Seòmar agus comataidhean

Borders Buses has had to restrict its timetables—an essential service in my rural constituency—because of a shortage of bus drivers following Brexit. The United Kingdom Government refuses to place bus drivers on its shortage occupation list, as the UK Migration Advisory Committee does not consider that the occupation meets the threshold. That is completely wrong. Does the First Minister agree?

I despair, listening to Richard Leonard, at Labour being prepared to prop up a Tory Government and a failed union yet again. No wonder Labour’s vote in Scotland is shrinking into the distance.

This a significant debate. It is not just about short-changing Scotland to the tune of £337 million of former European structural funds, and breaking a promise to ensure that post-Brexit Scotland would receive, as a minimum, the £549 million that it would have received. That is bad enough, but the UK Government has blatantly and deliberately set about undermining the principles of devolution.

That is also at odds with the UK Government’s own 2018 commitment to

“respect the devolution settlements in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and … engage the devolved administrations to ensure the fund works for places across the UK.”

Alister Jack, the Tories’ spokesman in Scotland, said:

“We intend to work with the Scottish Government and the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities to facilitate collaborative work”.

“Collaborative” is a weasel word, because the UK Government has utterly bypassed the Scottish Government and has dealt directly with individual regions and councils. Does that matter? Of course it does. First, this is no UK gift or act of generosity; it is our money, garnered through our taxes, national insurance, VAT and so on. Secondly, it is a naked use of those funds by the Tories not only to undermine devolution but to stem the rising case for independence.

Consider this: Scotland voted to remain in the EU by a thumping 62 per cent. Boris’s “oven-ready” deal turned out to be a pig’s breakfast, and that £350 million a week for the national health service on the side of a bus was just that—something scribbled on the side of a bus.

When it comes to the NHS and the care sector, we have staff shortages directly as a consequence of Brexit—and we can add lorry drivers, bus drivers, additional red tape and lorries stacked up at ferry ports. It is yet another Boris boorach—he is an ace at those. All of that impacts on the economy. As for reclaiming our fishing waters, we might ask the Scottish fishing industry and processors about that as their produce languishes in those stationary lorry parks.

The actuality of Brexit is not done. I reference Northern Ireland, which also voted remain, by 56 per cent. It now has transborder issues with Éire and with the rest of the UK. There is also that border down the Irish Sea, which was not to be a border and, in Boris-speak, never was a border. After all, if he does not know what a party is, he will not know what a border is. Now he is trailing a piece of legislation to overturn the Brexit deal. By the way, whatever happened to Alister Jack’s tunnel under the Irish Sea—or was it a bridge? It has been abandoned, just like the commitment to respect and work with the devolved Governments.

Did the Scottish Government have plans in place to administer and allocate those former EU funds? Of course it did, but it was right to indicate well in advance:

“We do not know which funds will be replaced. We have no idea what conditions may be placed on the funding. We do not know how long the fund will be for or when it might start.”

Well, we ken noo.

We can add to that the UK’s levelling up fund, which has been referenced by others and which, in my patch, has placed Scottish Borders in priority group 1, with access to £20 million to assist areas with high deprivation.

Of course there is deprivation in the Borders, but what principle is in operation here? In Clackmannanshire, the rate of deprivation is 40 per cent, yet is not on the hit list. Why not? Perhaps because Borders has a Tory council and, in John Lamont, a Tory MP. It is all about helping your buddies and shoring up your vote; it is not about prioritising areas of high deprivation, so let us not kid on about that.

In a BBC interview, my friend Alister Jack gave the game away yet again, when he spoke about the formation of a new cabinet union strategy committee, headed by the Prime Minister, specifically to counter independence. He had the nerve to say:

“This is actually true devolution in practice. Scotland has two governments, and this is the United Kingdom Government spending money, new money, directly with local authorities.”

Here we go. Scotland directly opposed Brexit, yet the Tories ripped Scotland out of the EU, undemocratically. Scotland was told that if it voted yes in 2014 it would be ripped out of the European Union, but the unionists did it for us. Here the Tories have 31 MSPs to the SNP’s 64, and they have only six MPs from Scotland at Westminster, compared with our 45. Wherever we look on the Scottish political landscape, we see that it is undemocratic.

It is worth repeating that the people have spoken time and again. They have rejected the Conservatives and, indeed, Alister Jack, who acts like a colonial governor who is long past his sell-by date.

Failing at the ballot box, the Tories rely on English MPs to impose policies on Scotland and funnel funding for political purposes with no democratic mandate. In 2014, they argued against independence. Well, here we are. Thanks to the union, we are out of Europe. If the Tories think that Scottish people want to continue with this kind of Tory rule and all that it entails, why do they not agree with us and put that to the test with a referendum?

Here we go.

If the Conservative Party is so popular, why have only six Conservative MPs been representing Scotland since the most recent general election?

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.