Miners' Strike (Pardons) (Scotland) Bill: business and regulatory impact assessment

Options

In developing proposals for the Bill, the Scottish Government have considered the following options:

1. Bring forward primary legislation to provide that an automatic and collective pardon will apply where the qualifying criteria are met;

2. Provide additional funding resource to the Coalfields Regeneration Trust and the National Mining Museum of Scotland. This gesture would reflect Scottish Government sympathy for former mining communities who continued to be affected by the Strike.

3. Apologise for the hardship suffered by miners as a result of the Strike.

4. Do nothing.

The options were appraised through an assessment of their ability to deliver the

following policy intentions :

• recognition of the hardship and disproportionate impact on miners from participating in the Strike;
• removal of stigma associated with a criminal conviction;
• providing a means for reconciliation within mining communities.

Sectors and groups affected

Options 1 to 4 have impacts for some or all of the following bodies:

Former miners
Families of former miners
National Union of Mineworkers
Wider mining communities
Police Scotland
ACPO
Retired Police Officers Association (RPOAS)
Former police officers
COPFS
Senior members of the Judiciary
Law Society of Scotland
Faculty of Advocates
Political interests – MPs ; MSPs ; relevant Local Councils
Disclosure Scotland

Benefits

Option 1 – Bring forward primary legislation whereby an automatic and collective pardon will apply where the qualifying criteria are met.

This options scores high across all three criteria. It has the benefit of officially recognising the hardship suffered by miners, their families and communities during the Strike, and providing comfort. The IRG report claims that the pardon could also aid reconciliation between former miners and police officers by helping to heal wounds and aiding understanding of different perspectives on the Strike. The pardon can also remove the stigma and shame of having a criminal conviction that a number of former miners still feel.

Option 2- Provide additional funding resource to the Coalfields Regeneration Trust and the National Mining Museum of Scotland.
This gesture would recognise the hardship suffered in the mining communities at a national level, while also expressing sympathy to former mining communities who continued to be affected by the economic consequences of the Strike. However, the option would do nothing to remove the stigma of criminal convictions or to reconcile former miners and police officers. Indeed, representations to the Scottish Government from stakeholders indicated that a non-monetary form of redress such as a pardon would be more meaningful than monetary redress.

Option 3 – Scottish Government apology for the hardship and disproportionate impact suffered by miners who participated in the Strike.

Similar to the pardon, this sort of official recognition scored highly in recognising hardship and aiding reconciliation. However, at an individual level, it would do little to relieve the burden of the stigma of criminal conviction. In addition, the apology could be perceived as meaningless given that the National Coal Board was a UK nationalised body and that the Scottish Government was not in existence at that time. It would therefore be inappropriate for the Scottish Government to issue an apology for matters outwith its control or design, and where it is not a successor to the UK Government at the time of the Strike.

Option 4 - Do nothing

This option scored low on all criteria as it would not recognise hardship; aid reconciliation; or affect the burden of stigma. Indeed, doing nothing would be a rejection of the recommendation from the IRG report and could signal that the important matters raised in the Report were being ignored. This could generate even greater feelings of hurt for miners, their families and communities.

Conclusion

The conclusion is to progress option 1

Costs

It is anticipated that there will be no cost attached to Option 1. The issuing of a pardon in any given case will be automatic and therefore involves no direct consideration of a case by the Scottish Government or any delegated body. It will be a matter for a person to consider whether they meet the criteria specified in the bill and if so, they should consider themselves pardoned. This will also apply in cases where a person considers that the terms of the criteria in the Bill are met in the case of a deceased person. There will be no documentation required from people seeking a pardon, and no written communication sent to those who consider that the qualifying criteria for the pardon have been met.