Douglas Lumsden
Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party · Scotland
“That is absolutely shameful. Tim Eagle: Answer the question. The Presiding Officer: Let us hear one another. The First Minister: It is all very well for Mr Eagle to take issue with me on this question, but the real guilty parties on Brexit and its implications for agriculture are the Conservative Party and its activities, and the Conserva…”
“Back in November, I criticised the draft climate change plan for being yet another Scottish National Party propaganda pamphlet that was heavy on rhetoric and light on detail, and the full plan is more of the same.”
“Will the cabinet secretary apologise for finding the time to jet all over the world while failing to produce an energy strategy? When will the cabinet secretary come forward with more detail about the cost of the policies included in the plan, so that she can finally be honest with Scots about how much it will cost them?”
“The plan will also, as I have mentioned—and as has been said in an independent report—provide more than £8 billion in co-benefits, including through improvements in population health brought about by active travel, warmer homes and cleaner air.”
“If I am lucky enough to be back in Parliament and lucky enough to be still doing this job, I will continue to deliver on the plan, which will include working globally with other sub-national and national Governments that understand that the fundamental challenge of our time is decarbonisation.”
“Continuation of that support has been built into the new members’ expenses scheme, as the need for on-going additional support was recognised by the corporate body during its recent review of the scheme, prior to the new session.”
The complete record
Every one of 543 lines we hold for Douglas Lumsden, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 11 of 11.
“Will the minister give way? Jamie Hepburn: Presiding Officer, do I have time to give way briefly? The Presiding Officer: I call Douglas Lumsden. Douglas Lumsden: Will the minister go back to his counterpart in the UK Government to say that the Scottish Government is not happy with the process that is being followed and to try to improve things going forward? Jamie Hepburn: We have already communicated that. I assure Mr Lumsden that we recognise that we have arrived at a regrettable set of circumstances. I recall that, last week, Alasdair Allan spoke to the previous legislative consent motion that concerns the bill. I recognise Mr Lumsden’s point that we have debated the issue quite a lot in the past few weeks.”
“We need a commonsense strategy for our energy that puts our own resources and workers at its heart. This Government does not care about oil and gas and it certainly does not care about the people working offshore or in the supply chain. Oil and gas from the North Sea is good for Britain, good for Scotland, good for the environment and good for jobs. Let us drop the pretence that GB Energy will bring down bills, or be good for investment or for my constituents, because it simply will not. 16:52”
“They feel ignored and abandoned by the Government, which talks about engaging with communities but does not want to listen to them. They have real concerns, but are struggling to get answers. That is where the Scottish Government is also to blame. In the weeks since the last time that we had this debate, there has been no news on the energy strategy. That strategy is now years late. There is no strategy, no plan and no clue. That sums up this devolved Government. We are still working under the shadow of its presumption against new oil and gas, and its presumptions that we should import oil and gas rather than use our own resources, that we should protect jobs in Azerbaijan rather than in Aberdeen and that we should make ourselves poorer while we make the Saudis richer.”
“From what I can gather, it will add amendments on sustainable development. The definition of sustainable development is: “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. What about the future generations who will have their countryside ruined by the overindustrialisation that we are seeing? What about the future generations who will have prime agricultural land taken away and replaced by battery storage sites, substations or solar panels? Earlier this week, I met the Angus Pylon Action Group. It has asked to speak to Gillian Martin, but its request has fallen on deaf ears, as have requests from all other campaign groups. Members of the APAG are devastated by what they are facing.”
“We on this side of the chamber understand that, and Unite the union understands it. Like Unite, I will fight for my constituents and to save the jobs of the North Sea oil workers. It is shameful how few Labour MSPs have signed up to Unite’s campaign. It is a party that is meant to stand up for workers. Instead, it is siding with its donors and Just Stop Oil. Like GB Energy itself, the process that we are being asked to follow in approving the LCM is a joke. We had an LCM a couple of weeks back and a supplementary one was lodged on Monday, which—as the convener said—gave no time for the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee to scrutinise the impact before the Parliament makes the decision today. That is complete disrespect for this Parliament. It sounds as though we might have another LCM coming next week. What will the LCM change?”
“In case he is not aware of the way in which legislation works, I note that the bill is not yet passed, and that GB Energy will not be able to be up and running until it is passed. Perhaps he wants to reconsider his language somewhat. Douglas Lumsden: It is fraudulent when we are promised 1,000 jobs but the chair of GB Energy then says, “Well, those jobs will perhaps come in 20 years’ time.” That is what I call fraudulent: it is a joke. We have Labour and the SNP—two partners in crime—determined to destroy the countryside with pylons, and both turning a blind eye to the desecration of the north and north-east of Scotland. We have Labour and the SNP—two partners in crime—determined to destroy the oil and gas industry and, with it, tens of thousands of well-paid jobs. It is common sense not to have a ban without a plan.”
“It is a pleasure to speak to the motion, which is on my favourite topic—the myth that is GB Energy. GB Energy will do nothing for my constituents. It is a fraudulent front that seeks to rob hard-working oil and gas workers of their livelihoods. What is worse is that my constituents are expected to be grateful for GB Energy being based in Aberdeen, for new pylons covering the countryside and that they were promised 1,000 jobs, only for the chair of GB Energy to roll back on that commitment and tell us that it might be 200 jobs over the next five years. We were told before the election that GB Energy would reduce bills, but what we see is bills increasing. I will give way to Daniel Johnson to tell us when bills will decrease. Daniel Johnson: The word “fraud” has a very precise meaning. Perhaps Douglas Lumsden could explain his use of it.”
“I move, That the Parliament agrees that all relevant provisions of the Great British Energy Bill, introduced in the House of Commons on 25 July 2024 and subsequently amended in relation to sustainable development (clause 7A) on 11 February 2025, so far as these matters fall within the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament and alter the executive competence of the Scottish Ministers, should be considered by the UK Parliament. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call Edward Mountain to speak on behalf of the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee. 16:43”
“We are engaging with the UK Government—I believe constructively—on funding priorities across the spectrum of Scottish clean energy interests to ensure that Scottish projects will benefit from GB Energy funding in 2025-26 and beyond. In discussions with the UK Government, I and the acting Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero and Energy have been clear that GB Energy must deliver real benefits for the people of Scotland and support a just energy transition. It certainly has the potential to do that.”
“I hope that members will therefore appreciate that the Scottish Government shares some of the concerns that have been expressed and that those concerns have been communicated to the UK Government. On the substance of the UK bill, I am aware that there is a considerable level of interest in how GB Energy will operate. In the past few months, in parallel with our legislative discussions, my officials and I have worked with the UK Government to establish how GB Energy can help Scotland to seize the boundless opportunities that the energy transition will have here. Despite already having a strong pipeline of clean energy and growing supply chain opportunities, there are still so many opportunities for Scotland to grasp as we advance our position as one of the world’s leading countries in renewable energy production.”
“The lack of time that is afforded to the Scottish Parliament to scrutinise the amendments is the result of decisions on timing taken by the UK Government due to the speed at which the bill is moving through the UK Parliament towards royal assent. I have raised those points with UK ministers and I have emphasised the importance of the Scottish Parliament and its committees having sufficient time to consider matters. I also made it clear that amendments being made at an extremely late stage in the UK bill’s parliamentary passage make it extremely challenging to facilitate the Scottish Parliament’s consideration of motions on legislative consent ahead of the bill getting royal assent.”
“Will the member take an intervention? Alasdair Allan: I have to make progress in the little time that I have available. It is important to note that the Scottish Government was given very little notice of the tabling of the amendment dealing with clause 6A, and that was also the case with the clauses that are covered by today’s supplementary LCM. I note the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee’s concerns about not having sufficient time to scrutinise today’s LCM. I will be clear that the Scottish Government recognises the importance of Parliament having sufficient time to scrutinise legislation—indeed, we share the committee’s concerns on that point.”
“Published in Edinburgh by the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body, the Scottish Parliament, Edinburgh, EH99 1SP All documents are available on the Scottish Parliament website at: www.parliament.scot Information on non-endorsed print suppliers is available here: www.parliament.scot/documents For information on the Scottish Parliament contact Public Information on: Telephone: 0131 348 5000 Textphone: 0800 092 7100 Email: sp.info@parliament.scot”
“We will continue to work with Police Scotland and other SPARC partners to develop and implement strategies to combat those perpetrating such crimes. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Thank you, minister. That concludes the debate. Meeting closed at 17:53. This is the final edition of the Official Report for this meeting. It is part of the Scottish Parliament Official Report archive and has been sent for legal deposit.”
“We are also providing almost £57 million in additional resource funding, which is an increase of 4 per cent compared with the 2024-25 published budget. That will support front-line service delivery and allow Police Scotland to make progress in key areas of transformation as outlined in its three- year business plan, which includes a strong commitment to delivering the best service for communities around Scotland, including those in rural areas. I have made clear to members the sometimes devastating impact that rural crime can have on our farming and rural communities. I hope that the information that I have provided today gives members some assurance that the Scottish Government will not be complacent.”
“In January 2024, the total reported rural crime figure was £221,675, but the recovered total at that point was only £16,500. Therefore, I hope that members can see that there has been a small but positive step in the past year. The method of working with the SPARC model has proven so successful that Police Scotland is using it as the template for the Scottish partnership against acquisitive crime—known as SPAACE—which was created around 18 months ago to bring a partnership approach to preventing a number of forms of theft and fraud. It is at the forefront of efforts to tackle retail crime, which members have heard me talk about in the chamber previously. On our support for Police Scotland more broadly, in 2025-26, the Scottish Government will increase police funding to £1.62 billion to support police capacity and capability.”
“However, there have been some positive strides forward in relation to both the number of crimes reported and the associated cost of this crime on rural communities. Police Scotland’s recent update on the work of SPARC highlights that in January 2025, a total of 69 rural crime incidents were reported, which is a decrease—albeit a small one—in the number of reported incidents across Scotland, with nine fewer reported crimes and offence incidents compared with the same period last year, when there were 78 crimes. Where we see a clear difference in relation to the reduction in rural crime is in its total cost. In January 2025, that cost totalled £188,250, with a total of £44,400 having been recovered. That is a decrease in the monetary value of rural crime compared to the same period last year.”
“Earlier, we heard from Tim Eagle about fly- tipping. Is fly-tipping one of the priorities that was listed, and what actions is the Scottish Government taking to reduce fly-tipping in rural areas? Siobhian Brown: There are seven areas—I have them written down. Fly-tipping is one of the priorities of that strategy. SPARC and the local partnerships also demonstrate crime prevention measures in relation to the marking, tracking and securing of farm machinery and tools, including in the most highly impacted areas. I fully appreciate that such theft is a significant concern to our rural communities and that it can have serious consequences for the agricultural sector in terms of cost and confidence.”
“She has undertaken a transformative amount of work to ensure that the Government and our agencies are all engaged with industrial sectors on key opportunities. I value enormously speed of decision making in Government, and I want to make sure that we can take decisions quickly—once due diligence has been undertaken, because it is vital that due diligence is undertaken in all circumstances. I assure Mr Lumsden that the Government acts with pace in its decision making on those questions.”
“I welcome the announcement that ScotWind money will be used to support the workers of Grangemouth. Those workers have done so much over the decades to keep our country powered up and moving, and it is right that we support them as much as we can. In his statement, the First Minister said that the funding will be available immediately in the new financial year to support businesses and stakeholders to bring forward investable propositions. Will he give more detail on what governance arrangements will be put in place to evaluate the propositions and to make the awards? Will he assure Parliament that any process that is put in place will act swiftly, to avoid any gaps in employment? The First Minister: As I said, the Deputy First Minister leads the Government’s activities on investment.”
“The devolved SNP Government likes to talk about how we are the Saudi Arabia of renewables. What a lot of hot air. Why do we not talk about using all the oil and gas infrastructure that has been built up over years and generated billions in tax profits?”
“The Labour Party wants to carpet bomb the countryside with pylons and substations, and the SNP devolved Government is only too happy to supply the ammunition. We need to drill more wells, issue more licences and extract more oil. The economically illiterate socialists on the other side of the chamber, supported by the extremist, unhinged Greens, have tried for years to destroy the livelihoods of my constituents. No one in Aberdeen is buying it. The pathetic and desperate attempts to throw the words “just transition” in front of everything that we do in relation to wind turbines and battery storage do not wash with my constituents in Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire. Oil and gas from the North Sea are good for Britain, good for Scotland, good for the environment and good for jobs.”
“Maybe it does not have a plan of its own. The energy strategy and just transition plan is years late, and it is still nowhere to be seen. The devolved Scottish National Party Government seems content to agree to the motion even though the details of GB Energy are so thin on the ground. We already have applications for developments in the North Sea that will provide 30GW of energy. GB Energy will have no impact on that investment, so I have to ask: what is the point? It is a political bung that is being provided in an attempt to placate the residents of Aberdeen. How will all that energy be transported? It will be transported by destroying our countryside and communities with monster pylons.”
“GB Energy is a sham. The Prime Minister is taking my constituents for fools. The structure of GB Energy is absurd, and it will take 20 years to deliver the promised 1,000 jobs. In the next five years, we can expect, at most, 200 jobs to be created. The UK Government’s plan is not a credible plan for economic growth. Instead, it represents 20 years of pain and decline for the north-east of Scotland. Tens of thousands of jobs will be lost as Labour shuts down the oil and gas sector without offering a meaningful replacement. Labour is blatantly attempting to hoodwink the public. Before the general election, Ed Miliband promised to cut energy bills by £300 through Labour’s net zero policy. What rubbish. Where is that promise now? Why would the Scottish Government wave through the legislative consent motion?”
“To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to the Court of Session’s decision regarding the Rosebank oil field and the Jackdaw gas field. (S6F-03781)”
“How are MAT services working in partnership with the residential rehabilitation providers to create seamless pathways from medication assisted treatment to abstinence- based recovery? Are there established protocols or referral systems in place to facilitate that transition? Neil Gray: As we expand our residential rehabilitation capacity, we need to get clarity and ensure that those pathways are robust. That is part of the capacity building that we must deliver. I will provide greater detail on that to Douglas Lumsden in writing. The Deputy Presiding Officer: That concludes this item of business. Addressing Child Poverty through Education”
“That concludes the debate, and I suspend this meeting of Parliament until 2 o’clock. 13:24 Meeting suspended. 14:00 On resuming— Portfolio Question Time Social Justice”
“It is important that we retain the skills and talent of women and girls in STEM jobs once we have sparked that interest, and we are funding Equate Scotland, through the equality and human rights fund, to support women’s recruitment to, retention in, return to and success in STEM jobs, where they are significantly underrepresented. The fact that I am a minute and a half over my time illustrates the number of comments that could be made about the issue. I invite colleagues across the chamber to take the matter up in a different forum to consider the data and what we can do jointly. I thank you for your discretion with the time, Presiding Officer, and I thank Michelle Thomson for bringing the debate to the chamber. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Thank you very much, Deputy First Minister.”
“A number of new and innovative women-led businesses have been supported through that. I appreciate that I am out of time, Presiding Officer, but, if I may, I want to make a short comment about education. Pam Gosal said that education is key, and that is quite clear. We need a pipeline of founders and people with the right mix of skills. Today’s young people are the entrepreneurs of the future. The young STEM leader programme gives young people in Scotland the chance to become STEM role models and to inspire their peers to develop an interest. That is key when it comes to inspiring women to get involved.”
“There is record funding of £2.6 million this financial year to widen participation in entrepreneurship through delivery of the pathways fund and the South of Scotland Enterprise pre- start regional pilot, and that funding will increase to at least £4 million in the next financial year. The Techscaler programme, our £42 million national programme for creating, developing and scaling tech start-ups, has active partnerships with organisations explicitly focused on supporting female entrepreneurship, such as AccelerateHER. It works in partnership to run hackathons and focused development events to address challenges such as reducing carbon emissions and advancing clean technologies, providing a platform for female-led ventures in clean energy, transport and legal tech.”
“More women are seeing and seizing the opportunities of entrepreneurship; indeed, the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2024 report highlights the parity in levels of early entrepreneurial activity for the first time in Scotland. The growth that the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor has set out reflects years of work by many across the chamber and by organisations such as Women’s Enterprise Scotland, whose research has prompted today’s debate. There is more to do to ensure that women-led businesses are able to prosper beyond the start- up stage, to become established, sustainable and thriving businesses and to secure the funding and investment needed to grow and scale. I am responding to today’s debate, because I lead the work to implement the recommendations of Ana Stewart’s report, “Pathways: A New Approach for Women in Entrepreneurship”.”
“Sarah Boyack: I ask the Deputy First Minister to read Close the Gap’s submission, which addresses all those issues and highlights how we need to do more. Kate Forbes: That is great—I will happily do so. Perhaps that confirms my point. I get a little bit nervous when people identify a strategy that has yet to be published as holding the answers, when, actually, we kind of know what we need to do, even on the basis of the stats that have been shared today. I want to identify some of the work that needs to be done and which has been done. Michelle Thomson acknowledged the progress that has been made in recent years in closing the gender gap in business start-ups and participation.”
“I agree that much of this has to be involved in the just transition. Obviously, we are still waiting for the energy strategy and just transition plan. Will this issue be covered in the plan, and will we see the plan this financial year? Kate Forbes: Sarah Boyack spoke in similar terms about putting a lot of store in the energy strategy, which I gently suggest is the wrong approach. We know a lot of what we need to do right now with regard to the just transition plan, which I do think should be conscious of skills. I imagine that the energy strategy will be the subject of extensive debate. Sadly, though, I imagine that the support for women that is or is not in the plan will probably get very little attention, considering some of the other issues that it raises.”
“The cabinet secretary, Gillian Martin, is perhaps unaware of that, given that she has never met with any of the 20 community groups in the north-east that have been established to oppose the pylon plans, even though the First Minister said that ministers would engage.”
“Up and down Scotland, including in my region, rural communities are being threatened by developments that, as one campaigner describes, are “bulldozing through the north east”. Energy companies want to destroy our countryside to reward their shareholders, and the Scottish ministers are complicit in it. I am not the only member of the Scottish Parliament representing a rural area whose inbox is full of constituents who are rightly concerned about the impact that planning legislation changes will have on their ability to protect their land and communities. The plethora of pylons that has been promised throughout the north and south of Scotland is causing locals a great deal of concern, with many community meetings, and community groups campaigning, on the issue.”
“That waiting time has come down thanks to a new ambulance, which was delivered due to the hard work and campaigning of former MP David Duguid, who ran an excellent campaign to have an ambulance based in Turriff. That means so much to the local residents, and I commend him for all the work that he did on that. Geography will, of course, always be a challenge when communities are spread far over wide areas, but this devolved SNP Government needs to do more to reduce rural inequalities and halt the problem of rural depopulation. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I thank all colleagues for their co-operation in allowing me to call everybody who wanted to speak, and to allow them at least four minutes to speak. With that, I call Neil Gray to conclude the debate. You have around seven minutes, cabinet secretary. 18:12”
“To make things worse, rural patients are often confused about when local hospitals are open and what services they offer. Turriff hospital, for example, used to have a minor injuries unit, but it was scaled back during Covid and has never been fully restored. From looking at the NHS Grampian website, I am no clearer about what services it now offers. I also want to raise the issue of ambulance waiting times. I am sure that, as I certainly have, members who represent Scotland’s rural regions will have heard awful stories from constituents who have faced agonising waits for an ambulance. Last year, patients who were waiting for an ambulance in Turriff faced a wait that was nearly three times longer than the waits that were experienced by other north-east patients.”
“Those of us who represent rural communities are all too aware of the challenges that residents in those communities face in accessing healthcare. Those challenges can be found in all corners of north-east Scotland. Tim Eagle’s motion highlights how many of Scotland’s rural communities are facing a reduction in services. That is exactly what we are seeing in Aberdeenshire, with a significant reduction in minor injuries services in Fraserburgh, Peterhead, Huntly and Turriff. That is doing nothing to help local residents and is only increasing the pressure on staff and resources in larger hospitals, such as Aberdeen royal infirmary, which recently declared a major incident and is actually turning people away. What an absolute shambles has been created by this devolved SNP Government.”
“It is an embarrassment that Edinburgh, Glasgow and Aberdeen airports are not connected to the rail network—something that is even more frustrating when we consider how close to those airports the railway lines are. I have a final point to make about airports. Some years ago, the Scottish Government was looking to get air passenger duty devolved but seemed to bottle it when the Greens started pulling the strings. The devolution of APD would surely be a great opportunity to make Scottish airports more competitive and would be a lever that we could use to boost economic growth. I thank Ash Regan for securing a debate on a topic that is vital to Scotland’s future prosperity, and I urge the Government again to allocate Government parliamentary time to transport and energy infrastructure, so that we can debate those topics fully. 13:14”
“The A96 was meant to be dualled by 2030, which would help to maximise the economic potential of the freeport, but that is another broken promise from this SNP Government. As has been said, the A9 was meant to be dualled by this year, but that improvement will now be at least 10 years late, which is another broken promise that means that more economic benefit will be lost. People in North East Scotland have had enough of the SNP’s spin and broken promises. They want to see commitments being delivered. We are in budget season, and improvements to road, rail and air hardly get a mention, but connectivity is important to the economic growth that will create jobs and deliver increased revenue for us all to spend on public services. Ash Regan was right to highlight the lack of integrated travel.”
“The SNP promised that £200 million would be spent on rail improvements to reduce journey times between the city and the central belt by 2026, and that project was backed by the Aberdeen and Grampian Chamber of Commerce because it would boost economic growth. However, the SNP abandoned that pledge and has supplied only 8 per cent of the funding. We have improved port facilities at Fraserburgh and Peterhead, and there was an SNP promise to dual the roads from Aberdeen to those places, but that project has also been dropped. Fraserburgh and Peterhead have no rail links, so they deserve decent road infrastructure. There is to be a freeport on the Cromarty Firth to support the renewables sector, and much of the supply chain and skills for that will be in Aberdeen.”
“Infrastructure connections are the veins of our economy, spreading life and jobs to all corners of Scotland and allowing all areas to grow and prosper. That was known by the devolved SNP Government of the past, but the situation has changed completely and I am not sure why. Fergus Ewing pointed out that the Government used to do that but that the situation has changed completely in the past four years. Let us take Aberdeen as an example. We have seen a huge private investment of £300 million in Aberdeen south harbour. It is a brilliant deepwater facility, but the planned infrastructure improvements to the city have not kept pace to maximise its economic potential.”
“I congratulate Ash Regan on securing today’s debate and commend her for the wording of the motion, which provides something for everyone in terms of location, by mentioning Edinburgh, Glasgow and Aberdeen, and in terms of connectivity, by including road, rail and air while also highlighting how important connectivity is to our economy and communities. That infrastructure is just as important as energy infrastructure, which is why it is disappointing that the Government does not bring those topics forward for debate in Government time. I can understand why the Government did not want to talk about subjects such as air travel and roads when it was shackled to the Greens, but the anti- growth, anti-aircraft, anti-car extremists have been ditched from Government, so those subjects should be at the top of the agenda again.”