Seòmar agus comataidhean

Small communities in and around West Linton in my constituency have formed the West Linton area supports Ukraine group, with over 30 households signing up to the UK Government programme. However, to date, because of the sluggish visa process, which has been referred to, no Ukrainians have been allocated. Will the Scottish Government, through its welcome hubs, together with local authorities, when relocating families in rural communities, take account of the need to ensure that they have other refugee families relocated with them in order to provide them with additional support in adjusting to their new circumstances after such dramatic experiences?

For clarity, I note that VAT policy is reserved.

I welcome this short debate and acknowledge the concerns and anxieties of households that face energy costs and costs of living that are skyrocketing. I will not repeat all the mitigations that the cabinet secretary outlined in her opening speech, but I will say that they are required solely because of the oppressive policies of this Tory Government, which knows—and, by its actions, demonstrates that it could care less—about the poverty that it is inflicting on the most vulnerable in society.

This economic disaster can be traced right back to the days of the Liberal-Tory coalition of 2010 to 2015, when austerity was seen as a solution to the banks’ collapse. Billions were taken from health and local government budgets, attacking the standard of living of ordinary decent folk, while the rich got richer and the economy was encouraged to function on consumerism that was fuelled by low interest rates and credit, both commercial and individual.

It was a house of cards primed for collapse. Brexit was pursued in the middle of a pandemic, and an oven-ready deal turned out to be a pig’s breakfast, which has now been compounded by an energy crisis.

This economic house of cards is collapsing after nearly 12 years of Tory rule. Who will suffer? Not the chancellor and his tax-avoiding wife—who declared, as a non-domestic taxpayer, that she did not intend to permanently reside in the UK, which saved her millions in UK tax while the rest of us are paying hikes in national insurance and some are losing universal credit. Not Boris Johnson, who apparently does not know what a party is—although he did have £50 to pay that fine. Not heartless Priti Patel, who is paying to export miserable desperate souls to a country with dubious human rights. They are so removed from what is decent and the reality of ordinary lives that I despair.

It will, as always, be the pensioners, those on low pay, the disabled, the disadvantaged and the single-parent families who pay the price for the Tories’ selfishness and incompetence.

The solution offered by the Opposition parties here is to raid public funds from our health and education budgets to, once again, try to ease poverty that has come about entirely as a result of the actions of the UK Government. Much has been done by the Scottish Government, but mitigation has its limits. Already, £600 million a year is being spent on just that.

Do our people deserve this? Did they vote for this? Consider this: at the most recent UK election, in 2019, Labour returned one MP, the Liberals returned one MP, and the UK party of Government, the Tories, returned 6. The SNP has 45 MPs. In the 2021 Scottish Parliament election, the Tories returned 31 MSPs to the SNP’s 64. Throw in the 62 per cent vote to remain in the EU, and we can see that the people have spoken in election after election.

Independence would end the mitigation of the actions of Governments and consequences of policies that we did not vote for. For the first time in generations, we could run our own economy with the competence that is so lacking among the Tories, with the goal of a socially just society that protects the vulnerable, not the privileged.

It is time for mitigation to end. Surely, even the remnants of the Labour Party and the Liberals in here can see that, or will they keep propping up this failed UK Government, which has been rejected time and time again by the Scottish electorate?

Hear, hear.

Will the member take an intervention?

I like the word “generous”—thank you, Presiding Officer.

First, I thank the former miners and families whom I had the privilege of meeting earlier today. Unfortunately, I probably talked too much, as usual.

My interest in the matter stems not only from my memories of 40 years ago and the images of police on horseback charging into lines of demonstrating miners, but from having the National Mining Museum Scotland in my constituency. It is in Newtongrange, which has neat lines of miners’ cottages on First Street, Second Street, Third Street and so on. My constituency also includes Gorebridge, which has a memorial to miners who lost their lives in the pits over the years, and the Shottstown miners welfare club in Penicuik.

All that means that the landscape and sense of community of Scotland’s mining past are literally never out of my sight. I also think of my mother, a Derbyshire woman and the daughter of a Welsh miner who died prematurely of an injury sustained in the pit. My mother never let us forget the hardships of the job, and the fact that he left behind 10 orphaned children, including her.

I also witnessed the events of 1984-85 in daily news bulletins. I saw the severity of Thatcher’s assaults on the mining communities and the union leadership taking on the Tory Government when coal was stockpiled high. None of that prepared me for mass policing and the sight of police charging on horseback into men and women who were defending their communities and livelihoods. Those officers were often shipped in from outside the community, because the police dared not use local officers.

During the strike, 1,300 or more people were charged and more than 400 were convicted, usually of breach of the peace or obstructing the police. As has been said, those convictions stand to this day, so the bill is much to be welcomed. However, a pardon does not remove the note of a conviction from the record. I will come to that later. I absolutely agree with a symbolic and collective blanket pardon. I note others’ comments that the Scottish Government should try to identify surviving individuals or family members to let them know that miners might qualify. We need a publicity campaign to ensure that they are aware of their rights, which the Government is doing partly through the NUM.

I note that the Government has recognised that miners’ wives and families who were directly involved in the dispute may also have received convictions and should perhaps be encompassed by the bill. I am glad that that door is open.

I note that there is currently a limit on the locus. The issue of the locus is extremely difficult. The Law Society has said that the current definition, which uses the wording “other similar gathering”, is difficult. Thompsons Solicitors has suggested that the phrase should be

“activities connected with the miners’ strike”,

but that is quite broad. That issue has to be teased out. I am listening carefully to the idea that the locus should be limited to the picket line and travel to picket lines.

I certainly agree that the UK must hold an inquiry into all that took place and, in particular, into whether there was political interference in policing and the judiciary.

I am hugely sympathetic to what Labour members have said on compensation. However, the problem is that, if we provide compensation from our budget, that would come out of the budgets that keep our health service and education and justice systems going. I note that £4.4 billion has been taken from the miners’ pension fund by the UK Government, which has not put in a penny. We must not let the UK Government off the hook, either for that or for the responsibility to pay out for something that was its fault.

I am with the member much of the way, but I am reluctant, not because the miners do not deserve compensation or should not get it but because we would have to take money from the budgets that deliver our health and education services to pay for something that was wholly the political fault of the UK Government. The issue that I have is that the money would come from other ordinary people’s pockets and services.

I will finish shortly, because you have been very generous, Presiding Officer. I note that the Historical Sexual Offences (Pardons and Disregards) (Scotland) Act 2018 had similar policy objectives, although it was about something that was once illegal becoming legal. However, there was a second condition in that act that is not in the bill. The 2018 act put in place a scheme to enable a person who had been convicted of a historical sexual offence to apply to have that conviction disregarded, so that it would never be disclosed as, for example, part of an enhanced disclosure check.

That brings me to the observations of the Law Society in that regard. It noted:

“the Bill specifically stresses that a pardon will not affect any conviction or sentence, nor will it give rise to any right or entitlement or liability.”

There is an issue there. People think that, by being granted this omnipresent pardon, their conviction will be expunged from their record, but it will not. I ask the Scottish Government, if the bill does not expunge the conviction, as it managed in the 2018 act with a similar pardon, why can we not put something in the bill so that miners have on their record a note that shows that they have been granted a pardon?

I welcome the legislation. To put the issue in practical terms, the First Minister will be aware that in many small towns, such as Galashiels in my constituency, town centres are blighted by many long-term vacant large retail outlets, whose actual owners or landlords cannot be traced, which prevents organisations such as Energise Galashiels and the local authority from redeveloping the town centre through either voluntary or compulsory purchase. Is that the type of difficulty that the legislation will, at long last, help to resolve?

Will the member take an intervention?

Further to that answer, what difference have the 20mph speed limit and dedicated cycle lanes had on road traffic accidents in areas such as my constituency?