The Scottish Government likes to associate itself with the Nordic nations. In the campaign for independence, the SNP points to the success of smaller countries like Norway, Iceland, Finland and Denmark. These states have roughly the same population as Scotland and are culturally and economically vibrant. This, according to the SNP, is evidence that Scotland could stand on its own two feet.

In recent years, the Government has also aligned itself more closely to the Nordic countries in terms of its policies. The baby box scheme was inspired by a similar initiative in Finland. Scottish tourism agencies have entered into a joint agreement with groups in Iceland on “sustainable tourism”. And in 2017, the SNP vowed to follow Denmark’s lead on exercise by doubling investment in cycling and walking.

These policies are fairly uncontroversial. However, there’s one Nordic policy the Government looks set to mimic that couldn’t be more contentious – the Finnish approach to free speech.

Finland’s politically correct establishment increasingly ostracises those who express unfashionable ideas. In September last year, it emerged that Päivi Räsänen, a Christian politician, was being investigated by police for a “hate crime” after she posted an image of Romans 1:24-27 on her Facebook page. Alongside the image, Räsänen expressed disappointment that her church denomination, the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland, had attended Helsinki Pride in 2019, contradicting historic Christian teaching on sex.

“There’s one Nordic idea Scotland looks set to follow that couldn’t be more contentious”

In February, it was announced that Finland’s prosecutor general has opened a criminal investigation into Räsänen for the post. In addition, she is being investigated for a pamphlet she wrote 15 years ago on the Biblical definition of marriage titled ‘Man and woman, He created them’. If she is convicted of a crime, known in Finland as an “agitation against a section of society”, she faces a fine or imprisonment. Räsänen’s conduct may have been disagreeable to some in Finland. Offensive even. But is it really criminal? Imprisonable? Surely not.

Even the most ardent opponents of Christianity should find her case chilling. When the state makes itself the arbiter of which ideas and beliefs are permissible in public life it is several large strides along the path to authoritarianism. The parameters of acceptable speech in Finland may exclude Christian ideas today, but they could very well exclude other beliefs tomorrow. Much depends on who the establishment likes. Finland’s treatment of Räsänen is illiberal and runs contrary to the ideals established by the European Convention on Human Rights: freedom of thought, belief and religion and freedom of expression (Articles 9 and 10).

Alarmingly, a case like Räsänen’s isn’t too distant a reality in Scotland. The Scottish Government is currently taking forward legislation that could see citizens criminalised for ‘stirring up hatred’ against others on the basis of age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, transgender identity, or variations in sex characteristics.

“Finland’s approach to Räsänen is illiberal and runs contrary to the ideals established by the European Convention on Human Rights”

What, exactly ‘hatred’ means in the context of the Scottish Government’s Bill is unclear. In addition, there is no requirement to prove that a person intended to stir up hatred, only that by their actions ‘hatred is likely to be stirred up’. The new offences outlined under the bill carry a maximum sentence of seven years in prison, or a fine, or both. The bill does contain two free speech clauses allowing ‘discussion and criticism’ of religion and sexual orientation. However, it remains to be seen how widely these would apply in practice.

The Hate Crime Bill raises serious questions. For example, would a Christian MSP who expresses disapproval of a church’s presence at Glasgow Pride be guilty of stirring up hatred against LGBT people? What about an atheist MSP who responds saying ‘Christians are narrow-minded bigots’? One of the most bitter political debates of recent months has been on the subject of transgender rights. Feminists like Germaine Greer have stated bluntly that ‘trans women are not real women’. Would these words be considered an offence if the law passes?

The majority of Scots would be astounded at the prospect of people being fined or imprisoned for saying things that are merely offensive. This would undermine the proud free speech tradition that exists in Scotland – a tradition that has benefitted our nation in so many ways. The freedom to say uncontroversial things is no freedom at all.

The Hate Crime Bill will need careful scrutiny by MSPs in the months ahead. Criticism is already building in different sections of society, from Christians, atheists, feminists and legal experts.

Returning to the theme of Nordic policies, let’s agree on one thing. Scotland can go Nordic in many ways, indeed it has, but let’s not go Nordic on free speech.