Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

Meeting date: Tuesday, January 30, 2024

Official Report 948KB pdf

---

Michael “Mick” McGahey

The final item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-11389, in the name of Richard Leonard, on recognising the contribution of Michael “Mick” McGahey. The debate will be concluded without any question being put. I ask those members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request-to-speak buttons.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament notes that 30 January 2024 marks the 25th anniversary of the death of Michael “Mick” McGahey, miner, intellectual, activist, agitator, President of the National Union of Mineworkers Scottish Area (NUMSA) from 1967 to 1987 and Vice-President of the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) from 1972 to 1987; recognises what it sees as his contribution, based on unerring principles, to advancing the interests and welfare of the working class; notes his steadfast support for the establishment of the Scottish Parliament, including moving a motion in support of its establishment at the Scottish Trades Union Conference in 1968; believes that he was, as he described himself, “a product of his class and his movement”, and notes the belief that the Parliament should mark this anniversary by engaging with NUM to erect a bust of Michael McGahey within the Scottish Parliament.

17:00  

Mick McGahey represents everything that is good about the working class and labour movements: an underground miner, who was a political visionary; a leader who earned the respect of not just the miners but the entire labour movement; and an inspiring orator who turned his words into action. As Mick himself said, he was “a product of” his class and his movement, and he remained fiercely loyal to both.

Thanks to Melissa and Joshua Benn and Ruth Winstone, we can read a touching diary entry in which Tony Benn, at the 1980 miners’ gala, recorded the following:

“I sat between Mick and his wife who were absolutely delighted by their seven-month-old grandchild—they had brought her along and Mick’s face was creased with smiles. I thought, if only the press could see him as a father, and grandfather, the image would be so different.”

So, to Elaine and Caroline, who join us in Parliament tonight; to young Mick; to the miners and their families; to the communists, the socialists, the trade unionists and the tribunes of labour, who are all here in the public gallery, comrades all, we say that without you there would be no Mick McGahey. This great man was so great only because he represented great people and a great cause, and because he had the greatest love and support of his family.

Today is especially poignant. It marks, to the day, the 25th anniversary of his death. Next year, we will celebrate the centenary of his birth. Mick McGahey was born in Shotts, just a year before the general strike. His father, Jimmy, was jailed, sacked, evicted and blacklisted during that bitter dispute, so the family were forced to move over 400 miles away to the Kent coalfield in search of work. It was not until the 1930s that they moved back north, to Cambuslang.

In 1939, at the age of 14, Mick left school and went down the pit. By the age of 18, he was leading the miners at the Gateside colliery on strike, in defiance of the wartime ban on industrial action. He was sacked, and he had to leave home to find work. In the coming years, the Labour Government nationalised the coal industry. Mick became a National Union of Mineworkers branch delegate. By the 1950s, he was chairing the union’s Scottish youth committee, advocating international peace and disarmament. By the 1960s, he was moving anti-Polaris motions at the Scottish Trades Union Congress.

In 1967, the year that he was elected as the president of the NUM Scottish area, nine miners tragically and needlessly lost their lives, poisoned by fumes caused by an underground fire at the Michael colliery in Fife. His unerring principle, agitation and determination in the wake of that tragedy led to every miner in every coalfield being fitted with self-rescuing breathing equipment as standard.

The following year, Mick McGahey made history at the Scottish TUC, invoking the spirit of Bob Smillie and of Keir Hardie. He called for the establishment of a Scottish Parliament to bring power closer to the people. Scotland was

“a nation”,

he said in that seminal speech,

“not a region of Britain”.

But he rejected completely

“any theory of a classless Scotland”,

citing the common bonds of the Scottish miners with the Durham miners, the Sheffield engineers and the London dockers.

Defeated in his campaign to become NUM national president in 1971, in 1973 he was elected as national vice-president, helping to lead the miners to victory in 1974. Like John Maclean before him, he was accused by the establishment of sedition. He was bugged by the secret services, with phones tapped; vilified in the tabloids; denounced by the Labour right and witch hunted by the Tories, but he never hid his politics and his lifelong membership of the Communist Party. He spoke out on the crimes of Chile and the injustices of South Africa, but he also led the miners from Scotland down to the picket line at Grunwick—an act of solidarity that was never forgotten by those migrant, predominantly women workers in north-west London, led by the fearless Jayaben Desai.

Today, we mark the 25th anniversary of Mick McGahey’s death, but 2024 is also the 40th anniversary of the miners strike—without doubt the most significant industrial dispute since 1926. Mick prophetically warned of the decimation of the Scottish coalfields if the Thatcher Government had its way. It was a strike not about wages but about jobs, pits and communities—and even the very way of life itself in those communities. It was a turning point. As Mick often said,

“If we stop running, they will not chase us. Stand firm and fight.”

After the strike, he was literally “bruised, battered, but unbowed”. He never wavered in his demand for the reinstatement of the victimised miners.

“Are we walking away?”,

he challenged the Scottish TUC from the Congress rostrum in 1985,

“from those boys who did one thing wrong in their life: they fought for their jobs. They fought for the right to work.”

Two years after the strike, Mick retired, but he was far from done. He helped to establish the Scottish pensioners forum. He was always a great teacher who understood the importance of political education. He was a man of principle and integrity and of honesty, humour and culture. This man, who left school at the age of 14, could draw extensively on Marx and Morris, on Gallacher and Maclean, on Burns and Grassic Gibbon, to prosecute his argument.

He could deploy wit, too:

“The only time I have ever heard of a wage explosion”,

he declared,

“is if you burst into your employer’s office on a Friday morning and blow the safe with gelignite”,

because trade unions existed not simply

“to fight the annual wages battle, but to end the wages battle by the redistribution of national wealth.”

He also recognised the central role of women in the struggle.

“Have you ever seen a plane fly with half a wing?”,

he used to say.

An intellectual and an internationalist, Mick McGahey truly was a working-class hero. That is why it is important that he is properly commemorated and immortalised in this Parliament, which he did so much to create, where his ashes were scattered by his family and where his spirit will always be.

Mick used to say:

“We are a movement, not a monument”,

but no one should underestimate the impact of that speech to the STUC in Aberdeen in 1968, not just because of what was said, but because of who was saying it.

He reignited the radical tradition of the Scottish labour movement. That was his first political priority in his first year as the new leader of the Scottish miners. In so doing, he changed the course of history. So, let us ensure that the people of Scotland are reminded of that, in this Parliament building, so that they—and we—can pay our enduring thanks to him. Let us turn our words into action so that his values, his principles, continue to echo down the ages, and so that his legacy lives on: the monumental, the glorious legacy of Mick McGahey. [Applause.]

I say to our visitors in the public gallery that you are all most welcome here tonight to observe our proceedings in the debate, but I have to advise you that that does not include participation, which in turn precludes applauding. I hope that you will bear with us in the observance of that rule, but you are very welcome to be here.

17:10  

I congratulate Richard Leonard on bringing to the chamber this members’ business debate on Mick McGahey, on the 25th anniversary of his death.

As a proud trade unionist for the whole of my working life, I am delighted to speak today—all the more so given that my Rutherglen constituency is so steeped in mining history. I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests, as I am a member of Unison.

As in much of Lanarkshire, the pits in Rutherglen, Cambuslang and Blantyre were key sources of employment, but sadly they were blighted by a history of disaster and loss of life, which has been forgotten to many over the years. Scotland’s worst mining disaster took place in Blantyre in 1877 and claimed the lives of almost 6 per cent of the total population of the town.

That catastrophe for the town and its surrounding area is commemorated by a memorial and an obelisk and by a new memorial that was unveiled on 4 February last year. In September, I was pleased to attend the unveiling of a new miners’ memorial on Rutherglen Main Street, which stands as a fitting reminder to all who worked in Rutherglen’s coal mines from the 1500s through to the 1930s.

Although my constituency has had a proud mining history over the centuries, one of the key local figures over the past 100 years was undoubtedly Mick McGahey. The Cambuslang miners’ memorial wheel bears an inscription that is dedicated to the man himself. As we heard in Richard Leonard’s speech, Mick McGahey was born in Shotts and then moved to England with his family before settling in Cambuslang, in my constituency, where he spent his formative years. He attended a local school; I understand that he left school on a Friday at the age of 14 and that, by the time that Monday morning came round, he was working at Cambuslang’s Gateside colliery—at the same pit as his father.

Just four years on from Mick McGahey’s starting work at Gateshead colliery, he became a union branch secretary at the age of just 18. Growing up in a family of miners shaped his outlook in his life and his politics. His work, his trade unionism and his political beliefs went hand in hand.

Mick McGahey was a giant in the trade union movement, serving as vice-president of the NUM for a period, and, as we have heard, a lifelong member of the Communist Party. He was a man who dedicated his life to improving the working conditions for his membership, and he played a key role in the formation of this Parliament. At the 1968 Scottish Trades Union Congress, he moved a motion to try to shift the labour movement’s constitutional position to one in support of devolution. Although it was not immediately successful, he played his part in changing minds and policy.

Although Mick McGahey was not alive to see our Scottish Parliament reconvened, I share the views of Richard Leonard and the NUM that there should be a permanent memorial installed here in his memory. In addition to the plaque on the Cambuslang miners’ wheel, as I mentioned, there is a street in the Whitlawburn area in my constituency, McGahey Drive, which, I understand, is named after him.

Mick McGahey must count as one of the most influential people to have come from my constituency in recent times. A lot has changed in the 25 years since he passed away, not least the formation of the Scottish Parliament and the closure of the last deep coal mine in Longannet. What have not changed are the attacks on workers’ rights and their terms and conditions, and tragically, as we remember every year on international workers memorial day, people being killed in accidents at work. The need for strong trade union voices and representation is just important today as it was in the past.

On this anniversary of Mick McGahey’s death, I can see that there is no more fitting tribute than the creation of a memorial to him here, in Parliament, and I am proud to add my name in support of such calls.

17:14  

I speak in support of Richard Leonard’s motion. In particular, I highlight my support for the belief that the Parliament should engage with the NUM to erect a bust of Michael McGahey in the Scottish Parliament. I say that because, throughout his leadership of the National Union of Mineworkers in Scotland, Mick McGahey had a profound impact on the lives of the Scottish people for more than half a century. Ewan Gibbs has written an excellent essay that charts McGahey’s life, his politics and his activism, which I would recommend to anyone with an interest in Scottish history. For me, it is the impact of the National Union of Mineworkers on Scottish life, under McGahey’s leadership, that merits the recognition that is called for in the motion.

Other members will speak of McGahey’s impact on health and safety for miners, which, when McGahey took over, was appalling. The union leadership fought for better working conditions and facilities, such as washing facilities. It also fought against poverty wages, and rightly so. However, my focus is on the improvements that were made to the lives of the mining communities—miners, their wives, their children and all working people.

It is reported that McGahey left school with little formal education and was self-educated, becoming absorbed into a culture that regarded books as treasures. He drove that thirst for knowledge and education throughout his lifetime, throughout the NUM and into the mining communities of Scotland. Miners became more aware of the importance of reading, writing and education—not just for them but, more importantly, for their children—to succeed in life. The evidence of that can be found in the progressive role that Scottish local government played throughout the second half of the 20th century, driving up education for the masses as well as driving the agenda for decent housing, access to health, the arts and culture and so much more for working-class communities up and down Scotland. Those councils that were driving and delivering such change were full of councillors who were miners, who fought for social justice and for their class, driven by the encouragement and support that they gained from their trade union, the National Union of Mineworkers, under the leadership of Mick McGahey, through highly skilled and educated pit delegates and NUM social committees, which worked well beyond the pits, into the communities and into miners’ homes.

When I grew up in the mining village of Kelty—my dad and my granddads all miners—I knew the name Mick McGahey from a very early age. The miners’ union was part of our lives, with the pit galas in the summer, the Christmas parties in the winter, the funding for the pipe band that I played in and the welfare funds for those who were struggling in my community and in communities across Scotland. I heard McGahey speak at many miners’ galas in Edinburgh, in the strikes in the 1970s and on the picket lines in the 1980s, but my greatest honour was to share a platform with Mick McGahey when he, along with Gordon Brown, unveiled the Kelty miners memorial in 1997, in front of many hundreds of people in my home village of Kelty.

I hope that the Parliament will agree to give this recognition and honour in memory of Scotland’s 20th-century working-class pioneer.

17:19  

I thank Richard Leonard for bringing the debate to the chamber and I congratulate him on his passionate and heartfelt speech.

I am very pleased to be speaking in the debate. I come from a family where four uncles were Lanarkshire miners. Like many others of my generation, I have a vivid memory of Thatcher’s destructive years in the 1980s, when she decimated mines and industry throughout the United Kingdom.

As Richard Leonard says, Mick McGahey was a working-class hero. He was born in Shotts in 1925 and he died of emphysema in 1999. Emphysema is, of course, a disease of the lungs to which miners were particularly prone, due to the hazardous nature of their daily work. He started work as a miner at the Gateside colliery at the age of 14—a child—and was a member of the Communist Party and the National Union of Mineworkers all his life. As we have heard, a monument to Mick stands in Cambuslang, where he and his family moved when his father was in search of work.

Among the many memorable things that Mick McGahey said during his lifetime, the quote that Richard Leonard mentioned is particularly apt. He said:

“We are a movement, not a monument.”

However, I would definitely support a monument to Mick McGahey here, in the Parliament.

He was a man who never lost touch with his working-class roots and socialist values. To this day, I still find it astonishing that miners had to fight for every penny that they received for doing such a dirty and dangerous job—and then had to fight for those jobs. I recall that several of my uncles had what was termed a “miner’s mark” on their heads, due to falling coal and rock. Why would society seek to begrudge those men a decent living wage?

I also recall Mick and Arthur Scargill, who fought long and hard for the mining industry, being demonised by the media, which referred to them as “loony lefties”. They were humiliated on shows such as “Spitting Image” and were laughed at simply for trying to better the lives of people who kept our homes warm, kept the lights on and put food on the table.

During the bitter miners strike of the 1980s, I stood in solidarity on the picket line at Polkemmet colliery in West Lothian, blinded by flashlights that were designed to intimidate and distress us. It was a huge learning curve for me to experience the lengths that the establishment would go to in order to keep the workers in their place and to avoid giving them respect and a decent wage.

I rattled a can on Glasgow’s Maryhill Road, and I found great support from people, most of whom had little to spare themselves. I realised then that the media slurs and misinformation do not always cut it with the Scottish public, who have a social conscience and understand the motivation of a greedy, corporate establishment.

Mick McGahey will be remembered, along with other legendary union leaders and socialists such as John Maclean, Jimmy Reid, Mary Barbour and many others I do not have enough time to mention. I often wonder what they would think of the society that we are in today, with zero-hours contracts and unpaid work trials prevailing—actually, I know exactly what they would think.

“Working-class hero” and “man of the people” are overused phrases, but not in the case of Mick McGahey, who demonstrated his passion and commitment to the working man throughout his life. It is a tragedy that miners had to fight for dignity and respect throughout their hard-working lives. That is a dark stain on the British establishment to this day. We should have learned from those dark days, but I am afraid that the jury is out on that.

17:22  

I congratulate Richard Leonard for securing this important debate.

There are many things that we could say about the life of Mick McGahey and his contributions to our politics and civic life, but I want to focus on his contribution to democracy. One thing that I share with Mick is that I am a member of Democratic Left Scotland—he was a member of that organisation for many years. At the heart of Mick McGahey’s politics and those of Democratic Left Scotland is a commitment to freedom: freedom from exploitative wage labour, freedom from apartheid, freedom from Pinochet’s terror and the freedom to govern ourselves. For him, that meant Scotland having democracy—and it is important to note how that conception of democracy might differ from what we have today. It was not democracy in the narrow sense—that is, about parliaments or assemblies or other institutions—but was something much more radical. It was about defending the interests of the Scottish working class, and the institutions could follow. As with many people in his tradition in the 1960s and 1970s, he understood what was coming.

Some people have made the mistake—it is easy to do—of confusing centralisation with solidarity. In his famous speech to the STUC in 1968, Mick reiterated his commitment to workers in England. He understood that we can choose solidarity even if we do not have the same Government. When the STUC eventually adopted devolution as its policy in the mid-1970s, it was in defence of Scottish industry and Scottish workers. Some at Westminster made that mistake, however, and they amended the bill for Scottish devolution so that it required a qualified vote. In 1979, Scotland was denied a devolved Assembly by the Government; it was denied devolution and its own voice at a vital time.

For Mick McGahey, as for many advocates of devolution at the time, a Scottish assembly had the potential to stand up to any future Conservative Government and its attempts to destroy Scottish industry and, with it, the Scottish working class. A Scottish assembly could have been a bastion against Thatcherism. However, centralisation gives opportunities for people such as the Conservatives to wield their destructive axe against the working class.

As we commemorate the 40th anniversary of the miners strike and consider the future of steel production on these islands, it is sobering to think of the impact that Scottish devolution could have had in facing down the brutal and inhumane Thatcher Government’s attacks on Scotland. We could have had a just transition for the miners and the coal industry, and we could have had control over our own steel, which is a cornerstone of the green transition that we now need to make.

Democracy is not a distraction from the interests of workers. It is not something that we do instead of solidarity. It is absolutely at the heart of building a better world. Indeed, it is a cruel irony that someone so associated with democracy was undemocratically manoeuvred out of the opportunity to be general secretary of the NUM. Again, we must consider how differently the miners strike could have ended had Mick been at the helm. Mick is here with us in his commitment to Scottish industry and to a devolution that is not about the narrow politics of institutions but about exercising power through and on behalf of the people.

As a member of the Smith commission, I argued for the devolution of trade union laws to Scotland. I am glad that that is now a more widely shared position, but I am sad that we have not been able to resist the latest anti-worker legislation foisted on Scotland by Westminster.

We need a democracy that can rebuild our industry for the climate crisis that is approaching, and we need to understand that that democracy will reinforce our solidarity with others around the world, not diminish it. That would be, alongside a tribute in this building, a fitting monument to Mick’s memory.

17:27  

I congratulate my colleague Richard Leonard on securing this debate, and I speak in favour of the motion.

As for many others, my main recollection of Mick McGahey is from the 1984-85 miners strike and the many interventions, rallies and meetings that he spoke at. This year is, of course, the 40th anniversary of the commencement of that strike. I hope that, later this year, the Parliament will again consider the impact that that dispute had on Scotland, because there are many lessons that those who wish to see the empowerment of working-class communities can learn from it. The dispute shows us again the need for unity and solidarity. The miners and their families suffered terrible financial hardship during it. They did so because they understood the significance of the dispute for their communities and for future generations. I believe that history has proved that they were correct.

Mick McGahey was, of course, a significant trade unionist and working-class leader in Scotland over many decades. Like his father, Jimmy, he was a Lanarkshire miner and a member of the Communist Party. He worked in the pits from the age of 14 and, by the age of 18, he was already chair of his NUM branch. He was an active member of his union throughout his life. Mick McGahey’s family’s story of being blacklisted and having to move for work is shared by many families. As a trade unionist, most of his time was spent on the fight for pay, health and safety measures—and, indeed, compensation for those who were injured.

He gained prominence in the 1972 and 1974 miners strikes. Much like we see today—indeed, we have seen this since the creation of the trade union movement—and as Rona Mackay has said, he and other trade union leaders were painted as monsters by the press and by their political opponents. Prime Minister Edward Heath, in his 1974 election campaign, singled Mick McGahey out as being a leader of a small group of unelected communists who wanted to run Britain. The 1974 strike, of course, ended with a 35 per cent pay increase for miners.

The timing of the 1984-85 strike was not decided by the miners but by the then Conservative Government, which had a vision of closing the pits and smashing the miners’ union and the organised working class. As was said repeatedly during that dispute, if you close a pit, you kill a community. The experience of working-class communities is that, when there are closures, the jobs are not replaced. Even now, communities across Scotland have not recovered from the defeat in the 1984-85 strike and the subsequent pit closures. As was also said at the time, if the miners were defeated, it would be more difficult for every struggle and dispute that came afterwards.

The motion today seeks to recognise Mick McGahey with a bust in the Parliament. When Mick McGahey died, his ashes were placed beneath the grounds of this Parliament. He fought for this Parliament and for a working-class Parliament, and I believe that it would be fitting to have a commemoration of his life in the building.

17:31  

I, too, congratulate Richard Leonard on securing the debate, and I welcome Mick McGahey’s family to the Parliament.

I am pleased to speak to commemorate this extraordinary individual, not only because I have mining areas in my constituency in Midlothian—Penicuik, Gorebridge and Newtongrange, where the National Mining Museum Scotland is—but because my mum was the English daughter of a Welsh miner who mined in the Derby pits. He died in his late 40s after a pit prop fell on him, causing a severe head injury from which he never recovered. He left behind a large family of orphans, including my mother. She was all her days a formidable advocate for the miners and their communities, and never more so than during the miners strike in 1984-85, which I witnessed.

I saw the charges on the miners by 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 in those days, and there was a world of difference between the capabilities and, I suspect, the strategy of both men in disputes with the UK Government.

Thatcher was out to avenge the demise of her predecessor, Edward Heath, who took on the miners—with the resulting three-day week—failed and lost an election. That brought in a minority Labour Government under Wilson. When Thatcher then came in, she was hellbent on emasculating the unions, starting with the miners. To some extent, it was handed to her on a plate. Why strike in the summer, when the coal was piled high?

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 under the circumstances. I understand, however, that there was a failed attempt to solve the dispute, involving secret talks between Lord Whitelaw, the Tory deputy leader, and Mick McGahey. The talks were facilitated by Bill Keys, the leader of the print workers’ union. The negotiations, which began over a bottle of Chablis in the House of Lords—my goodness!—are revealed in the hitherto unpublished diaries of the late Keys. The initiative collapsed when Arthur Scargill ruled out the deal because it would lead to pit closures. Maybe he was right—maybe not.

How different history might have been if Mick McGahey had led the charge. Instead, as a result of that devastating rout of the miners, trade union legislation has made it tougher for all workers, and that legislation has not been repealed by successive Conservative and Labour Governments. I cannot see Sir Keir reversing any of that—can you? I suspect that, if he had a grave, Mick McGahey would be birling in it, but, as we know, his ashes are scattered beneath this very building, which is fitting for a democrat who supported devolution long and hard. It is therefore appropriate that it was this Government and this Parliament that granted a pardon to those who were convicted during the strike, making us the first part of the UK to do so.

Richard Leonard, other members and I have also long campaigned for UK reform of the mineworkers pension scheme, which is a rip-off that has seen the UK Government benefit with no contribution while miners receive a pittance.

Mick McGahey was a bright, brave and colourful man—an orator, eloquent and educated, but with a thick Lanarkshire accent that utterly confused the boffins at MI5 who were trying to eavesdrop on what he was up to. I love that.

Most of all, he was a man of integrity and, genuinely, a man of his people. We could do with more folk of that ilk.

17:35  

Comrades in the gallery and members in the chamber, we have heard that few people in our recent history have made themselves heard on the national stage and truly altered the course of history. They are people we can call titans of the working class, and Mick McGahey is certainly one of them.

To this day, McGahey remains a respected figure across the political left and a feared adversary across the political right. He was a man who stood against injustice, exploitation and corruption wherever it was evident around the world. He was a lifelong communist, a proud Scot and a trade union leader who worked with everyone he could to achieve tangible improvements for his class.

He remains an inspiration to the many who have since followed along the path of socialism. I never met him, but people in my home town of Mauchline and surrounding areas and villages certainly did. His socialism is a path that many people from my area have followed or hold a lot of respect for. Only recently, I spoke to former miners in Cumnock who met him and who were out on those picket lines with him. Many of them said to me that, although they might not always have agreed with McGahey’s line in the disputes of old, they still possess tremendous respect for a man who always remained consistent and steadfast in his defence of them.

He is an important part of our working-class history, and we should commemorate him here. I shudder to think what he would have had to say about the Tory Government’s egregious attacks on the rights of workers to defend themselves from exploitation, which are going on today. I imagine, however, that he would have said, “Stand firm and fight.”

He was a man who not only stood for what he believed in but advocated passionately for those who were worse off than him, and he committed his entire life to giving voice to the voiceless and resisting the vested interests of the people at the top. I can think of few figures more fitting for a memorial in this Parliament, which he did so much to build, creating a sustainable foundation for Scotland.

McGahey, and people who knew him, always knew that there was never going to be a simple day on which victory occurred and progress took hold. He understood that it would be a process of struggle and conflict that led to brighter days ahead for his class. Part of that was about securing the right of the Scottish people to have devolved powers in a Parliament of their own. It was to be a working-class Parliament.

We owe his generation a great deal for holding fast in that pursuit and for holding that reality. I very much doubt that he would be a great fan of the self-congratulation and endless delay that goes on in the Parliament now, but he would be proud, nonetheless, that voices and opinions of a varied and experienced mixture of society flourish in this building. That is part of the legacy of what he fought for and championed as democracy, particularly a democracy that reflected the unique views of working-class people in Scotland.

I thank Richard Leonard for bringing the debate to the chamber and members for their participation. I hope that we see the likes of Mick McGahey again.

17:39  

I extend my thanks to Richard Leonard not only for lodging the motion but for his passionate and heartfelt contribution and introduction. I also thank him for reminding members that Mick McGahey was a leader, a campaigner and a much-loved family man. Members have given their considered and thoughtful insights, and I note the heartfelt contributions and passion from across the chamber. I say to Alex Rowley that, if he wishes to send me a copy of the essay that he referred to, I would be very interested to read it.

I welcome Mick McGahey’s former mining colleagues, friends and family who have joined us in the public gallery of the Scottish Parliament’s chamber.

I never had the opportunity to meet Mick McGahey. However, as a teenager in Scotland during the miners strike, I can remember the horrific scenes on our television screens and the regular interviews with Mick McGahey. I remember his unmistakable voice—a voice full of conviction and authenticity. I have vivid memories of him from those days, in particular.

As someone whose great-great-grandmother lost her father, husband and son in separate mining accidents, I agree with Richard Leonard that we owe a debt of gratitude to Mick McGahey and others who fought so hard for the welfare and the health and safety of our mining communities.

I spoke to one of the planning officials at a meeting today and explained that I was closing tonight’s debate. He said that, in his home village, which is a former mining village, there is a street named after Mick McGahey. Other members have mentioned that that is the case in their communities, which is a reminder that Mick McGahey was much loved and is remembered across Scotland in many of our communities today.

It is therefore entirely appropriate that, on the 25th anniversary of his passing, we take time to celebrate Mick McGahey—who was known as Michael to those closest to him, I understand—and remember his contribution. Colleagues have highlighted some of Mick’s many achievements, including his principled trade unionism and advocacy for a devolved Scottish Parliament. Again, it is very fitting that we are debating his legacy in the Scottish Parliament, which he fought and campaigned for.

Of course, there was much more to him than that.

“More than just a militant”

is how the Glasgow Times put it in 2014, while The Herald wrote about his “grit and intellect”. That was not an accident. Like many other Scots, he was a voracious reader with a passion for poetry, including a love for the works of Burns and Shakespeare. I am told that he was as comfortable advocating for his union members as he was debating the novels and other works of Lewis Grassic Gibbon and other working-class poets of the time.

Like many who were born into the coal and steel town of Shotts, Mick was introduced to trade unionism and the minds that would define his life. Other members have referred to that in their speeches. By 14, he had left school—although, as we know, not his education—and followed his father into the pits. He later followed in his father’s political footsteps by joining the Communist Party of Great Britain. At just 18 years old, he had already risen to become union branch secretary at Gateside colliery, later becoming president of the National Union of Mineworkers Scottish executive and vice-president of the UK NUM.

Years later, in 1968, before many of the current generation of MSPs were born, Mick made the case for devolution, as Richard Leonard and others have said, by moving a motion in support of a Scottish Parliament during his address to the STUC, and he was a key figure in pushing the STUC to support the campaign for the Parliament’s creation.

Political allegiances aside, if Mick was here today—as many members, including Clare Haughey, have said—he would value the relationship that the Scottish Government has with the trade unions. We are very proud of our collaborative approach and the recognition of the vital role that trade unions play in society today.

Together, we are forging a society that thrives on shared prosperity, embraces equality, fosters opportunity and values community. Fair work, which we often debate in this Parliament, is central to that, and trade unions play a key role in its delivery. Although fair work was not captured in the same terms back then, and it was a very different labour market, I am sure that Mick would still have been a strong advocate for it, given his campaigns for workplace improvements, health and safety, pay and conditions and preserving economic security through resisting pit closures.

I thank the minister for giving way and for giving a fine speech, but does he recognise that one of the things that Mick McGahey stood for was a more active industrial policy? His hope was that the devolution process would defend against industrial closures. We see the record of closures such as the Springburn railway works and the Clydebridge steelworks, and we could do much more to safeguard high-skilled manufacturing and industrial employment in this country.

Paul Sweeney refers to the legacy of Mick McGahey and others in resisting such closures over the decades, but I am proud of the fact that Scotland is now looking at creating many more manufacturing jobs in this country and, I hope, reinventing a lot of that industrial heritage in a way that is fit for purpose in the 21st century.

As many members have noted, Mick McGahey saw value in community mobilisation and support. He campaigned throughout Britain to politicise miners and empower them to get off their knees, as he said, and fight against deindustrialisation, which Mr Sweeney just mentioned, in what he saw as a struggle to save Scotland’s economy. Many members have echoed the point that he would surely be appalled by the persistent erosion of workers’ rights by consecutive Conservative Governments at Westminster. Back in 2016, we saw the introduction of the abhorrent Trade Union Act 2016, and, in 2022, there were attempts to change the rules to allow the use of agency workers during strikes, for instance. We also now have the unnecessary, unwanted and ineffective Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Act 2023. As has been said, Mick McGahey would agree that it is time for a change in terms of those attacks on workers’ rights.

Mick McGahey rightly fought hard for the retention of the mining workforce, and his legacy continues. The Scottish Government recognises the importance of the right to strike and of an effective workers’ voice. That voice is paramount and valued, not just in the workplace but in shaping our future as we strive to become a fairer economy. It behoves us all to ensure that we use our incredibly rich resources to build a wellbeing economy that benefits all our communities and people, as well as meeting 21st century challenges, such as achieving our net zero targets. Although Mick fought hard for the coal industry in his day, we can collectively recognise today the need for a just transition, which did not happen when the mining communities were closed by Thatcher and the Tories in the 1980s, so that we can provide good green jobs for people in future generations.

Will the minister be kind enough to acknowledge the position of the Deputy Presiding Officer, who is unable to take part in this debate but often speaks in debates in support of mining communities?

I am not getting involved—I cannot, as Deputy Presiding Officer.

Absolutely. I am quickly trying to work out the protocols in my head, but I will just say that Annabelle Ewing has a very good track record in speaking up on those issues in the chamber.

As the motion rightly notes, we should absolutely recognise the impact that Mick McGahey has had on the trade union movement, particularly in Scotland. I am confident that his integrity and commitment would transcend party politics. His influence continues through the legacy of his work with the NUM and the STUC. As has been said, Mick never got to see this Parliament open, as he sadly passed away just months before it did. As we have heard, his advocacy for the working classes and the trade union movement continues to inspire many, and it is poignant that his ashes are buried in the foundations of the Parliament.

It is fitting that we recognise his contribution with a bust in the Scottish Parliament—a place that is founded on the principles of accountability, citizen participation, power sharing and equal opportunities—if others choose that as something to deliver. I very much welcome the debate and call on the Parliament to support the sentiments of Richard Leonard’s motion.

Meeting closed at 17:48.