Seòmar agus comataidhean

I am nearly finished, but yes.

I want to make a wee bit of progress. The Labour Government did nothing about granting pardons or setting up compensation schemes.

There is a legacy of mining communities in my constituency—those of Newtongrange, Gorebridge and Penicuik—and I have immediate family connections with miners, as well as my own direct memories of the 1984-85 mining dispute itself.

The footprint of the mines in my constituency is there for all to see. Newtongrange, whose mining museum and great wheel border the A7, is still characterised by the neat rows of miners’ cottages—First Street, Second Street and so on—with narrow lanes at the back, which the coal lorry used to deliver their quota.

High above the community, Gorebridge has its memorial to miners who lost their lives in the pits over the years, the inauguration of which I was glad to attend. There is also the Shottstown miners welfare club in Penicuik. Those communities are still all there. That means that the landscape and sense of community of Scotland’s mining past are literally never out of my sight. We have a responsibility to those communities.

My family connection with mining was my paternal grandfather, who was a Welsh coal-miner. I never met him; he died prematurely in his early 40s from a head injury that he sustained when a pit prop fell on him. That 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 that job and the fact that he left those 10 orphaned children, including her. His death had an enduring effect on the way she led her life and how she saw coal mining, which she passed on to me.

When the events of the mid-1980s became the stuff of news bulletins, she raged against the Tory Government for its ruthless treatment of the miners, their families and their communities. I, too, was shocked, especially 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.

As others have said, during the strike, 1,300 or more people were charged and more than 400 were convicted. Those convictions stand to this day, so the bill is much to be welcomed.

At stage 1, I noted that the Government recognised that miners’ wives and families who were directly involved in the dispute might also have received convictions and should perhaps be encompassed in the bill, and I am glad that that has happened at this stage.

We need a publicity campaign to ensure that everyone is aware of their rights. I understand that the Government is doing that, partly through the NUM.

I absolutely agree with having a symbolic and collective blanket pardon, but that does not remove a conviction from the record. Section 3(a) of the bill makes it plain that that remains the case, so members might question what practical effect such a pardon would have. People might think that, by being granted a collective pardon, their conviction will be expunged from the record; it will not. However, I appreciate that we still have the effect of the prerogative of mercy, which is the power of the Crown to quash a conviction. In any event, in practical terms that issue might not be so relevant, as convictions might now have lapsed through time and records might be lost. However, the UK Government must hold an inquiry into all that took place, and in particular into whether there was political interference in policing and the judiciary.

I will be brief, because we have already rehearsed the issue of compensation. It really makes me cross that £4.4 billion was taken straight out of the miners pension fund without the UK Government putting a penny in, while Richard Leonard was looking for compensation from our budgets for public services. I would never let a Tory Government off the hook in the way that he seems to be doing. I am glad that he is going to speak to his Welsh colleagues, because we need power behind us to ensure that that £4.4 billion—

I thank the Presiding Officer for the pause to allow members to enter the chamber.

It is with great pleasure that I lead my debate on men’s sheds. I add that this is not the first time, as I led a debate on the same topic in 2019, and contributed to another in 2021. I thank members for signing the motion and, in advance, for contributing today. I also welcome to the gallery members of the Peebles and District men’s shed and the Penicuik and District men’s shed, which are in my constituency. I visited both pre-Covid and hope to do so again. There are also sheds in Lauder and Galashiels.

All men’s sheds have much in common, and their members have a wide range of experience, which is very handy—for example, there may be an accountant who can search out funding streams; a retired lawyer, if you are lucky—although not many people say that about lawyers—who can help with the legal stuff; and men with experience of trades. Collectively, they make a powerful functioning organisation.

The name “shed” is so apt. I recall that my father had his own one-man shed plonked right in the middle of the back garden. He would retreat there from our large and noisy family with the Sunday papers and sit in the open doorway at peace with the world, or he would disappear inside to make sledges for us that were so heavy that they would not move through the snow. There were also shelves that were constructed to survive an earthquake. Woodwork was not a talent of his, but he was happy. When men’s sheds came on the scene, I immediately recognised the benefits.

The play “Men Don’t Talk” by Clare Prenton was born out of discussions with Peebles men’s shed members, and it prompted me yet again to highlight again the importance of men’s sheds. Men talk there, and the play explores what they talk about, including a range of small, medium and large issues. By “large”, I mean issues of loneliness, bereavement, dementia and so on—all discussed while they hammer away at bird boxes, planters and garden benches that are mostly for community use, accompanied, of course, by the obligatory cups of tea and coffee and biscuits. Lest I forget, I should make it plain that Peebles men’s shed also provides for women members.

I thank the Scottish Men’s Sheds Association for its briefing, and note that there are 201 known men’s sheds and developing groups across Scotland—129 open sheds, 47 that are in development and 25 that are proposed. The pandemic meant that some sheds have gone, but post-pandemic there is an even greater need for them, as we can see from the sheds that are proposed and in development. Incidentally, the SMSA has an excellent website to guide those interested in the dos and don’ts of establishing a shed.

I now welcome more people to the public gallery—you missed a bit, but you can see it online later.

There is no dispute that men’s sheds do a power of good, and I am not just talking about bird boxes and benches. The companionship is good for body and soul, and is much needed, especially after the last two dreadful years.

I know that you would have wanted to take part in this debate, Deputy Presiding Officer, so I thought that I would say what you would have said; besides, I have family connections to Orkney through a sister, which I think gives me sufficient authority to deputise for you. I am deputising for the deputy—how nice. Here is the jist of what you told me.

Orkney men’s shed, like others, found securing premises difficult, but having at last found a location in Finstown, which is midway between Stromness and Kirkwall, and thus central and ideal, it has had to relocate to Stromness.

A hard-working team of volunteers led by Morgan Harcus has quickly enabled Orkney men’s shed to prove its worth to members and the wider community. The concept is making its way north of the Galt, with plans for the Sanday men’s shed well advanced. Given the risks of isolation and poor mental health, there is no reason at all why that model could not be replicated on other islands, albeit tailored to meet the circumstances, demand and personalities in each community.

I trust that, if I run out of time, I will get a little more time for that.

However—the minister will know where I am going with this—funding for sheds has to be raised through the Big Lottery Fund and so on. That is time consuming and exhausting, and finding suitable premises is a common challenge—it is not just a challenge in Orkney. That was true in Peebles, where premises were secured in the former ex-servicemen’s club, and in Penicuik, where, after years, a place has just been secured in the YMCA. Local authorities can help with that, and they often do.

The Scottish Government is quite right to face up to the challenges of the population’s health and wellbeing, especially the health and wellbeing of older people. Keeping folk fit in body and mind is not only the right thing to do; it can save more than pennies for the public purse, especially the health budget. Therefore, it seems to me—I am glad that the minister is listening—that there is a requirement for a more proactive role for Government in supporting the men’s shed movement. I am aware that there was a meeting with the SMSA earlier this year to discuss a new funding strategy for men’s sheds. A trilateral funding approach in the budgets of the Minister for Public Finance, Planning and Community Wealth, the Minster for Equalities and Older People, and the Minister for Mental Wellbeing and Social Care was looked at.

I understand that the minister has responded to a request for three-year funding, and I appreciate that the Scottish Men’s Sheds Association is disappointed to receive only one-year funding. However, these are extraordinary times, and there are severe financial pressures on all budgets. As my mother used to say, “It’s better to get something than nothing.” I note that the minister has suggested that the Scottish Men’s Sheds Association should apply for funding to explore the upcoming social isolation and loneliness fund. I encourage it to do that.

If allowed, I will be back again in a year’s time in another men’s shed debate looking to see that more funding is secured for that very important organisation and all the individuals who give up their time to develop men’s sheds throughout Scotland.

I am glad that the minister is listening, and I hope that the Deputy Presiding Officer is happy.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I do not know where I am with the voting. I cannot vote.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I am still trying to connect to the digital voting platform. It is just not connecting. I would have voted yes.

Richard Leonard and I have debated this issue before. I absolutely support compensation for the miners but there is a question to be asked about who should pay and why.

The policies were pursued by a Tory Government; there was no Scottish Parliament in place at the time. Liability lies entirely—

If Richard Leonard lets me conclude, he will have a chance to respond.

Liability lies at the feet of the UK—a UK which, as Richard Leonard knows, has taken £4.4 billion out of the miners pension fund without putting a penny into it. The UK is sitting on that money—they filched it. Compensation should come from there, not from the budgets that we have in this place for public services. That would penalise the health service, policing, education and so on. [Interruption.] I hear what members ask about what the UK will do. I call upon Labour members, along with their Welsh Assembly colleagues, to pursue the UK Government to reach into that £4.4 billion that it has filched from the miners pension fund to set up a proper compensation fund and, at the same time, to do what we are doing in this place, which is to grant a collective pardon. We are the first nation to do this; it is a disgrace that it has not been—

That was in response to actions that took place while the Scottish Parliament was in place. This is about what happened in 1984 and it is not as though they do not have the money. How can members possibly support £4.4 billion that was taken from the miners pension fund not being used for a compensation fund?

I say to Labour members: do not let yourselves be bulldozed by a Tory Government; get your colleagues at the Welsh Assembly to put on pressure for a compensation scheme as well, and let us shame a Tory Government that requires to be shamed.

Our office furniture contracts require suppliers to ensure that chairs meet all relevant standards in force at the time of purchase. We inspect chairs at regular intervals to ensure that they remain in safe condition and replace them when they reach end of life. If a member or member of staff feels that they require support for a particular health concern, they can contact the people and culture office—formerly human resources—for support. If necessary, a workplace assessment can be arranged with our occupational health provider.

I do not have the date of purchase to hand and I do not even know whether the chairs were all purchased at the same time, but I will endeavour to find that out and to advise the member in writing. Chairs are replaced if they do not pass an inspection, which is in line with our environmental policy.