Meghan Gallacher
Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party · Scotland
“Shirley-Anne Somerville: One example of when cutting people’s benefits does not help involves the suggestion that we take away support from disabled people, which disabled people tell us helps them into employment. We need to bear that in mind.”
“I, too, thank Maggie Chapman for bringing the really important issue of our universities to the chamber. I want to cast members’ minds back to March 2025, when Douglas Ross, as the convener of the Education, Children and Young People Committee, challenged the former principal and vice-chancellor of the University of Dundee, Professor Iain…”
“As the cabinet secretary mentioned in her statement, the Scottish Government has spent billions of pounds on tackling child poverty, but it remains stubbornly high, with one in five children still living in relative poverty.”
“If we fast forward a year, we see that the University of Dundee has sadly found itself in the headlines for all the wrong reasons again. As Maggie Chapman said, that is not down to the lecturers or the students; it is down to the university’s governance and structures, as well as the financial situation that our universities and colleges…”
“On that latter point, I went to Fife Gingerbread this morning and spoke to families and their support workers about the work that that organisation and others do to ensure that women are supported into employment in a way that encourages their confidence, builds their skills and is sustainable and successful in the long term.”
“The former education secretary and now Deputy First Minister, Jenny Gilruth, said in January this year that teachers would need to relocate to where the jobs are. Mike Corbett from the NASUWT condemned those comments.”
The complete record
Every one of 420 lines we hold for Meghan Gallacher, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 9.
“If we fast forward a year, we see that the University of Dundee has sadly found itself in the headlines for all the wrong reasons again. As Maggie Chapman said, that is not down to the lecturers or the students; it is down to the university’s governance and structures, as well as the financial situation that our universities and colleges face.”
“I, too, thank Maggie Chapman for bringing the really important issue of our universities to the chamber. I want to cast members’ minds back to March 2025, when Douglas Ross, as the convener of the Education, Children and Young People Committee, challenged the former principal and vice-chancellor of the University of Dundee, Professor Iain Gillespie, on the financial crisis at the university and the public funding that was being used to support the institution at that time, when it faced a £35 million deficit. Serious questions were raised about the management decisions that had contributed to the crisis. If I remember the responses correctly, I do not think that the committee session shone the best light on those who gave evidence.”
“On that latter point, I went to Fife Gingerbread this morning and spoke to families and their support workers about the work that that organisation and others do to ensure that women are supported into employment in a way that encourages their confidence, builds their skills and is sustainable and successful in the long term.”
“Shirley-Anne Somerville: One example of when cutting people’s benefits does not help involves the suggestion that we take away support from disabled people, which disabled people tell us helps them into employment. We need to bear that in mind. I point the member to what is in the plan that we announced before the election and the other work that I outlined in my statement, such as the ready for industry, success and excellence—RISE— initiative that Colleges Scotland worked on with the Government, which increases people’s skills and addresses some of the barriers to employment that they face. I also point to the £90 million investment in employability schemes that is now provided on a multiyear basis to ensure that it has the maximum effect, and the work that is going on to help parents into jobs.”
“As the cabinet secretary mentioned in her statement, the Scottish Government has spent billions of pounds on tackling child poverty, but it remains stubbornly high, with one in five children still living in relative poverty. With 22 per cent of working-age adults economically inactive, more needs to be done to get families out of poverty through long-term employment and job opportunities. We need to get Scotland working again. Will the cabinet secretary look at investing in employability services? Will she also look at the ballooning benefits bill, which is unsustainable? If we are really serious about getting Scotland working again, we need to cut that bill.”
“That is why, alongside the other investments that we are making, we are committing to a teacher job guarantee and doing the work required to develop that. I look forward to working with members and with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities as we develop that. Pupil Support Assistants (Rural Primary Schools) 7.”
“The former education secretary and now Deputy First Minister, Jenny Gilruth, said in January this year that teachers would need to relocate to where the jobs are. Mike Corbett from the NASUWT condemned those comments. Does the new cabinet secretary agree with the Deputy First Minister, or does she agree that the issue comes down to a dysfunctional teacher supply system that still sees teachers trapped in short-term or temporary contracts? Màiri McAllan: On the substance of Meghan Gallacher’s question—setting aside any misquoting of cabinet secretaries—the fact is that, as I put to Colm Merrick, the Government has invested significantly in the retention of teachers and the growth of teacher numbers in Scotland. We understand the importance of finishing one’s probation and then being able to move into secure employment.”
“The result is a vicious cycle—less investment in opportunity, more economic inactivity, greater reliance on benefits and ever-growing pressures on public services and finances. No one is arguing against supporting those who genuinely need help. However, when we look at compassion, we also need to look at whether the current system is delivering the outcomes that people deserve. I am in my final few seconds. During the debate, we have heard a few different phrases to describe the cabinet secretary—we have had “Super Ivan”, “Ivan the Great” and “Ivan the Terrible”, but time will tell which version of the cabinet secretary will be his legacy in this role. 16:45”
“If the Government is genuinely committed to reducing demand on public services and creating a more sustainable system, it cannot continue to ignore one of the fastest-growing areas of public expenditure. The Scottish Fiscal Commission has made it clear that spending on social security is rising more quickly than funding provided through the block grant adjustment. By 2026-27, the gap will exceed £1 billion, and it is expected to grow further. The question that the Government never seems willing to answer is this: if the benefits system is costing more every year, why are so many of the underlying problems facing Scotland getting worse? Every pound that is absorbed by the spiralling welfare budget is a pound that is not being spent to tackle the root causes.”
“Two decades on, we are still hearing the same promises about joined- up services, prevention, efficiency and transformation. That is why I asked the cabinet secretary earlier what is going to be different this time. What is the point of holding a debate when there is nothing concrete before the Parliament to scrutinise? Given the SNP’s track record on delivery, why should anyone take it at its word? The Scottish Conservatives have attempted to be constructive by making practical proposals that could help to deliver meaningful public service reform. We believe that it is necessary and the right thing to do, but any serious discussion must also address the ever-rising welfare bill.”
“The looming £5 billion black hole in Scotland’s finances will simply not disappear by itself, especially when the Government spends money as though it is going out of fashion. The Government is now in the same position that it has put councillors in year after year, and it has only two realistic options: cut spending or raise taxes. Instead, it appears to have chosen a third route: rebrand the problem as public service reform. As Murdo Fraser rightly pointed out, the new cabinet secretary has already insisted that public service reform does not mean cuts. I hate to break it to the cabinet secretary, but “public service reform” is precisely the kind of language that councils have long been encouraged to use when trying to soften the blow of reductions in services. We have been here before.”
“Is it savings, efficiencies or streamlining? I know those terms well, and I know this story. When I was a councillor, we were instructed to pursue cuts every year in order to agree a budget. After all, balancing the books is a legal requirement. Councillors in the chamber—past and present—will know that. However, the Scottish Government has had no qualms about taking an axe to local government budgets over many years. Although ministers in the chamber passed the sentence, it was councillors who were left to carry out the difficult decisions, reduce services and manage the consequences in our communities. That is finally catching up with the Scottish National Party. As Michael Marra said, after nearly two decades in government, the SNP has finally been forced to confront the consequences of its decisions.”
“I begin by congratulating all the members who have, this afternoon, made their first speeches in the chamber, including Dawn Black, Alyn Smith, Zen Ghani and Gary Bouse. All spoke passionately about their communities and predecessors. I refer to Gary Bouse’s speech in particular, because his constituency is part of the region that I represent. He is absolutely right to mention the jobs in Falkirk and concerns about the number of industries and businesses that have closed in recent times. I welcome the opportunity to work on a cross-party basis on that issue, because we know how important it is to the people of Falkirk. I come to the crux of the debate. Two hours on, the Government has not properly explained how it plans to reform public services in Scotland. If it is not about cuts, what is it about?”
“With regard to the empowerment of communities, I recognise the hugely important role of development trusts, social enterprises, supported businesses and the voluntary sector in the delivery of services at a community level, which is why we talk about public service reform and not just public sector reform. Empowerment of communities is critical to public service reform.”
“We must consider how we deliver public services to ensure that families get the right support at the right time and in the right place for as long as they need it, and join up different parts of the system to focus on efficient and effective preventative support for service users. We know that, when services are designed in that way, we achieve better outcomes and better value for every pound that we spend. Achieving that requires significant change at both local and national levels in order to move away from one- size-fits-all approaches and siloed and crisis- driven responses towards the design and delivery of support for individuals and families that is more flexible, person centred and preventative.”
“Individuals should not have to navigate a maze of disconnected services in order to access the support that they need. Too often, people, and particularly those who are facing the greatest disadvantage, have to tell their story multiple times, undergo repeated assessments and deal with fragmented support. That is not good for people and it is not good for the system. It involves unnecessary duplication, stress and waste. Services must organise around the person and their family in order to understand what is important to them. Our commitment to whole-family support is a great example of place-based, person-centred change in action.”
“The Christie commission was established in 2011. We are talking about prevention, which was mentioned then, and about joined-up working, which was also mentioned then. What is going to be different this time? Ivan McKee: I do not know whether the member came into the debate late, but she should have heard the first part of my speech in which I listed a whole page of things that we have delivered on the back of the Christie work. However, we recognise that there is more that we need to do to take such work forward, and that is the whole point of the public service reform strategy. Of the four Christie principles—empowerment, prevention, integration and efficiency—this debate rightly focuses on the one that I believe underpins all the others, which is empowerment.”
“The work of the nursing and midwifery task force and the midwifery and neonatal task force will be important in ensuring that the review can build on those inspections. I am confident that we have an excellent and outstanding chair to lead that work and that she will be open to engaging with parliamentarians and, most importantly, all the communities that we seek to represent.”
“Will she ensure that there is a positive change in the number of those beds, to ensure that parents can stay with their babies who need specialised care? Angela Constance: Ms Gallacher makes an important point about the need to keep mothers with their babies, irrespective of the health needs of the children. We want to ensure that that happens as much as is conceivably possible, and I would be delighted to work with Ms Gallacher on that. I will follow up on the specific question that she has asked about the number of beds, their availability and where they are. What will be different about this review is that it will be on the back of seven Healthcare Improvement Scotland maternity inspections, and there are broad themes in relation to those.”
“Over the past 10 years, there have been three reviews of maternity and neonatal services. I do not believe that there is any joined-up thinking in this Government about its approach and how it will improve those services for mums and their babies. I want to raise an issue about the number of beds that are available for parents in neonatal wards. The work that was undertaken by Bliss Scotland shows that, for every 10 children who need specialised care, there is only one bed for parents who want to stay overnight. I worked with the previous minister on the issue and I am willing to work with the cabinet secretary. Will she give an update today on the number of beds that are currently available for parents?”
“We will, of course, analyse very carefully the findings of the court decision that Meghan Gallacher has referred to, which is a separate issue from that of the EHRC guidance. Youth Disorder (Summer Months) 5.”
“The Court of Session has just ruled against West Lothian Council in my region in finding that providing multi-user unisex toilets in a primary school amounted to indirect sex discrimination against female pupils. Therefore, will the Scottish Government implement the EHRC guidance in full without further delay and work directly with councils to ensure that they are not falling foul of sex discrimination law? Shirley-Anne Somerville: If Meghan Gallacher will forgive me for saying so, I think that she is confusing two different pieces of legislation. Maggie Chapman’s original question was about the Equality Act 2010 and the guidance that followed from that. There is an issue around the regulations on the provision of facilities in schools, on which the Scottish Government will undertake consultation and will look to update in due course.”
“As has been reflected, the development and co- development of guidance that has gotten us to this point has been helpful preparation for the next step that we will take together. Meghan Gallacher is absolutely right to highlight the difficulties and the potential harms of the online world, as I have done. We also need to remember that navigating the online world can provide communities for certain young people and can be an outlet for their needs in life, but they will not be able to navigate it well and get those benefits unless we help to protect them from the harms, which is exactly what we will do.”
“We are all aware of the negative impact that mobile phones can have on young people, from bullying to disruption and violence in our classrooms. The Scottish Conservatives have been calling for a ban on mobile phones in classrooms for quite some time. Does the cabinet secretary accept that teachers, parents and pupils have waited long enough for action? Does she understand that some might feel frustrated that, instead of action now, we have yet another consultation, which could mean that the can is kicked down the road? Màiri McAllan: I would reflect to Meghan Gallacher that the law in Scotland is as it stands, and the Government’s position has long been that we cannot unilaterally implement the policy nationwide without a change in the law.”
“I move amendment S7M-00128.4, to leave out from “acknowledges” to end and insert: “notes with concern that many families still face limited availability and choice of early learning facilities and high childcare costs, which is a barrier particularly for mothers seeking to return to work; understands that the funded childcare current model has resulted in wage inequalities, a severe decline in childminders and unfair distribution of funding between local authority-run nurseries and the private, voluntary and independent sector; believes that, should the Scottish Government wish to extend childcare policy, it should fix the current funding model and address staff shortages within the sector, and calls on the Scottish Government to publish a clear and properly-funded timetable for expanding childcare support from nine- months-old, with reassurances of working with the sector, detailing any learnings from the pilot scheme they said they would introduce in 2023.” 15:09”
“Before ministers make new promises, they must answer basic questions: who will deliver the expansion, where will it happen and how will it be paid for? Those are my concerns today, and I believe that we will probably address those issues later in the debate this afternoon. I welcome the approach so far from the cabinet secretary and I will take up the offer to meet her in due course.”
“If the Government wants the mixed- market childcare model to survive, the funding must absolutely follow the child fairly and sustainably because, without the PVI sector— Stephen Kerr: Would the member go as far as to say that, unless the disparity in funding is properly tackled now, the expansion, which we all support, will fail? Meghan Gallacher: When I entered the Parliament in 2021, one of the first issues that came across my desk was that the PVI sector did not feel part of the overall 1,140-hour package. That is why people were leaving the sector. Childminders did not want to remain part of the sector. That it is one of the issues that needs to be addressed urgently. I know that I am running out of time, Presiding Officer, but I am moving towards my conclusion.”
“If the Government is serious about expansion, it must confront the reality that is facing the private, voluntary and independent sector, which delivers a substantial proportion of childcare across Scotland. Too often, the PVI sector feels like an afterthought, despite being critical to delivery on the ground. Providers are struggling with rising costs, staffing shortages and Government guidance that does not reflect the economic position. There are also serious concerns about the unfair distribution of funding between local authority settings and the PVI sector, which Willie Rennie has already mentioned. That is not sustainable. We cannot continue as we are and then put an expansion on top of the current model.”
“If we are serious about growing our economy, childcare must be viewed as economic infrastructure that is every bit as important as transport or housing. Affordability is only part of the problem. Flexibility matters, too. Parents have repeatedly told me and my colleagues who have previously held the education brief that funded hours might exist on paper, but they are often delivered in ways that simply do not reflect the realities of working life. Shift workers, national health service staff, hospitality workers and parents with irregular hours cannot always make rigid nursery patterns work. I want to talk about some of the other issues that are currently faced not just by parents but by the sector.”
“To go back to the point that I was making, for some families, childcare costs now rival mortgage payments. Parents across the country have to cough up more than £1,000 a month to pay for childcare. When families sit down at the kitchen table to work out whether it is financially worth while for one parent to return to work, the answer is far too often that it is not. For mothers in particular, the choices can feel impossible. Some reduce their hours because childcare costs do not match working patterns. Others leave the labour market altogether because the cost of childcare wipes out much of their income. This is not just a family issue; it is an economic issue. When skilled workers are pushed out of employment, Scotland loses talent, productivity and economic growth.”
“I take the opportunity, early in the development of the policy, to acknowledge the importance of delivery, to put on record that it is what I want to happen, and to ask her whether she will work constructively with the Government so that, in a few years’ time, when the policy comes to fruition, the mothers who she is talking about can say that the Scottish Parliament, including Meghan Gallacher’s party, delivered for them. Meghan Gallacher: I said right at the start that I believe in expanding childcare. Later in my contribution, I will speak about what I believe it should be expanded to, but I am more than happy to meet the cabinet secretary on that. I believe that childcare is fundamental not just for parents and families but for our wider economy.”
“One statistic that I have pulled out today from the state-of-the-nation survey that Pregnant Then Screwed Scotland conducted should concern the Scottish Government: 66.8 per cent of Scottish mothers did not believe that the Scottish Government would deliver on expanding childcare provision. Behind that statistic is a simple reality. Parents feel that the system is not built around modern day life. Parents are doing everything that they can to stay in work, provide for their children and build a future for their families, but childcare costs are making that harder. Màiri McAllan: I hear Meghan Gallacher’s points about delivery and public trust.”
“I believe that there is an opportunity to reset relationships and work constructively across parties to find solutions. First, however, the Scottish Government must provide answers and explain—not just to parents but to the Parliament—why it failed to deliver the expansion that it had previously promised. Right now, too many parents simply do not trust that the Government can deliver. During the election campaign, I had the privilege of serving on a cross-party steering group led by Pregnant Then Screwed Scotland. Together, we discussed how childcare could better support parents, particularly mothers, and explored practical ways to improve the current system.”
“Thank you, Presiding Officer. I welcome you to your post. I also welcome the cabinet secretary to her post. I will begin on a point of consensus with the Scottish Government: I believe in expanding childcare provision across Scotland. Throughout the previous parliamentary session, I repeatedly called on the Government to expand the early learning and childcare from nine months onwards for working parents. In 2023, I believed that those calls had finally been heard when the then First Minister, Humza Yousaf, announced a pilot to expand childcare to children from nine months onwards. However, since that announcement, despite my trying repeatedly to establish what progress has been made, there has been little to no clarity on that point.”
“I note the Liberal Democrats’ desire for a focus on support for working families only. I understand the reasons behind that, and I want to work with them to better understand what they are looking to achieve. However, first, we cannot fail to understand the importance of childcare to finding and sustaining work. Secondly, it is important that we do not have a system that denies children whose parents are not working the important early learning opportunities that are provided, particularly if those might be the children who could benefit most from them. I say that as an early point of principle, but I look forward to working with the Lib Dems on such issues. As I have said to a number of members, as we develop the provision, we will draw on the successes of the 1,140 hours policy and be clear on the opportunities for improvement.”
“I commit to working on those issues as we develop the expanded offer. As my colleagues have stated, and as I maintain, the statutory guidance is clear that, whenever possible, families who access cross- border placements should be treated on the same basis as families who access local provision. I am sympathetic to the issue of when a three-year-old begins to receive the childcare, although we must take into account practical issues. For example, how manageable would it be for staff to have an intake every week or every day? Those are practical considerations, and I will work with the Greens and COSLA on such issues. On that basis, we will support the Green amendment. We will also support Labour’s amendment, and I look forward to hearing Labour members’ contributions.”
“To give members the details, although I am sure that they are acquainted with them, I should say that we want, by the end of this parliamentary session, to provide the choice of childcare support for every child in the country from nine months old to the end of primary school. Importantly, the support is to be provided for 52 weeks a year and will be designed to fit around families, rather than families being expected to fit around the system. I must say that it is a substantial project that will take a team Scotland approach. On the note of working together, I was really pleased to see that the importance of early learning and childcare featured in most of the parties’ election manifestos. I hear the concerns from Green colleagues about cross-border placements and the variation in funded ELC eligibility dates when a child turns three.”
“The Scottish Government announced in 2023 that it would expand funded childcare from nine months onwards. What progress has been made since that promise? Màiri McAllan: I was going to come to that later, but I will address it now. I will talk about some of the work that we have been doing in our priority communities. We have been working with our six priority families and testing the roll-out of childcare as it is needed in different circumstances, whether that is communities that are affected by poverty or children who have disabilities. We have been taking forward that work and it will inform the expansion of childcare.”
“I go back to the property value limit that has been put on the scheme; it is important to recognise the flexibility that that will provide, to ensure that others can benefit from other parts of the affordable housing supply.”
“Shirley-Anne Somerville: If that continues to be the Scottish Conservatives’ policy, and if the party wishes to take a different approach to forthcoming Scottish Government budgets and to have costed discussions about whether to take the tax away and the implications that that will have for spending, I am sure that the Deputy First Minister will be delighted to hear Meghan Gallacher’s detailed and costed proposals. As I said to Ariane Burgess, it is important to recognise that this is not only about support for first-time buyers—important though that is—but about the support that can be given to those who will then move into the private rented sector, mid- market rent housing or an affordable social home. We will design the scheme to ensure that it helps people.”
“I welcome the cabinet secretary back to her portfolio, which has been extended, and make a plea that Scotland’s housing emergency be prioritised. Analysis of the previous first homes fund found that around 68 per cent of buyers had household incomes that were above the Scottish median, which meant that the policy did not benefit people on lower incomes. We need immediate relief if we are to get people on to the housing ladder and tackle Scotland’s housing emergency. Does the cabinet secretary not agree that we can help those people now by backing the Scottish Conservatives’ idea to abolish land and buildings transaction tax for people buying their first home, because that would encourage aspiration and help people to get on to, and move up, the property ladder?”
“I call Neil Bibby, for up to five minutes. 14:45”
“If someone demonstrates that they cannot control their temper during tense parliamentary exchanges, they should not be handed the responsibility of negotiating sensitive parliamentary business again a few months later. The First Minister should know that it is wrong to reappoint Jamie Hepburn as business manager, because it sends completely the wrong message about standards, accountability and behaviour in the Government. Therefore, I urge all members to vote against that appointment at decision time. I move amendment S7M-00109.1, to leave out “Jamie Hepburn,”. The Presiding Officer: “Up to five minutes” usually means up to five minutes. It would also help if you spoke to your amendment at the start. Only about a third of what you said related to the amendment. In future, we will take a stricter view on such matters.”
“Nobody pursued that issue more persistently than Douglas Ross, who stood up for his constituents and repeatedly pressed the Government on what action it intended to take regarding the growing gull population. Nobody expected the extraordinary behaviour that Jamie Hepburn displayed during those exchanges. We all accept that Parliament is a place for robust debate, but business managers have a particular responsibility to maintain working relationships across the chamber. Their job is to lower the temperature, not to raise it, and to build consensus, not to fuel confrontation. During the altercation involving Douglas Ross and Jamie Hepburn, we saw behaviour that was entirely unbecoming of someone entrusted with that responsibility.”
“Perhaps the First Minister was trying to keep him out for as long as possible, because—let us be honest—everyone knows why Stephen Flynn is truly here. He is certainly not visiting Holyrood for its architecture. On a sincere note, I wish all cabinet secretaries and ministers the best in their new positions. Despite all the jokes that we will probably hear over the next few minutes, there are serious responsibilities at a serious time for Scotland. That brings me to the amendment in my name on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives. Members from across the parties will remember the debates in the previous session regarding the impact of gulls on communities throughout Scotland.”
“Now, we have a minister for cuts—perhaps more appropriately, and as he might become known over time, Ivan the Terrible—who will instil fear across Government departments as he bursts through the door, swinging an axe and looking for cuts in every nook and cranny that he can possibly find. The nationalists have promised more spending without saying where that money is coming from, which means that tax rises or spending cuts—or, indeed, a combination of both—are on the way. I welcome Stephen Flynn to the chamber. Can I just check with him whether he managed to get through the security gates okay this morning? It seems like the doors at Bute house can be tricky to open, but it is good to get some practice in, isn’t it?”
“Hidden under all those grand promises is a financial black hole that is estimated to be around £5 billion. The uncomfortable truth for SNP members is that they cannot endlessly announce Scandinavian levels of spending while delivering a Scottish level of economic growth. At some point, someone has to do the sums. That task now appears to have fallen to Ivan McKee, although I am not entirely sure that “Cabinet Secretary for Public Sector Reform” is the correct title. Throughout the election campaign, the Scottish Conservatives consistently pointed out that the SNP’s sums just do not add up.”
“It has somehow promised more spending, more subsidies, more childcare expansion, supermarket price controls, more quangos and more intervention—all while still claiming that it can deliver net zero on time and on budget. It acts like it has a magic money tree in the back garden at Bute house only for the new Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government to discover that the roots have rotted away. During the election campaign, the Scottish National Party treated the Scottish public to a never-ending parade of gimmicks and giveaways—free this, cap this, ban this and subsidise that. Every problem in Scotland was apparently to be solved by another taxpayer- funded announcement and another glossy press release. However, reality has now arrived.”
“It appears that John Swinney’s Government has been on the Mounjaro, because it is slimmed down in size, but it somehow carries all the same political baggage. To judge by some of yesterday’s appointments, the First Minister clearly knows how to recycle. We now have a Government in which the Cabinet looks exhausted already, and it has not even delivered its first programme for government. No matter how busy some of our cabinet secretaries might get— Màiri McAllan included—I am sure that they will always make time for calls from world leaders who are looking for advice on how not to run a country. The Government talks a big game.”
“I, Meghan Gallacher, do swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to His Majesty King Charles, his heirs and successors, according to law. So help me”