Five years ago, the Scottish Government asked me to chair an Independent Advisory Group on Tackling Sectarianism. In three years’ of engagement we heard many shades of opinion, from those who believe that sectarianism is the great unacknowledged civil rights issue in Scotland to those who believe that its existence is overstated and best ignored. Some thought it should be restricted to faith-based anti-Catholicism and others wanted to reframe it as anti-Irish racism. We heard those it described as a ‘Glasgow ned issue’ and while others insisted that its most pernicious roots were in the establishment.

In this ‘heartfelt quagmire’, we turned to three things: evidence- as far as we could find it, experience – in all its variety, and practice – promoting action to engage and change. The evidence told us that sectarianism had left complex trails in Scottish life, if no longer the barrier to most people that it might once have been, experience told us that it continued to define people’s experience in some communities, especially young people and better practice told us that sectarianism had been avoided or denied in many places for too long. We concluded that change was both possible and desired, and that it would take action on a wide variety of fronts, including by local government, churches, communities, parading organisations, police and football clubs.

This time, I was asked to review progress. Some were able to point to real change. Churches have developed a number of close working relationships at community level and have developed a capacity to identify and address sectarianism which is both practical and has potential implications for wider policy. In youth work and education, the quality and breadth of resources to help young people and those who work with them to engage directly on this topic has improved enormously. Support from the Scottish government has extended thinking and capacity and developed a professional and community-based body of knowledge to help schools, youth and community project engage in exploring the implications of sectarianism and ways to address it. Education Scotland showcased models of good practice and both primary and secondary school level which show how addressing sectarianism can be a bridge to addressing a variety of social issues while giving life to local learning communities.

“Moving from the margin to the mainstream” may be a cliché, but it neatly describes the task, not only in education. Until now, sectarianism has been treated gingerly, relating only occasionally to the issues of local community governance, wider equalities and hate crime. Progress now depends on breaking through this resistance: Can sectarian crime and incidents be recognized within the hate crime review? Can local government ensure that sectarianism is treated as an area of equalities work deserving recognition alongside the other areas of fair treatment and equity. Can Community Planning frameworks be developed to devise effective inter-agency strategies to address complex problems. To date, there is little evidence that this has been taken up in practice.

Football also remains important. As we have said repeatedly: football is not sectarianism, but sectarianism in Scotland will not be consigned to history unless football also plays its part. The Scottish Social Attitudes Survey found that 85 per cent of Scots associate football with sectarianism. Police Scotland identified a ‘permissive environment’ for aggression, sectarianism and even violence around football and the level of resources required to police some of this is considerable. The Fifpro survey of footballers reported an alarming level of abuse aimed at players on the pitch, and the evidence from monitoring social media is that sectarianism, football and youth culture are a genuine source for concern.

In the original Advisory Group Report, we concluded that strict liability would have to be considered unless the football authorities came forward with effective ways to address these concerns. In the course of this review, the football authorities indicated that they rejected strict liability and also suggested that the association of sectarianism and football was misplaced. They also pointed to a number of initiatives agreed with Active Scotland including the appointment of a Diversity and Inclusion officer, a tighter set of procedures around unacceptable behaviour and a more positive approach to junior coaching as alternatives. I remain to be convinced. Too often, the priority of the football authorities seems to minimise the nature of the issue and refuse direct responsibility or influence. I remain sceptical that the steps taken will address the issues identified in our work.

At the same time, the primary purpose of the review is not to name and shame but to change behaviour where it affects threat, discrimination or isolation. it is therefore important both to test the proposed measures and to monitor them against the real changes required. I have proposed a robust framework of evidence-gathering where success would demonstrate a measurable reduction in the policing costs, active engagement by clubs in addressing issues in wider society, the evidence in social media and the media and the emergence of a wider perception of change. But if change does not become evident, then the Advisory Group’s challenge of ‘If not strict liability- then what?’ remains live.

Over the past year, the ability of unacknowledged issues of community cohesion to have dramatic political effects has become obvious across the western world. In this context, tackling sectarianism in Scotland remains a story of progress rather than crisis. But sectarianism will only be confined to the history books if the culture of avoidance and denial is replaced by one of confident intervention and change wherever it appears.