Michael Marra
Scottish Labour · Scotland
“I thank Jack Middleton for bringing the debate to the chamber. Its subject is of widespread concern, and will impact significantly on communities across the north of Scotland and in my North East Scotland region.”
“Indeed, the decline of quality local journalism that is embedded close to people is a tragedy. As many local newspapers face increasing issues with sustainability, it has become more, rather than less, important for the biggest companies and corporations to ensure that their journalism is rooted in communities.”
“More broadly, I believe—Jack Middleton has touched on some of this—that the decision is an act of surrender to what is a wildfire of commoditised fear that is weaponised by tech oligarchs to purposely undermine real freedom in pursuit of power and profit.”
“Although it is a commercial decision from STV, backed by the regulator to this point, it is also the latest example of what is becoming an ever- growing list of services being centralised away from communities in Scotland. Those in the north- east and further afield have, over the years, seen the same situation before.”
“The absence of regional journalism will only hasten that process, and whatever we might think, collectively, about the barrier and where the balance should sit, local people should have that accountability and the opportunity to make their case about where power is situated.”
“I welcome the hard work that Our Union Street is doing to re-energise Union Street and the centre of Aberdeen. The project is working along with partners to bring together a shared vision of the future of the city centre.”
The complete record
Every one of 754 lines we hold for Michael Marra, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 16.
“They are leading the news in our region, and I urge Ofcom and STV to think again and keep giving the communities in the north of Scotland the service that we need and deserve. 18:39”
“More broadly, I believe—Jack Middleton has touched on some of this—that the decision is an act of surrender to what is a wildfire of commoditised fear that is weaponised by tech oligarchs to purposely undermine real freedom in pursuit of power and profit. The locally trained ethical journalist in Aberdeen, Angus or Dundee will, in reality, be replaced not by a journalist in Glasgow but by an artificial intelligence server in orbit. That is the trend that we are seeing, and the direction that these processes are taking. If the decision goes ahead, it seems a long way back to real local representation in the news. I therefore stand in solidarity with the journalists in Aberdeen and further afield.”
“The absence of regional journalism will only hasten that process, and whatever we might think, collectively, about the barrier and where the balance should sit, local people should have that accountability and the opportunity to make their case about where power is situated. We are talking about not merely the loss of a news bulletin in the evening news, but something that is deeper. It is about the identity of the communities that I represent: their ability to connect with what is going on in their areas, to tell their stories and express themselves and to understand what is happening where they are.”
“Although it is a commercial decision from STV, backed by the regulator to this point, it is also the latest example of what is becoming an ever- growing list of services being centralised away from communities in Scotland. Those in the north- east and further afield have, over the years, seen the same situation before. On issues such as our core public services and where infrastructure spending is prioritised, it speaks to a worrying continuation of that recent story of devolution: that, while more powers are situated in Scotland, more power is taken out and too often centralised in the central belt instead.”
“Indeed, the decline of quality local journalism that is embedded close to people is a tragedy. As many local newspapers face increasing issues with sustainability, it has become more, rather than less, important for the biggest companies and corporations to ensure that their journalism is rooted in communities. Such locally rooted journalism is, to be frank, the only route to sustainability for journalism, because it is unique and irreplaceable. In my home city of Dundee, so rich in its history of journalism and its traditions that carry through to the excellent local and regional press that we still proudly host today, we will see the loss of our dedicated news from a national broadcaster in STV, and the opportunities that that creates.”
“I thank Jack Middleton for bringing the debate to the chamber. Its subject is of widespread concern, and will impact significantly on communities across the north of Scotland and in my North East Scotland region. The ongoing situation at STV has been a farce that has been rolling on for months, causing untold stress to the staff at the station as uncertainty over jobs has continued. The worry about what that means for communities in the north of the country rolls on, too. It is hard to think of a decision in recent times that has been more universally opposed. This Parliament, all parties, the National Union of Journalists, STV staff, the viewing public and many more have stood in opposition to the changes because we all know that quality local journalism matters.”
“I apologise for the fact that I am having to take part in the debate online. I thank Maggie Chapman for securing the debate—”
“The Government deserves to get a hard time from me and all other back- bench members, but we need to find a way of interacting and working in this place that does not extinguish the humanity of the individual whom we are questioning or, in the case of members of the Government, the individual whose question they are answering. That means saying what we mean and meaning what we say, letting our yes be a yes and our no be a no. It means that we need to have the humility—not something that politicians are often blessed with—to admit when we have gone too far, and to extend grace to others when they do the same. Not every one of us will manage that, and certainly not every day.”
“At the start of this session of Parliament, there have been warm words from many members across the chamber about the need to work together to cross political divides in the national interest, and so show people who are disaffected and disillusioned with politics that this place can be a force for good and can deliver tangible change in their lives. I whole-heartedly agree with those sentiments, but I wonder how long any of those lofty intentions will last before they are swallowed up in the day-to-day cut and thrust of political intrigue and partisan conflict. Too often, this place has failed in its duties to deliver genuine, principled scrutiny of Government—something on which our very democracy depends.”
“I thank the member for giving way—she is giving a very fine speech and tribute to Jo Cox. Has she been struck, in recent days, by what has been revealed by the BBC about the firebomb attacks that were made on the UK Prime Minister by another state? The purpose of those attacks was to divide people in Britain, and exploit the existing divisions, including through social media accounts online. That is a prime example of how the weakness in our political discourse can result in direct harm to our country. Jenny Young: I thank the member for that intervention, and I absolutely agree with him. We all need to be wise to the fact that there are outside influences, and indeed other nations, who intend us harm and are seeking to disrupt and influence our discourse. The point is certainly well made.”
“That will be achieved by having close, ongoing engagement on the ground. I will be happy to keep members updated and to engage with any members who want to discuss the matter further.”
“Having rejoined the regeneration portfolio, which I previously covered, my reflection is that what is of the utmost importance is not what ministers—or even members—think should happen, but is the utilising of the expertise of local communities. When we look at Our Union Street as a model, we see that the involvement of partners such as the chamber of commerce and the BID is integral to the success of the project. We see that in other examples of successful regeneration elsewhere in Scotland. At the heart of that success are community and business voices. I want to ensure that we are focused not just on the quantum of funding but on maximising its impact. That is about ensuring that we work constructively with local partners to ensure that every pound that is invested has the maximum impact.”
“I welcome the hard work that Our Union Street is doing to re-energise Union Street and the centre of Aberdeen. The project is working along with partners to bring together a shared vision of the future of the city centre. Can the minister say a little more today about how the Scottish Government will assist with the funding of that regeneration and the delivery of the shared vision that the partners are developing? Tom Arthur: I join Mr Marra in recognising the hard work of all those involved in Our Union Street. To date, we have committed £400,000 to the project and, today, I am announcing an additional commitment of up to £600,000, which will mean a total investment of up to £1 million. As I touched on in my statement, my officials have already met local partners, and we will continue to engage.”
“Those are practical things that the Government could be doing right now to set the framework on better footing. I look forward to the other contributions in the debate. I move amendment S7M-00309.3, to insert at end: “that the Scottish Government’s approach to public service reform should align with the principles of Community Wealth Building, Fair Work and the European Charter for Local Self-Government and the need to encourage economic growth, and calls on the Scottish Government to produce a detailed timetable for the reduction in the number of public bodies as part of a drive to reduce broader waste and to produce a holistic assessment of the impact of the public sector reform programme on Scotland's vital third sector.” 15:33”
“We could say much more about this agenda. It is a huge challenge. I absolutely agree with the cabinet secretary about the preventative aspect. Delayed discharge has cost this country billions of pounds because, under this Government, there was no reform of health and social care when it was clearly needed, on the basis of demographic trends. I will close by talking about the two practical things that we have asked for in our amendment. The first is “a timetable for the reduction in … public bodies”. After five years, I still trip over new ones every week, and I have no idea what they actually do. Secondly, we are looking for an understanding of the displacement effect of the withdrawal of public capacity in our third sector. It is vital that the Government explains that.”
“We need the Government to tell us something specific—what a service will look like or that a service will cease to exist—so that it can hang its hat on that and we can understand whether it is making progress, instead of its just talking about the fiscal savings. I think that that is at the heart of this. Change is, of course, not cost free. When the United Kingdom Labour Government was elected in 2024, I met the then Cabinet Secretary for Finance and said that that moment, with the significant increase in public investment, was a unique opportunity for rapid change. She looked at me as if I had walked out of a spaceship instead of the lift to the ministerial corridor because the very idea was a completely alien concept to the SNP. That is because the SNP was elected in 2007 on the basis of no reform, and it has pursued that for 20 years.”
“The cabinet secretary knows that I fundamentally believe in the empowerment of citizens. I have told him that my vision of a future Scottish state is very much one in which citizens are empowered, where they own and have control of their data and understand what is happening. However, that requires a broader vision of technological implementation, which I find lacking in the strategy. Willie Rennie was right to talk about prioritisation. If we do not understand what success would look like, it is really difficult for Parliament and the public to see whether any of this is working.”
“All we had from the cabinet secretary were some adjectives for what reform could look like, instead of a description of the shape of services that we absolutely require. I will give the example of health service reform. The recent division of boards into two regions— east and west—has been put in place without any real explanation. It came as a huge surprise to leaders in our national health service and it was imposed without any form of consultation with the trade unions. It did not meet fair work principles from the outset—it is a good example of how not to do reform. Whether there was a case to do it is not the question; the process that the cabinet secretary set out in the strategy and in his speech was not followed, and on that basis, we are concerned about it.”
“That is one aspect, of course; however, as I articulated in my opening remarks, the driver is to deliver excellent joined-up public services that are preventative in nature and to empower staff, communities and service users to help to do that. Michael Marra: I will say two things in response to that. First, I am sure that the cabinet secretary is a keen advocate for that, but I would believe him a bit more if we had not gone for 20 years without the Scottish National Party substantially reforming the public sector. There have been some reforms, but they clearly have not met the trends or achieved the scale of transformation that is required—I will come back to that. Secondly, I am afraid that if we do not have an idea of what is going on, that will result in a management consultancy strategy that is not very likely to gain public buy-in.”
“Using that gap as the animating principle of this programme is a dangerous place to start, because it can lead to the wrong decisions, driven by the greatest short-term savings rather than long-term efficiency or a vision of where the state might go. What we require is a sense of destination. What is the Government’s vision of a modernised Scottish state for the third quarter of the 21st century? I have never heard that, let alone seen it described. Ivan McKee rose— Michael Marra: If the cabinet secretary wants to tell me that vision, I will gladly hear it right now. Ivan McKee: Michael Marra talks about fiscal sustainability being the driver.”
“The cabinet secretary said that every pound that is saved can be reinvested in other purposes. I am not sure that I entirely agree. Most pounds that are saved will be used to close the £4.7 billion gap between the Government’s spending plans and what it can afford—between the spending trajectory that the cabinet secretary has set, along with his colleagues, and the amount of money that has been identified by the Scottish Fiscal Commission. That gap has led to three emergency budgets from the Government in the past four years. SNP members are late converts— principally on that basis—to the need for reform.”
“I am pleased to speak to the amendment in my name, in which we set out very clearly, as we did in the election campaign just a few short weeks ago, that Labour believes that our public services are in need of widespread, root-and-branch reform. We believe that the shape of the Scottish state needs to adapt to the reality of three accelerating major trends that our citizens are living with every day: demographic change, technological change and climate change. Where the change that the Government leads meets the core principles that we have laid out in our amendment, we will work with it constructively to deliver on it. However, I have to say at the outset that the Scottish National Party’s £4.7 billion fiscal gap will loom large in today’s debate in two significant ways.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of any impact of NHS Tayside’s recruitment freeze on patient care and waiting times across Dundee and the wider Tayside region. (S7O-00051)”
“I know that members will appreciate the efforts that the volunteers have put into pulling together that money, but they still have a distance to travel to ensure that that key facility in the centre of Aberdeen is brought back to life—not just for the enjoyment of citizens and their consumption of culture, but as a key contributor to driving the tourist economy and the night-time economy. It is absolutely critical: it has been the city’s only independent cinema and it is a key cultural draw. I would like to hear from the minister, when she is summing up, what more we can do to support not just Belmont but similar cinemas across the country.”
“Production skills in Scotland are more often delivered in a partnership model between further education—our colleges—and our schools, but we know that many of those partnership arrangements with colleges are under threat or have been retracted because of the funding model. We might want to consider whether Qualifications Scotland can deliver some of those skills more directly through our schools. In particular, I want to highlight the consumption end. I pay tribute to the Belmont cinema in Aberdeen and the campaign to restore it after its closure in late 2022. There has been a significant community campaign for that key project, which has raised £2.815 million to date.”
“That all loops back into the same process, because production requires prior consumption and inspiration among young people and older people, so that they can see themselves as having a place in that industry. They have to see it to be it. As Alyn Smith highlighted, the skills are significant, whether they are delivered through further or higher education. We should probably consider the evidence that was taken at committee in the previous session of Parliament about some of the school-level skills that might be an option for Scotland. In Northern Ireland, that is certainly the case.”
“The impact of those digital streaming platforms is significant and profound; it is driving diversity in content and disrupting the business models that were previously used by the industry. As a result of that, there are threats as well as opportunities. Quite often, in debates in the Parliament and in other places, people talk about some of the disruptive elements of online digital streaming and social media content creation and the threats that they can bring. However, at the same time, we have to be at the forefront of taking advantage of some of the opportunities. In doing so, it is vital that we consider the end-to-end process of creation, production and enjoyment.”
“I thank Alyn Smith for bringing the debate to the chamber; it is very welcome. As he outlined, the screen sector is very important for the whole of Scotland, and he rightly highlighted his own constituency’s particular assets in that respect. The sector makes a significant contribution to the Scottish economy—it is a modern industry in a content-hungry global economy. There is huge scope for growth globally in many other sectors, but it is right to highlight some of the key assets that we have in this country, whether that be our natural physical environment or being an English- speaking nation, which allows us to export our talent around the world through digital streaming.”
“The Deputy First Minister said that she met the Institute for Fiscal Studies last week to understand what learnings the Government might take. Will she tell us what those learnings are? Jenny Gilruth: We will have a follow-up meeting on that over the summer recess. There are a number of learnings in relation to health and social care, the use of technology and our use of capital across Government. We had an introductory meeting of around 30 minutes. I would be more than happy to come back to the member with further detail in that regard, because I want to continue that dialogue with the IFS. It is hugely important that we listen to it and that we act accordingly, given the extent of the challenge that members across the chamber recognise exists in relation to our budget. Pension Fund Assets (Affordable Housing Delivery) 5.”
“Labour welcomes the early opportunity to debate the scale of the fiscal challenge that the SNP has created for Scotland. The £4.7 billion gap between the spending trajectory that has been set by the Government and the income that the Scottish Fiscal Commission has projected will be generated is vast. How that gap is tackled will be the defining issue of this session of the Parliament, and it will affect everything else that we do. We might all wish that that process will involve arresting the decline in standards when it comes to the ability of our schools to best equip our nation’s children for their futures. Perhaps we could start by understanding why pupils in Scotland are a year behind those in England in mathematics. Such outcomes have long-term economic consequences.”
“Scottish income tax provides about 80 per cent of devolved tax revenues, and our policy choices since devolution have resulted in the most progressive income tax system in the UK. However, we want a tax system that is even more resilient and gives us a broader set of tools to respond to economic shocks and future fiscal challenges. We are already taking action where we can. We are delivering on our commitment to introduce air departure tax in April 2027 and, through this framework, we will introduce a private jet tax from April 2028. We know that private jets produce significantly more—”
“However, we are now reaching the limit of what we can do with our devolved taxation levers. The UK Government has the powers to tax wealth far differently than it has done, but it has chosen instead to take short-sighted decisions, such as the decision to increase employer national insurance contributions, which has damaged the economy and created additional pressures on public services. If the UK Government is not willing to instil fair and progressive change in that area, it should give the Scottish Government the powers to do more. In the meantime, we are determined to do all that we can with the limited powers that we have. That includes aiming for a better balance between taxation of labour, income and wealth.”
“This Government exists in a Parliament of minorities, so I recognise that we need cross-party support to allow reform to be delivered on council tax, but I also recognise that council tax is a regressive form of taxation. We will, therefore, publish analysis later this year that will help to form an evidence base to inform any wider reforms, subject to Parliament’s support. We have also given councils much greater flexibility to increase the charges for second and long-term empty homes, ensuring that, where housing is owned as a form of wealth rather than a lived-in home, more can be charged for it. On non-domestic rates, the basic property rate is the lowest it has been since 2018-19, and the small business bonus scheme remains the most generous of its kind in the United Kingdom.”
“Thanks to the decisions that were taken by the Government, more than half of Scottish taxpayers—as we heard during First Minister’s questions—are now expected to pay less income tax in 2026-27 than they would if they lived in England. We will keep it that way over the course of this session of Parliament. Unlike in other parts of the UK, our people will continue to benefit from free tuition, free prescriptions and no peak rail fares. Having applied that progressive approach to residential land and buildings transaction rates also ensures that those who buy the most expensive properties pay proportionately more tax. On council tax, we are continuing to work with local government to build cross-party agreement on the future of council tax in Scotland.”
“Yesterday, the First Minister and I met all senior civil servants in the Scottish Government to talk more to that mission. Next week, alongside Mr McKee, we will meet the leaders of our public bodies on exactly the same subject matter. The public finances are challenging, and I do not shy away from that reality. However, there are opportunities here for more efficient ways of working. There is cross-party support to reduce the number of public bodies in Scotland, and I am sure that colleagues will engage with Mr McKee directly on that. Colleagues who served in the previous session of Parliament will recall that we reinforced our commitment to ensuring that the public finances are on a sustainable footing through the medium- term financial strategy, which was published last June.”
“Rather, that economic growth creates the necessary conditions whereby child poverty can be eradicated. It is not growth for its own sake, but growth to help support our people. We are rightly focused as a Government on creating the conditions for that growth, by supporting good jobs, attracting investment and maintaining high-quality public services. That is exactly why, as I said to Mr Marra, the Government will support the Labour Party’s amendment. Ultimately, economic growth underpins all that we do in relation to fiscal sustainability. By boosting employment and investment, we expand our tax base, which in turn helps to fund the public services that our people rely on. We know that, alongside growing the economy, reform is essential. That is exactly why the First Minister has appointed Ivan McKee to lead this work at Cabinet level.”
“Mr Marra might be aware of some of the First Minister’s comments about our engagement, particularly with business, in recent weeks; I will come on to that. To give Mr Marra some comfort now, I will say that the Government will be voting with the Labour Party on its amendment to the motion today. More broadly, following the election, we need to look at engagement in the round and consider whether that is the best context. Without making a decision on my feet today, I give Mr Marra an undertaking that I will write to him. I was in a discussion with the First Minister earlier today on those matters, and I do not want to prejudge the outcome of that. We have to grow the economy—we all understand that—but the Government is not focused on tackling child poverty to the detriment of economic growth.”
“Will the Deputy First Minister take an intervention? Jenny Gilruth: I will take Mr Marra, but I am conscious of the time. Michael Marra: I appreciate that the Deputy First Minister has given way. In these matters, she and her predecessors have taken advice from a tax advisory group. Can she update us on the status of that group? Will it be maintained, and when will it next meet? Jenny Gilruth: I think that Mr Marra is referring to the Scottish Fiscal Commission. Michael Marra: No—the tax advisory group. Jenny Gilruth: Okay. I would like to come back to Mr Marra in greater detail on that. I met the Scottish Fiscal Commission earlier today and we will continue that engagement. However, we are looking at a range of ways in which we can better engage with businesses.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on whether there should be parity of access to justice for all former patients affected by the actions of Sam Eljamel, regardless of whether treatment was received through NHS Tayside or privately. (S7O-00018)”
“Both my party and the First Minister’s party are committed to vital support for ambitious capital works at Dundee and Angus College. The college leadership has waited for years for the Government to agree to a solution, and I can now confirm that the deadline to address reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete problems at the Kingsway campus in Dundee has been missed. What can the First Minister say about when we will finally get a decision from the Government?”
“North-east communities are acutely aware of the impact of climate change in this country, whether in regard to the crumbling sandstone in Dundee or the displaced people of Brechin. Climate change needs a solution urgently. Patrick Harvie: In that case, I invite Michael Marra to condemn the contribution that Tony Blair has made in recent days, calling for the abolition of net zero policies, and I invite him to encourage the UK Cabinet to give Tony Blair short shrift. Michael Marra: I have not read the piece by Tony Blair, but—”
“Across the chamber, we are acutely aware of the challenge to households and to industry, and we really need a serious plan in these difficult times when global price shocks are frequent and the constrained fiscal environment makes long- term decision making increasingly challenging. We, on the Labour benches, completely reject the climate denialism of Reform, which we have now heard in a couple of speeches. Duncan Massey: Will Michael Marra give way? Michael Marra: Excuse me—not at the moment. Man-made or human-made climate change is real, and it is devastating communities around the world. It is driving resource competition, and it is one of the key causes of migration, with which Mr Massey’s party is so obsessed. Stephen Kerr: Will Michael Marra take an intervention? Michael Marra: No, thank you.”
“The strike price has been higher than the wholesale electricity cost, apart from for a very brief period during the Russian invasion of Ukraine, so how can he justify that position in anything but his imagination? I say to Alan Brown that, unfortunately, the answer cannot be zonal pricing. He made a fine opening speech, and I forgive him for not knowing that Scottish ministers had ruled out zonal pricing. That had to be wrung out of them like blood from a stone—it took a period of months for them to take a position—but ruled out it was, because of the devastating impact that it would have on the renewables industry in Scotland.”
“The subsidy regime—whether the contracts for difference scheme, its predecessor, which was the renewable obligations certificate, or a more direct subsidy from taxpayers for the transition—is the cost of the hugely challenging but necessary energy transition, and it is being socialised across the whole of the UK. Unfortunately, the sloganeering of the election has given way to the sloganeering in this motion. The minister is absolutely right to raise the issue and to campaign on the price of energy. However, frankly, the promise of a one-third cut in prices under independence exploits people’s concerns. The minister was completely unable to justify those claims when I asked him to do so during his initial speech, so I hope that, in closing, he might be able to attempt that.”
“I will dispense with further sickly warm words for the minister—perhaps, like us, Mr Gethins, it is all getting a little bit old. I very much enjoyed the many first speeches from new members today. I make particular mention of Heather Anderson—the more Dundee the better. I am sure that she will be a mighty advocate for God’s gift to Scotland. The debate has come down to the future of the subsidy regime and whether the cost for that should be spread across 70 million taxpayers or 5.5 million taxpayers. The validity of the Government’s motion rests on that question above all others.”
“We have provided £150 million of investment, which will attract wider investment and create a funding stack of almost £900 million-worth of projects across”
“Yesterday’s Confederation of British Industry report showed that net zero-related industries are worth more than £10 billion, that they account for 5 per cent of Scotland’s total economic output and that they provide jobs for more than 100,000 people, as the member for Moray raised at First Minister’s question time. Those opportunities, which exist onshore and offshore, are set to grow. That could be game changing for Scotland, with around £100 billion of global capital expenditure coming down the track. Westminster is holding back that huge potential, not least through the punitive transmission charging charges that it has set, which business cited to me. The Scottish Government is doing everything that it can within its limited powers.”
“The benefit is not only to Scotland’s citizens. I will talk about the rest of my brief. Scotland is a responsible and outward-looking member of the European family of nations. Yesterday, my first meeting as part of my external affairs brief was with the Ukrainian consul general. Back in January, I sat in a bunker for two nights as the Russians bombarded Ukraine’s energy infrastructure. In a more dangerous world, Europe needs to move closer together. Parties that have turned their back on Europe ignore that at their— and our—peril. We are rich, and we should be thriving. We are part of Europe’s solution to the energy crisis. Other members will be glad to hear that I saw that for myself in Aberdeen, on my first ministerial visit on Monday. I am grateful to colleagues from across the sector for meeting me. Those businesses matter.”
“Will the minister give way? Stephen Gethins: I will give way for a second time, because I have great respect for the member. Michael Marra: I, too, welcome the minister to his position. I consider him a friend and am delighted to see him in his place. The minister spent the election campaign talking about how independence could deliver taking a third off energy bills in Scotland. Can he tell us how? Stephen Gethins: I have great respect for the member, and I thank him for his kind words. He is an advocate for the north-east and for Dundee. However, he must understand that, as we sit here exporting electricity while the Treasury in London benefits from it, we could introduce measures such as a social contract or a social tariff to help lower bills for those most in need. That is only one of the things that could be done.”
“Michael Marra: That certainly plays a role, and expanding the workforce can do that, but the basis of our growth in Scotland over the past 40 years has been additional inputs rather than innovation or total factor productivity growth. Stephen Kerr: Will the member take an intervention? Michael Marra: Are we getting time back under the new regime?”