Official Report 1071KB pdf
The final item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-12169, in the name of Richard Leonard, on marking the 40th anniversary of the miners strike. The debate will be concluded without any question being put. I invite members who wish to participate to press their request-to-speak buttons.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament notes that 12 March 2024 marks the 40th anniversary of the official start of the 1984-85 miners’ strike; considers that this strike was, without parallel, the most significant industrial dispute since the 1926 general strike; believes that miners took action in defence of jobs, communities and a very way of life; considers that the full force of the state was deployed against the miners and their trade union, the National Union of Mineworkers, but that they stood steadfast for a full year; believes that the strike could not have endured without public support, including from women’s groups, the lesbian and gay community, trade unions and workers across the world; deplores what it sees as the injustices towards miners and their communities during and since the strike; notes the belief that there is continuing need for investment in mining communities, and further notes the call for a public inquiry into the policing of the strike.
17:31
I thank all those MSPs who signed the motion, but more than that, I thank all those miners who lived—who struggled—through the strike 40 years ago. [Applause.]
Too many of them are no longer with us, but some we welcome to the public gallery in Parliament tonight.
“It is an abiding and indisputable truth that a people which does not understand the past will never comprehend the present, nor mould the future”.
Those words of Tom Johnston echo down the ages, and they remind us why this debate in this Parliament is so important: because this is our history, the people’s history, working-class history. If we do not understand it or comprehend it; if we do not remember it, who else will?
The miners strike was 40 years ago. All the pits have long closed down, but for anyone who lived through that tumultuous year, it is still very real, and it is still very raw. This was not a strike about pay and conditions. This was not a strike about material gain. It was a strike about jobs—about the closure of pits, about mass unemployment and about the survival of mining communities. It was a strike about the defence of a very way of life.
We should make no mistake about it—much of the strike’s leadership was provided by the heroic women of our mining communities, who transformed the battle to defend the coal industry from an industrial struggle into what was truly a community struggle. It was a strike that was founded on the simple socialist principle of solidarity, and so it was about a higher ideal: of an old miner, fighting for the job of a young miner whom he had never met, in a coalfield that he had never seen. It was about that old trade union principle: that you do not cross a picket line.
Yes, we saw violence—the violence of the state brought down upon mining community after mining community. We saw the imprisonment of innocent men, and the victimisation and the sacking of innocent men. We witnessed at first hand the violence of a Tory Government closing down industry after industry, throwing four and a half million of its own citizens out of work. That was the violence that we saw.
We saw the violence, as well, of the union busting of Thatcher, of MacGregor, of Wheeler; of the threat to the National Union of Mineworkers of sequestration and receivership. We saw the media bias, the political vitriol, the spying, the dirty tricks and the smears from MI5. That was the violence that we saw.
Where there was attack upon attack, not just on civil liberties but on human rights, it was not the Labour left, it was not the Communist Party, it was not the Scargills or the McGaheys and it was not the striking miners—it was the security services who were the real subversives.
And then there was the violence of Orgreave, where there was a riot—not a mass riot of pickets, but a mass riot of police. It was a turning point, and the Orgreave truth and justice campaign’s simple demands—to restore justice, to restore accountability and standards in public life and to restore police operational independence, and for the establishment of an inquiry—must be met in full.
The strike that we mark today in Parliament was not just about resistance to a closure programme of pits, but resistance to a closure programme of entire communities; to a closure programme of towns and villages; and to a closure programme of hope, and its replacement with fear.
The central demand of the strike was not just a plan for coal, but a plan for energy, for the economy and for society—a plan of hope for the future. That is why it resonates today with those workers offshore, and with the workers onshore at Grangemouth and in the communities around it.
It has been the privilege of my life to meet the families of miners, and in particular to meet those miners who were arrested, convicted and sacked during the strike. Some I had not met for 40 years—and every one of them people of principle and of honesty, whose only crime was to be guilty of standing up for their class. Many of them were young miners who had their future stolen from them—never criminals, yet criminalised. Many of them are now entitled to a pardon, but deserving of compensation, too—although, as the late Alex Bennett used to say,
“It’s not compensation we’re after, it’s what we’re due.”
Next year, we will mark in this Parliament the centenary of the birth of Mick McGahey, who warned us that the movement has to learn that
“If we stop running, they will not chase us. Stand firm and fight.”
It is now up to us to carry on the fight—the fight for truth, and for justice, because time can be no barrier to justice. Many of those same issues—of poverty, of unemployment, of inequality—are still around us in our coalfield communities, so we will never walk away from those issues, and we will never walk away from those communities.
Today, we remember the strike. We will shed a tear for those whom we have loved, including our comrades who are no longer with us. We celebrate the enduring legacy of the strike, because they never broke our spirit and they never defeated our class.
We send a message to the miners, and to their sons and daughters, their wives, partners and grandchildren—a message of unflinching solidarity. We remember them—we celebrate their struggle, and the battle for justice, which was then, and remains now, part of a wider campaign for equality, for human compassion and dignity, and for the triumph of the human spirit and the triumph of hope in place of fear. It is this great cause which the miners fought for, and which, I firmly believe, in the end, will prevail.
We move to the open debate.
17:39
I congratulate Richard Leonard on bringing the debate to the chamber. It is almost Christmas, and I am sure that Parliament will be once again graced with the presence of the Newtongrange brass band, when they play at our carol service. It always brings a lump to my throat when I remember that that is what the mining communities were about. It was about that tradition, and the community, and being part of something that was greater than the individual people who worked in the mines.
I was very lucky to be at the opening of the new Newtongrange National Mining Museum, after it had been refurbished, at the same time as the great tapestry of Scotland was on display downstairs in this very building. The steelworks, the mining and the traditional farming—the whole history of Scotland—were rightly represented in the tapestry.
I mention the steelworks because I am from Motherwell and Wishaw. I was at secondary school at that time. My best friend then is still my best friend to this day, and her dad and brother were both miners. My family were no longer involved in the steelworks, but I had schoolmates who had fathers who were steelworkers and miners, and fathers who were policemen. I remember being appalled at the scenes on the television of the upset outside Ravenscraig, in what was my home town.
As Richard Leonard said, that was absolutely orchestrated by Thatcher and her Government in an effort to destroy the trade union movement. That was my community, and I was so hurt to see what was happening to it, as he described. I remember when the steelworks closed, and the mining, so I know that the idea of a just transition is so important, because, to me, the bigger crime was walking away from those industries and putting nothing in place in our areas to replace that work and those opportunities for young people.
As Richard Leonard has always said, this injustice has gone on. We now have the Miners’ Strike (Pardons) (Scotland) Act 2022, which is important, but I remember writing in 2021 to Kwasi Kwarteng, the then Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, about the injustice of the miners pension scheme at that time, as the money had been removed from them.
I was glad that, in October this year, the incoming Labour Government righted that historic injustice and reversed the decision, so that 112,000 former coalminers finally have that £1.5 billion for the pension scheme transferred to them, boosting their pensions by 32 per cent. However, many people did not benefit from that, because it was too late. I mentioned my best friend—her dad, Joe, passed away this year. He was fairly lucky; he had worked in the mines for his whole life until they closed, and he then went into the steel industry, so he managed to secure further work in industrial Lanarkshire.
However, he suffered the consequences of those years, with vibration white finger and difficulty breathing sometimes. Those conditions are very prevalent in my area as a result of those industries. Those jobs were not easy, but they were vital to our country and to our economy, and we owe such a huge debt of respect and recognition to the people who worked in those industries for so long.
Once again, I thank Richard Leonard for bringing the debate to the chamber tonight. We do not just have Newtongrange—we also have the wonderful Summerlee Museum of Scottish Industrial Life. I know that he is a very fond representative of that area, which I used to represent. These museums are so important, because we cannot forget not just the mechanics, but the whole heart of the industry, and the injustices that were done to the miners at that time.
I alert members that there is, as they might imagine, an awful lot of interest in participating in the debate. I intend to get everybody in, so I will probably have to extend the debate in order to do so. I would be grateful, therefore, if members could stick to their allocated speaking time to allow other events that are taking place in Parliament this evening to go ahead—not too late, if at all possible.
17:44
I congratulate Richard Leonard on securing the debate. I do not agree with everything that he says, but I always admire the passion that he brings to the chamber and enjoy listening to his contributions.
I do not have that many childhood memories, but one of my first is the Falklands war in 1982, when I would rush home from school and watch the reports every night. The next thing that I remember after that is the miners strike in 1984. Once again, I was hooked on watching the news updates every night. Like the Falklands, that almost seemed like war to me as a 12 or 13-year-old.
One of the things that I remember most about the strike—like most people, probably like most people—is the battle of Orgreave. I remember the scenes on television with thousands of miners and probably thousands of police with their riot shields and batons banging. There were police horses charging the crowd. I remember blood running down people’s heads—I am not sure whether Arthur Scargill had blood rushing down his head at Orgreave as well—and police helmets lying everywhere. It was a scene of total chaos. Such scenes stick in your mind for ever more.
I also remember hearing about the taxi driver in Wales who had a concrete block thrown on to his taxi from the bridge. I bring that up not to demonise miners but to highlight the division that the dispute caused. I was shocked years later when a friend who grew up in Nottinghamshire told me that there were still neighbours in the streets who did not talk to each other because of the division that the dispute had caused.
As I got older, I realised that the miners were striking to save not just their jobs but their communities. That is the main reason why I want to speak tonight. I want to speak for the communities that I represent. We often hear in the Parliament that we must not do to the oil and gas industry what happened to the mining communities, but that is exactly what the Scottish National Party and Labour Governments are doing. The SNP’s presumption against oil and gas is demonising the industry and Labour’s approach to new licences is killing off the industry.
Unite the union has a campaign called no ban without a plan. Tomorrow, it is marching from Johnston Terrace down to Holyrood and speaking up for Grangemouth. It has also held demonstrations in Aberdeen. I will be there and will talk to the demonstrators because Unite is spot on: there is no plan. We are waiting for the energy strategy and just transition plan, but we have been waiting for ages. We have often been told that they need Cabinet approval, but that has gone on far too long.
We can all look back and agree that we needed to stop burning coal. We probably all agree that we need to stop burning oil and gas. However, as Richard Leonard said, we need to learn the lessons of the past and have a managed transition that protects our communities. That is why it is vital that the Government learns the lessons of the past and has a proper transition plan in place for oil and gas workers in the North Sea.
17:48
I, too, congratulate Richard Leonard on securing the debate. As we both know, this is not the first debate we have taken part in—and it will possibly not be the last—not just on the strike of 1984 but on the miners’ pension fund, the Miners’ Strike Pardon (Scotland) Act 2022, the Coalfields Regeneration Trust and, in fact, Mick McGahey.
I am older than other speakers and saw the charges on the miners by the mounted police, the women manning barricades at the picket lines and collecting for their communities, and communities—and, indeed, some families—being torn apart. I listened to Arthur Scargill and Mick McGahey.
During that long strike, the voice of Mick McGahey was more measured than that of Arthur Scargill, although, right to the end, Mick McGahey insisted that the 1984 strike was unavoidable and that the union’s tactics had been correct in the circumstances. I understand that there was a failed attempt to solve the dispute involving secret talks between Lord Whitelaw, the Tory deputy leader, and Mick McGahey, but Thatcher was out to avenge the demise of her predecessor, Edward Heath, who had taken on the miners with the resulting three-day week, failed and lost an election. When she came into government, she was hellbent on emasculating the unions, starting with the miners, and she succeeded.
It was the first time that I had witnessed British police attacking British people who were simply defending their jobs and their communities. I watched the scenes on the news bulletins with my late mother, who was a formidable advocate for the miners because, for her, it was personal. Her father was a Welsh coal miner. I never met him. He died in his early 40s from a head injury that he sustained when a pit prop fell on him. In those days, surgery was not so sophisticated, and a steel plate had been inserted. He left his large family of children, including my late mother—a Derbyshire woman—orphaned, as his wife had died in childbirth. My mother never let us forget the hardships of mining, and the fact that he left those 10 orphan children. His death had an enduring effect on the way she led her life, as a committed socialist, and on how she saw coal mining, and she passed that on to me.
My mother raged against the Tory Government for its ruthless treatment of the miners, their families and their communities, and I, too, was shocked when police on horseback were sent charging into men who were simply demonstrating for their livelihoods. Often, those officers were shipped in from outside the community, because the local police could not be used or would not be used.
Little did I know that, one day, I would represent mining communities in Midlothian, in particular, Newtongrange, Gorebridge and Penicuick. The footprint of the mines in my constituency is there for all to see. It includes the mining museum in Newtongrange; the memorial high above Gorebridge to the miners who lost their lives in the pits; and the Shottstown miners welfare club in Penicuick. That is just a snapshot.
Convictions were to follow the strike, with 1,300 or more people being charged and more than 400 convicted but, at last, two years ago, this Parliament passed the Miners’ Strike (Pardons) (Scotland) Act 2022. I absolutely agree with that symbolic and collective blanket pardon. Because the act does not get rid of the conviction, I appreciate that we still have the effect of the prerogative of mercy. However, the act is good enough, and, in any event, in practical terms, that issue might not be relevant, as convictions might now have lapsed through time, and records might be lost.
What is sad is that the UK Government has not followed the Scottish Parliament in introducing a collective pardon, although I commend it for, at long last, tackling the issue of the miners’ pension fund. That is an issue that I and Richard Leonard, as well as others, have campaigned on.
In particular—here I share Mr Leonard’s concern—there must be an inquiry into whether there was political interference in policing and the actions of the judiciary during that period.
17:52
I congratulate my colleague Richard Leonard on bringing this debate to the chamber.
I begin my speech by paying tribute to Neil Findlay, who was an MSP for Lothian before me and who campaigned for years to fight the injustices that were inflicted on striking miners.
It is hard to overstate the role of mining in Scottish life and communities such as Newtongrange, Addiewell and Danderhall. The miners gala, attended by thousands, used to finish near this building, in Holyrood Park, and many local people came out to support the miners during the strike. Edinburgh District Council donated £5,000 a month to the striking miners and Edinburgh students passed motions in support of the miners. Those are just a few examples that demonstrate solidarity and community spirit, and we should be proud of that part of our history.
Many of our former mining communities still feel the effects of having their industry ripped out from under them with no replacement or support. Research from the Coalfields Regeneration Trust found that former mining communities are some of the most deprived areas in the country, with higher unemployment, fewer children finishing school and more people out of work and on benefits.
Those communities, where people did their jobs for 150 years, built this country and fuelled our industrial revolution, but they were left behind, and, when those people stood up for themselves, they were demonised, brutalised and mistreated. Among them was one who would go on to become the MP for Midlothian, David Hamilton. At the time, he was an active member of the National Union of Mineworkers, and he was held for two months during the strike before being released and acquitted, with a finding that no crime had been committed.
Many miners who were convicted of non-violent crimes lost their jobs and had their lives ruined. David Hamilton, like Neil Findlay, campaigned for a review of prosecutions made during the strikes in Scotland. Two years ago, following the independent review that took place, I was proud to vote for the Miners’ Strike (Pardons) (Scotland) Act 2022, which ended that historic injustice, and I am also proud to see the Labour Government in Westminster recently also taking action to rectify an injustice, ensuring that miners will now receive the £1.5 billion that was kept from their pensions, which is a reversal of the Conservative Government’s position and is a recognition of their contribution to our country.
Will the member take an intervention?
I do not have time.
To conclude, I join members in remembering workers, communities and women who took action. I remember Mick McGahey, trade unionist and miner, whose ashes are scattered in the foundations of this building. He said that the miners did only one wrong thing in their lives:
“They fought for the right to work”.
We should never stop fighting for working people.
17:56
As the MSP for the Cowdenbeath constituency, it is a privilege for me to speak in this debate. I congratulate Richard Leonard on securing the debate, and on his extremely powerful contribution.
I welcome the minister, Tom Arthur, to his place. It is quite fitting that he is here to respond to the debate on behalf of the Scottish Government. He, further to an invitation from me, represented the Scottish Government on the march with the miners that took place in Benarty in June this year. The event was held to mark the 40th anniversary of the miners strike, and the turnout and solidarity that were shown were hugely impressive. I also welcome our visitors to the gallery and say that they are all very much welcome in their Parliament.
At the outset of my remarks, I wish to say how much I admire the former mining communities in my constituency. They are resilient and generous and they stick up for each other. Indeed, the intense community spirit that was forged by the dangerous and dirty work that was carried out underground created an implacable bond among the communities above ground. What was done to those communities, to miners and to their families during the 1984-85 miners strike was utterly abhorrent, and it is beyond doubt that the scars are still deeply felt.
The strike involved a unique set of circumstances that saw entire communities defending their way of life and their jobs against a United Kingdom Tory Government that seemed determined to bring them to their knees by deploying the forces of the state to that end. Arbitrary dismissal by the National Coal Board for relatively minor acts of public disorder was the order of the day, and some were even dismissed notwithstanding that they had not been convicted but rather had been admonished or found not guilty or subject to a not proven verdict, or, indeed, had not even been brought to court at all.
Dismissal brought with it financial hardship, loss of income, loss of pension rights and difficulties in obtaining future employment. However, above all, convictions for activities anent the strike meant that miners and their families lost their good name and their respectability—perhaps the hardest loss to bear. It was important, therefore, to see, in June 2022, the enactment by this Parliament of the Miners’ Strike (Pardons) (Scotland) Act 2022. In fact, I had been a member of the Scottish Government’s ministerial justice team when the decision to proceed with the independent review by John Scott into the impact of policing on affected communities during the strike was announced in June 2018. I was, therefore, extremely proud to vote for legislation that recognised those wrongs by way of a collective and automatic pardon for those eligible, thereby bringing a degree of reconciliation and justice to the many involved.
What we need to see now, as has been called for by a number of members this evening, is a public inquiry into the policing of the miners strike. It remains to be seen whether the new UK Labour Government will heed those calls. It also remains to be seen whether the UK Parliament will follow the lead of the Scottish Parliament in legislating for a miners pardons bill. It is to be hoped that the UK Government will proceed with legislation in that regard.
Finally, it must surely be time for the UK Government to compensate those who have been unjustly penalised by the state over the intervening years for the financial hardship that they suffered as a result of the unique set of circumstances of the miners strike. That compensation could, of course, be funded from the billions of pounds that the UK Treasury, under successive Tory and Labour Governments, has siphoned off from the surplus in the miners’ pension fund for the past 30 years.
Let us hope that the new UK Labour Government now delivers the justice that miners and their families deserve and for which they have been waiting for so long. I am sure that we will all be watching.
18:00
It is a great privilege to speak in this debate. I start by saying how much I genuinely respect Richard Leonard. In the 40 years that I have known him, I have never had any doubt that he holds his convictions genuinely and sincerely. However, as he well knows, we fundamentally disagree.
We were both students at the University of Stirling during the miners strike, and I have a vivid memory of a miners strike support meeting being held in the foyer of the Macrobert centre at which I had the temerity to ask representatives of the NUM why it was not prepared to allow the miners the opportunity of a secret ballot on strike action. On that occasion, the left did not like the question and, I presume, it probably still does not like that question.
I want to make my position clear: at the end of the day, regardless of what has been said by all the speakers in the debate so far, Arthur Scargill’s primary motivation in the miners strike was political. It was a politically motivated strike, led by Arthur Scargill, with one objective in mind, and that was to remove a democratically elected Conservative Government that was led by Margaret Thatcher. The NUM thought that it could bring down the Thatcher Government, and it was fully justified in some of the assumptions that it made, because it had done the same thing to Ted Heath’s Conservative Government in 1974—but Margaret Thatcher was no Ted Heath.
Yes, the miners strike pulled communities, families and, indeed, our country apart, but the trade union bosses were not doing anything new when they were flexing their industrial muscle and crippling the country, because they had been doing it for the previous two decades.
I disagree with much of the point that the member makes—as he would expect. Does the member have any qualms about the manner of policing during that period? Would he perhaps address that?
I have a tonne of qualms—if that is how qualms are measured—about how everything was conducted during that period, and the violence on the picket lines and on the secondary picket lines. I will come back to that point in a moment, if I may.
The NUM’s calculations were justified because of the weakness of previous Governments. Because of that, we had seen wage growth spiral out of control, productivity decrease, costs increase and an economic crisis caused by inflation and an uncompetitive economy. We were regarded as the international economic basket case of basket cases—the sick man of Europe. Let us not forget that Harold Wilson’s Labour Government closed 253 pits when, during Margaret Thatcher’s Government, 115 pits were closed.
The NUM’s refusal to ballot its members to go on strike seems to have been lost in the narratives that we have heard tonight. At no point during the strike were workers ever allowed to have their say through a secret ballot. To address Christine Grahame’s point, it was a time of fear and intimidation and bloody violence on the secondary picket line. We have already heard about Orgreave, and no doubt that will come up again.
There is no doubt that, at the time, it was a real struggle for the families in those mining communities, which was largely thanks, if I may use that word ironically, to Arthur Scargill’s egotistical attempt to bring down a democratically elected Government, under the guise of saving an industry that, in common with all traditional industries, was already dying, due to technological change. However, more important than that, a growing sense of aspiration within mining communities and mining families meant that it was no longer the desire of those families that their children should be sent down the pit.
I represented Fallin when I was the member of Parliament for Stirling. Polmaise colliery was famous for being first out and last back during the strike. However, when I think of the people of Fallin or the former coalfields around Falkirk, I think not of victims with nothing left to live for but of educated, clever and aspirational people who wanted more for their children than going underground to mine coal.
I, too, think that we should memorialise the miners strike, but my reasons are very different from those of Richard Leonard. For centuries, working-class people have been kept in their place and told that low-paid, menial and dangerous jobs somehow gave them status and that there was pride in being part of a community and doing something that no one else wanted to do.
You need to conclude.
Now we know better—that that was nothing more than an attempt by vested interests to keep people in their place.
Technology, investment and aspiration should improve the lives of everyone. No one should feel shackled to a dying industry for the sake of the ego of a union leader.
I need you to conclude.
That is what we should also remember.
Before I call the next speaker, I will say that—[Interruption.]
Mr Torrance, I will not have conversations of that nature going on across the chamber.
I am conscious that several members still want to participate in the debate. In order to accommodate them—and some who have pressed their buttons very late, who will be given a speaking allocation, albeit not of four minutes—I am minded to take a motion without notice, under rule 8.14.3, to extend the debate by up to 30 minutes. I invite Richard Leonard to move such a motion.
Motion moved,
That, under Rule 8.14.3, the debate be extended by up to 30 minutes.—[Richard Leonard]
Motion agreed to.
18:07
I thank Richard Leonard for securing this debate on a cause that he is passionate about: seeking to bring a wider understanding of what happened to the miners and their communities, and of the impact that that continues to have.
I fundamentally disagree with Stephen Kerr. A worker is entitled to withhold their labour until such time as they receive the terms and conditions that they believe are fair. That includes fighting for their job. Anything other than that is slavery, and is certainly not a fair day’s pay for a fair day’s work. I am proud that the United Kingdom Labour Government will bring forward the new deal for working people and that it has introduced the Employment Rights Bill. An important part of that legislation is that it should give unions better access to workplaces, enabling them to recruit and organise workers more effectively in industries that are resistant to unionisation.
The debate teaches us a lesson on why that is important. The Thatcher Government wanted to make an example of miners, regardless of the cost to those workers, their families, their communities and, indeed, the whole country. Worse, Mrs Thatcher used the police to break that strike. Governments make laws, but the police and the justice services must uphold the law without the interference of politicians—including Prime Ministers. Richard Leonard’s call for a public inquiry into the policing of the strike is therefore as important today as it was 40 years ago. A democracy must have separation of powers; therefore, the use of police to break a strike for political purposes calls our very democracy into question. The only way in which we will ensure that that never happens again is to shine a light on what happened at the time. The police service must uphold the rule of law, work for its communities and never be used as a political pawn.
The other issue is the lasting impact on mining communities, which were set against each other and saw families torn apart and miners starved back to work. The strike was only able to continue for as long as it did because of support from wider communities, the trade union movement and others who sustained striking miners and their families.
Although most of Scotland’s coal mines were in the central belt, the strike also had a significant long-term impact on rural Scotland. Mine closures targeted and influenced the trade unions, altering labour dynamics in both industrial and rural contexts. The rural economy declined as ancillary industries such as transport, equipment and related services suffered, so the younger generation left in search of jobs in urban centres, exacerbating population decline and community fragmentation.
It is clear that the closure of the mines devastated many communities, which are still suffering. That provides lessons for us all today. We must move away from hydrocarbon fuels that harm our environment and planet and must do so for the good of the whole population and the whole world. However, that will impact on people working in those industries and on their livelihoods and families. Lessons must be learned and we must ensure that a just transition leaves no person or community behind. That is challenging, but we can achieve it if we learn the lessons of the past.
18:11
I begin, as Richard Leonard did, by thanking and remembering the miners who lived through the injustices in the run up to, during and after the miners strike 40 years ago and I thank him for bringing this important debate to Parliament.
I was a small child in Zimbabwe in the mid-1980s but I remember hearing, even there, on the other side of the world, snippets about a big thing happening in a world totally unknown to me. As the motion shows, the strike was an unforgettable experience, not only for those who took part in person, for miners and mining communities, and not only for unions and their families and allies. It had deep and lasting effects on the way that people across Scotland, Wales and England see themselves, their history, their Governments and their rights and freedoms.
There may be three reasons why the strike is so important. First, it matters because of the miners themselves and their dignity, courage, skill and comradeship. Those qualities were shared by the families and communities who bore the hardships of coal mining, shared the fear and grief of mining disasters and knew the realities that underpinned British industrial success. If that success began with the injustices of colonialism and the horrors of slavery, it continued on the bent backs of labouring miners. Those in the women against pit closures movement carried on the traditions of solidarity, support and care that their mothers, aunts and grandmothers had always known.
Secondly, the strike is important because of the extraordinary vindictiveness of the Government and organs of the state. Miners experienced the Ridley plan and smear campaigns, the carnage of Orgreave and a police presence on village greens, the notorious Stepps incident and security cordons across tiny country roads. Miners were victimised, especially in Scotland, and the state was willing to see miners’ children go hungry as a punishment for their parents’ resistance.
Thirdly, the strike matters because, in response to that brutality, solidarity sprang up like fields of flowers. Connections were made between women working in the Dundee Timex factory and their sisters in Cowdenbeath, and between international trade unions, peace activists, Asian youth movements and Chilean exiles. Groups such as black people support the miners, lesbians and gays support the miners, and the Dundee trades council marched at the Edinburgh miners gala.
The Government thought that its anti-union legislation could suppress support, but it might as well have kettled the wind. That support was reciprocal: the miners had already supported the Grunwick workers in 1977 and would go on to make sure that LGBT rights reached the Labour manifesto. Here in Scotland, the miners had long called for devolution. They helped to found the Parliament in which we proudly, if belatedly, passed the Miners’ Strike (Pardons) (Scotland) Act 2022.
We have our own memories, or those that were passed down to us by comrades and families, but we have lessons learned as well. Whatever struggles we are engaged in now, whether they be for climate, migration, economic or social justice, we know that what we do must be rooted in experience, respect and community. We must not underestimate how long and meticulously the forces of reaction will plan and wait, and how many of our common resources they are prepared to commit to defeat us.
However, we also know what is not theirs to command and what they will never have. Solidarity is something that we do together—it is not simply a voice calling across a chasm. Together, locally and globally, we can create communities of shared experience, shared resistance and shared love. The miners taught us that, and I am grateful to them.
18:15
I will start with how proud I am to say that I grew up in, live in and now represent a coalfield community. I therefore thank Richard Leonard for securing this important and heartfelt debate, which recognises the impact that the 1984-85 strike had not only on miners but on their families, wider communities and Scotland itself.
The strike has been defined as the greatest industrial dispute in post-war Britain and its significance cannot be overstated. To this day, the echoes of that brutal Thatcher Government are felt in so many towns and villages across our country.
I strongly disagree with Stephen Kerr. The pit closures were used as an insult to the miners, who contributed so much to Scotland’s culture and economy. Communities such as the one that I live in faced job losses and deprivation, and miners and their families were vilified and criminalised for their fight to save their livelihoods and their communities. The injustices that were felt by miners and their communities remain rife across modern Scotland.
Although it is unlikely that full amends can ever truly be made, I do recognise the Miners’ Strike (Pardons) (Scotland) Act 2022 as a step in the right direction. However, much more must be done and we must all fully support an inquiry into policing at that time. We must continue to find the truth, which miners and other striking workers deserve.
My region, South Scotland, is home to so many mining villages and communities, such as Cumnock, Dalmellington and my home town of Mauchline. Like others across Scotland, those communities have faced and continue to have unimaginable struggles as a result of the pit closures.
Will the member take an intervention?
I will, if it is brief.
I thank Carol Mochan for taking an intervention. As someone who was born and bred in Kirkcaldy, which had at one end the Frances, which was commonly known as the Dubbie, and at the other, the Seafield, I know that the communities there were rich in culture, heritage and wealth. However, Mrs Thatcher’s legacy is 40 years of deprivation in those areas. Would the member agree with that?
Absolutely. I agree 100 per cent. The fault is square on that Thatcher Government. Poverty, deprivation and depopulation are still felt hard. It is incumbent on us to continue to remember the difficult choices that were made by those who felt that striking was their only option. Fortunately, unions and organisations such as the Coalfields Regeneration Trust continue to keep the issue front and centre.
Even when some Governments prefer to forget their responsibilities to their communities, the Coalfields Regeneration Trust and others bring it to the fore. The report “State of the Coalfields 2024” lays bare the truth, stating that Ayrshire coalfield communities stand out as “particularly deprived” areas.
The coalfield communities did not create those problems. Rather, they fell victim to the social and economic problems that we see across the United Kingdom because of such a right-wing Government. Unemployment, lack of investment and accepted decline by the state are the scars that my communities will suffer for generations to come. There was no contingency planning, no support and no sympathy. Those are the realities that miners faced.
We cannot praise the fight’s endurance without reflecting on the impact and support of women—predominantly the wives, sisters and daughters of the miners. They continued to support the miners, alongside community groups and trade unions, and they allowed the fight to continue for as long as it did. For that, I cherish the stories that have been recounted from women on the picket lines and in the communities.
I believe in those communities not only because of our history of mining and our part in empowering the country but because that history built a resilient people and bold communities, with warmth, talent and tenacity. It is they who deserve the wealth generated from the labour of their parents, grandparents and wider communities.
I close by demanding of the Governments of today: keep that fight for justice alive.
I can accommodate a brief final contribution from Fulton MacGregor before we move to the minister.
18:20
Thanks for accepting my late request to speak, Presiding Officer.
I thank Richard Leonard for what was—as always on this issue—a very powerful speech.
I represent Coatbridge and Chryston, which has a rich coal-mining heritage as well as hosting other heavy industry. I come from Coatbridge myself. I was only four or five around the time of the miners strike, but I do have some memories of it, and my family had a rich history in the heavy industries, so I wanted to speak in the debate.
Clare Adamson mentioned Summerlee museum in Coatbridge. Every year, it hosts the international workers memorial day for Lanarkshire, which is always a poignant event. There is the Cardowan colliery in Stepps, and there is the Auchengeich site in Moodiesburn, where this year we commemorated the 65th anniversary of Scotland’s worst coal-mining disaster of the 20th century. Forty-seven men lost their lives, 41 women were widowed and 76 children lost their father. I take this opportunity to pay tribute to Willie Doolan, who is in the public gallery, and to all those at the Auchengeich memorial committee, for the work that they do to ensure that we remember those men, and others who tragically died.
I do not think that the Tory contributions today have been helpful at all—I have to agree with Carol Mochan on that, and that is me being very nice about it. Stephen Kerr said that he wanted the Parliament to be clear on his stance, so let me be clear on mine. The Tory Government of the 1980s and what it did to the miners and our communities were an absolute disgrace. I would say to Stephen Kerr, as Carol Mochan did, that our communities are still paying the price. Stephen Kerr represents Central Scotland, which of course includes many of the Lanarkshire constituencies. Those communities are still paying the price for what the Thatcher Government did.
I welcome the calls for a UK pardon, following the line of the Scottish Parliament, and I absolutely back the call for a public inquiry into the policing of the miners strike. It was completely political, and it should never have happened. That is not to blame the police officers. As another member said, they had to do what they were told. It was a political intervention.
I see you looking at me, Presiding Officer, so I will finish there. Thank you again for letting me speak. Thanks, too, to Richard Leonard for bringing the debate to the chamber.
Thank you, Mr MacGregor, and sorry for cutting you slightly short.
18:23
It is an honour to have the opportunity to respond to the debate on behalf of the Government. I begin by commending and sincerely thanking Richard Leonard for bringing this important debate to the chamber. His connection to the miners strike is evident in his decades of advocacy for those affected. I also thank members from across the chamber for their thoughtful contributions. As other members have done, I welcome those miners, families and friends who are joining us here in the public gallery and those who are watching from home.
The motion rightly acknowledges one of the most significant industrial disputes in our history, which profoundly shaped our communities and society. The miners strike was not just about pay but about livelihoods, dignity and future generations. It was a struggle of collective action and solidarity, when families stood firm against economic hardship and division. Forty years on, we reflect on the sacrifices made, the resilience shown and the lasting legacy that continues to shape our communities and our policies.
The scars of the struggle remain visible in mining communities, as we have heard, where unemployment exceeds the national average, life expectancy lags behind wealthier regions and challenges in attracting investment persist. However, slowly but surely, progress is being made. Initiatives supported by the Scottish Government have helped to regenerate former mining sites, transforming them into spaces that support recreation, community use and biodiversity. Polkemmet country park in West Lothian, once a colliery, is now a nature park, and Westfield community garden in Fife has become a sustainable hub for community engagement.
The Coalfields Regeneration Trust has been key in that renewal, by fostering economic and social resilience in the former coalfield areas. The Kelloholm skills centre in Dumfries and Galloway offers training for new industries, and the coalfields community investment programme, which operates across several coalfield areas in Scotland, supports small businesses that are adapting to a change in the economy. I also note the critical role that European Union funding has played in many of those projects.
On the point about the Coalfields Regeneration Trust, will the Scottish Government reconsider the award of direct grants from the trust, which has become an important part of mining communities? I know that that has been stopped for various reasons, but at this time of change, and in reflecting on the anniversary of the miners strike, is it the right thing to do to look again at that option and make it available to the trust?
I very much recognise Martin Whitfield’s points. I am committed to engaging with all organisations that the Scottish Government engages with on projects relating to community-led regeneration to support the resilience and sustainability of our communities. Martin Whitfield will appreciate that the budget is coming to Parliament imminently, but I will be happy to engage and to meet him and other members who have an interest, along with the Coalfields Regeneration Trust, following the budget, to explore what options are available.
This anniversary is a significant milestone, and it means a great deal to the communities that lived through the strike. As Annabelle Ewing touched on, I had the privilege and honour of attending a march, rally and exhibition in Fife earlier this year on behalf of the Scottish Government to mark the occasion. It was clear to me that the bonds of community remain as strong today as they were 40 years ago.
The miners were the backbone of the coal industry and they fuelled our whole economy, working in dangerous and gruelling conditions. Their strength and solidarity, and the unwavering support of their families, are a testament to the resilience of Scotland’s communities. As has been touched on, although it was inevitable that coal would eventually be replaced by cleaner energy sources, there are crucial lessons that we must take from how transition was managed or, in this case, egregiously mismanaged. Government policies left our industry uncompetitive and they neglected to provide workers and communities with pathways to a new future, thereby intensifying the miners’ hardship unnecessarily in an environment of strained industrial relations.
Will the minister take an intervention?
I will take one more intervention, as I am conscious of time.
If lessons are to be learned, will the minister say when we can see the just transition plan that many oil and gas workers are waiting for? We keep getting told that it is imminent, but we cannot wait forever.
I will come to those points imminently. The failure of what happened in the 1980s teaches us critical lessons as we approach another industrial shift—as has been said, the transition away from oil and gas and the move towards net zero.
The Scottish Government is determined to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past. That is why we were the first country to establish a Just Transition Commission, which advises on how to make that change in a fair and just way. The principles of a just transition are embedded in our climate change legislation. Through our just transition fund, £75 million has been allocated for projects in the north-east and Moray to create highly skilled jobs and support innovation.
We have also ensured strong trade union representation on the Just Transition Commission, and, in recent years, we have provided funding to support the Scottish Trades Union Congress in its just transition efforts. That enables the trade union movement to increase its engagement with workers, thereby enhancing workers’ ability to influence transitions in their sectors. By empowering workers, we will ensure that their voices shape the development of Scotland’s just transition plans and that fairness and inclusivity are prioritised in that process.
Unlike what happened in the 1980s, we are determined to bring workers, communities and their representatives to the heart of decision making and to ensure, by engaging closely with trade unions, that the costs and benefits of the transition are fairly distributed and that no one is left behind.
Regeneration programmes, community wealth-building initiatives and investments such as the vacant and derelict land fund are already helping to revitalise former coalfield areas. Infrastructure projects such as the reopening of Leven station, the Alloa to Kincardine line and the Borders railway are reconnecting communities and creating economic opportunities. Those are concrete steps towards renewal, which we must continue to build on. [Interruption.]
Do I have time to take another intervention, Presiding Officer?
I do not think so.
I am afraid that I cannot.
The legacy of the miners strike highlights the importance of workplace rights and the role of trade unions. Fair work supports a more committed, better skilled and more adaptable workforce that can spot challenges and opportunities, solve problems and offer insights and ideas for improvement, thereby creating real value for organisations. The Government’s fair work agenda, which we have long championed—we established the Fair Work Convention in 2015 and announced our flagship fair work first policy in 2018—supports that.
Trade unions play a vital role in achieving better terms and conditions for employees, and we will continue to champion collective bargaining and trade union recognition and to strongly oppose anti-trade union Governments and legislation, such as the Trade Union Act 2016 and the Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Act 2023.
It is the Scottish Government’s position that employment law should be devolved to Scotland. That is the only way to protect workers’ rights from future anti-trade union Governments. However, I welcome the current UK Government’s Employment Rights Bill, which has the potential to put important elements of the fair work agenda on to a statutory footing and offers opportunities for collaboration.
The miners strike was a time of profound injustice. As has been mentioned, the use of state power, through policing, the courts and the media, left deep wounds in communities, and allegations of misconduct and wrongful arrests have yet to be fully addressed.
As has been touched on, the Scottish Government has taken steps towards supporting reconciliation. However, more must be done. A full UK-wide public inquiry into the policing of the strike would provide transparency, accountability and the closure that many still seek.
We remember the courage and sacrifices that were made during that time as we work to create a fairer society. This evening’s debate reminds us of the cost of mismanaged transitions and inspires us to ensure fairness in the future. I thank Richard Leonard for bringing it to Parliament, I thank members for their speeches, and I thank the miners, their families and their communities for their enduring contribution.
Meeting closed at 18:34.Previous
Decision Time