

For many disabled people, harassment is an unwelcome part of everyday life. Many come to accept it as inevitable, and focus on living with it as best they can. And too often that harassment can take place in full view of other people and the authorities without being recognised for what it is. A culture of disbelief exists around this issue. The harassment of disabled people can take many different forms, including bullying, cyber-bullying, physical violence, sexual harassment and assault, domestic violence, financial exploitation and institutional abuse.

9.9 The Inquiry further found that disabled people often do not want to report harassment when it occurs, for a range of reported reasons which include fear of consequences, concerns that they will not be believed, and lack of information about who to report it to. The EHRC report, Disabled people's experiences of targeted violence and hostility suggests (in Chapter 7) that disabled people are more likely to tell a third party rather than the police about such experiences, and therefore the extent and severity of the problem is unclear.

9.10 The EHRC report, Disabled people's experiences of targeted violence and hostility, finds that - despite the lack of robust material comparing risks to disabled and non-disabled people - there is consensus in the existing evidence that disabled people experience a heightened risk of violence and anti-social behaviour leading to victimisation, compared to non-disabled people. The EHRC reports that one in five disabled people in Scotland were also found to have experienced disability-related harassment; 47% had experienced hate crimes due to their disability^[66]. The EHRC cites evidence of particularly high levels of victimisation of those with mental health conditions^[67][68] and/or learning disabilities^[69][70].

9.11 The risk of victimisation identified by the EHRC, is illustrated by Mencap's (2007)^[71] data on victimisation of disabled children and young people. For example:

• Eight out of 10 children with learning disabilities have been bullied at school.
• Three out of 10 children and young people with a learning disability who have been bullied were bullied on the streets, and the same proportion of children and young people that have been bullied were on the bus and at the park.
• Five out of 10 children and young people with a learning disability had been bullied in more than one place.
• Nearly 50% of children and young people with a learning disability had been bullied for over a year.

9.12 A study in 2008 found disabled women to be twice as likely to experience domestic violence as non-disabled women^[72]. It reports that women with learning disabilities are identified specifically in the wider literature as being at risk, with levels of violence against women reported to be greater than against men with similar impairments.

9.13 The EHRC recently commissioned a qualitative study^[73] to provide detailed information about disabled people's experiences and views of disability-related harassment and their perceptions of the role of public bodies. According to respondents, disability-related harassment is a widespread problem.

Attitudes towards positive action and discrimination

9.14 The Scottish Government's (2011) report Attitudes to Discrimination and Positive Action^[74] presents key findings from a study of public attitudes towards discrimination and positive action, based on data from the Scottish Social Attitudes Survey. The EHRC defines 'positive action' as 'measures that are designed to counteract the effects of past discrimination and to help abolish stereotyping.' The results of three survey questions on positive action are discussed below, followed by a question on attitudes to discrimination.

9.15 Table 12 shows that most respondents (76%) agreed that shops and banks should take action to reduce barriers to disabled people using their services, even if this leads to higher prices. This has barely changed (from 77%) since 2002. (Note that the number of responses varies to questions in the 2010 survey, as some questions were part of the self-completion section of the survey which often generates slightly fewer responses than the rest of the module.)

Table 12: Question: "Shops and banks should be forced to make themselves easier for disabled people to use, even if this leads to higher prices". (Source: Scottish Social Attitudes Survey, 2010)

	2002	2006	2010
	%	%	%
Agree strongly	24	27	23
Agree	53	50	53
Neither agree nor disagree	14	15	15
Disagree	7	4	6
Disagree strongly	*	1	1
Can't choose	2	1	1
(Not answered)	1	3	1
Sample size	1507	1437	1366

9.16 An even higher proportion of respondents (93%, see Table 13) believed that providing information about public services in 'easy read' formats for people with learning disabilities is a good use of government money.

Table 13: Question: "Some people with learning disabilities find it difficult to read. 'Easy read' is designed to help them by making words simpler and using pictures. Do you think it is a good or a bad use of government money to provide information about public services in 'easy read' formats for people with learning disabilities?" (Source: Scottish Social Attitudes Survey, 2010)

	Info in other languages	Info in 'Easy read'
	%	%
Very good use of govt money	3	23
Good use of govt money	44	70
Neither good nor bad use	19	4
Bad use of govt money	29	2
Very bad use of govt money	4	*
(Don't know)	*	1
Sample size	1495	1495

9.17 Regarding attitudes to different kinds of positive action that employers could take to try to increase the representativeness of their workforce, the majority (63%, Table 14) felt that giving a suitably qualified disabled candidate an automatic interview for a job would be unfair. In contrast with the survey's findings on discriminatory attitudes, it was the more highly educated and those in managerial or professional professions who were most likely to view this kind of positive action as unfair.

9.18 The number of respondents feeling that automatic interviews would be unfair has increased from 57% in 2006. This change suggests that the advent of the recession may have had some impact on attitudes towards the position of disabled people within the labour market.

Table 14: Question: "Say several people apply for a job, including someone with a disability. They all meet the necessary requirements for the job. Do you think it would be fair or unfair to automatically give the person with a disability an interview for the job, even if other applicants appeared to be better qualified?" (Source: Scottish Social Attitudes Survey, 2010)

	2006	2010
	%	%
Definitely fair	25	25
Probably fair	38	37
Probably unfair	26	25
Definitely unfair	9	12
(Don't know)	1	1
Sample size	1594	1495

9.19 We now consider attitudes towards discrimination. Table 15 shows whether respondents know any disabled people, cross-tabulated against the question about tolerance of prejudice, to explore whether those who have contact with different kinds of people are less accepting of prejudice in general. Knowing someone with a physical disability does not appear to be significantly associated with being less likely to feel prejudice is sometimes justifiable. However, those who know someone with a learning disability were significantly less likely than those who did not to say there was sometimes good reason for prejudice. These findings do not, however, rule out the idea that having more contact with different people might have an impact on people's views about diversity and prejudice. Perhaps how much contact people have and what type of contact makes a difference, and not simply whether or not they know someone from a particular group. Or perhaps contact with particular groups makes a difference to their attitudes to that group, but not their willingness to accept or reject prejudice in general.

Table 15: Attitudes to prejudice by whether or not the respondent knows anyone from different groups (row%) (Source: Scottish Social Attitudes Survey, 2010)

	Scotland should get rid of all prejudice	Sometimes there is good reason to be prejudiced	(It depends)	Sample size
Knows anyone with a physical disability?
Yes	67	28	4	998
No	66	31	2	263
Knows anyone with a learning disability?
Yes	69	25	4	767
No	62	34	3	468