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 3 of 11.
“If it had been, I am sure that Sue Webber would have spent four minutes talking about Winchburgh station. She also highlighted the value of the logistics industry and spoke about the lack of rest stops, which will become more important as we move towards electric or hybrid HGVs or hydrogen vehicles. On the lack of toilet facilities, Emma Harper made the point very well: we would not put up with a lack of facilities in this building, but that is what we are asking our logistics drivers to do day in, day out. The Labour proposal to charge EVs 3p per mile seems a bit of a back-of-a-fag-packet policy, to be honest. It would hammer rural drivers, and I have no idea what would happen if you were driving a hybrid vehicle—whether you would have to pay double.”
“We are used to broken promises from the SNP, whether it is on dualling the A9, the A96 or even, as once promised by Alex Salmond, the A90 between Aberdeen and Peterhead. Whatever happened to that promise? There has been no mention of that promise by the cabinet secretary today. The sad reality is that these delays and broken SNP promises are leading to deaths on our roads and in our rural communities. Sadly, the Parliament is becoming numb to the repeated deaths that happen week in, week out. This is not good enough, and this SNP Government needs to realise that it is to blame. Jamie Greene highlighted the lives that have been lost on the A9. The number of deaths would be less if the Government had stuck to the timescale that it had promised. There were questions about whether this should have been a wider debate.”
“The SNP has now promised a refined package for the route. The refined package, which is more of a regressed package, is not much use when you are a business trying to move your goods between Inverness and Aberdeen, and it does not help rural communities, who are left wanting—unconnected and struggling to access the rest of Scotland safely. The SNP says—it has repeated it today— that it supports the dualling of the A96. If that is the case, come back with a timescale and a plan, so that we can all see it. Over the past four years, all that it has done is kick the can down the road. It is all too wishy-washy, just like the SNP’s amendment to the motion. There are bits of the amendment that I agree with, but it makes no commitments on the projects that we highlight in the motion, which is why we cannot support it.”
“The variety of MSPs who have spoken today make it very clear that the problem with our roads is an issue from the very north to the very south of Scotland. Whether you are in the north-east or the south-west, our trunk road system is not fit for purpose for today’s needs. If we are to encourage growth, build economic prosperity and make the most of our industries, we need a road network that meets our ambitions and requirements. It is not just an economic issue. As I mentioned earlier, it is a matter of life and death. Today, we have heard of the tragic consequences of our poor roads and the undualled A9, A96, A75 and A77. We have heard about families left devastated and communities rocked when people are killed and injured on our roads. Back in 2011, the SNP first promised, in its manifesto, to dual the A96 by 2030.”
“I thank colleagues from across the chamber who have so clearly set out the challenges that our road networks face. I want to start by acknowledging the very real and life-changing consequences of not getting our road infrastructure right. Tragically, last weekend, two of my constituents, both just 24, died as a result of a crash between the Toll of Birness and Mintlaw. They were a young couple with so much life ahead of them, and their deaths are all the more tragic because of the dangerous nature of the roads north of Aberdeen. Those of us who live and work there know that it is dangerous, and we will continue to call on the Government to make safety improvements. That is why I brought this debate to the chamber: to make our roads safer and to save lives.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the economy secretary has had with ministerial colleagues on how its internal modelling of oil and gas jobs in the north-east compares with the latest industry estimates. (S6O-05261)”
“Yes or no? Jenny Gilruth: I repeat that I have set out the interventions that the Government has taken in relation to the budget, and those interventions made through the budget last year have led to an increase in teacher numbers this year, for the first time since 2022.”
“To ask the Scottish Government how it is supporting skills development to promote the future of the north-east fishing industry. (S6O- 05256)”
“Let me say it again: we did not support either the extension of the levy to 2029 under the previous Tory UK Government or the further extension to 2030 and the increase in rate that were confirmed in last year’s UK autumn budget. That is having a devastating effect on the sector in North East Scotland and in the rest of Scotland. The levy needs to be scrapped, and it needs to be scrapped now. The Presiding Officer: That concludes general question time. First Minister’s Question Time 12:00 Grooming Gangs Inquiry 1.”
“The UK budget was a hammer blow to the north-east of Scotland and the oil and gas industry. However, it is now nearly three years since the Scottish Government announced its presumption against oil and gas developments. In that time, it has refused to support Rosebank, Cambo and Jackdaw. The Scottish National Party Government is complicit in thousands of jobs being lost in the north-east, so will it commit to publishing its energy strategy and just transition plan before the end of the year and finally show some support to our oil and gas workers? Shona Robison: We did not support the extension, under the previous Tory UK Government, of the energy profits levy until 2029, nor—[Interruption.] The Presiding Officer: Let us hear the cabinet secretary. Shona Robison: I am not sure that members quite heard that, Presiding Officer.”
“I move amendment S6M-19895.4, to leave out from “UK Budget” to end and insert: “delivery of a successful Scottish economy depends on stability in the UK public finances and a long-term plan to invest for future growth; recognises the challenging global circumstances, including the continued threat of tariffs, which create uncertainty and risk deterring investment and dampening growth; notes with concern that lower earnings and employment growth in Scotland compared to the rest of the UK are reducing the impact of tax policy in Scotland; agrees with the Auditor General for Scotland that ‘the Scottish Government has not set out clearly enough how it plans to address this economic challenge in future years, and what this would do to support fiscal sustainability’, and calls on the Scottish Government to work in proper partnership with the UK Government to deliver stability, long-term growth and prosperity across Scotland.” 16:19”
“Will the member give way? Michael Marra: No, thank you, sir. The Deputy Presiding Officer: The member is about to conclude. Michael Marra: Populists of every political stripe might pretend that there are shiny, easy answers to the challenges that are facing our country, but serious, decent people know that there are not. The hard work of governing is to deal with the world as it is and to work to make it better.”
“The gas plants, the pipelines and the terminals are all at risk.”
“I was at a meeting last night about Mossmorran, and I was told that the reasons for closure are Government policies. The plant pays carbon tax of £20 million per year, with that amount due to double. It has high energy costs and there is less ethane available because of the North Sea shutdown. We were told that the ethylene that Mossmorran produces is 50 per cent more expensive than that of its competitors abroad. How can the plant compete in that market? When global companies are choosing to walk away from Scottish energy and manufacturing because policy is hostile and uncertain, that is not a transition—it is economic vandalism. We should brace ourselves for more, because as Governments force the decline of home-grown hydrocarbons, more and more large pieces of infrastructure will become unviable.”
“I have met many energy companies over the past few weeks—I guess that the Cabinet Secretary for Climate Action and Energy has done so as well, but no one from the Labour Party ever seems to attend the meetings that are called. The energy companies tell me time and again how bad things are, that they are not replacing people who leave, their order book is reducing, they are focusing on work overseas, they are moving their skills overseas and they are downsizing and getting rid of offices. The sad and frustrating part is that that decline is self-inflicted and driven by political policy. It is a classic case of shooting ourselves in the foot. It is not just the north-east that is suffering—the news from Grangemouth and Mossmorran is a result of the North Sea contracting, with less product flowing to them.”
“Today is a really dark day for the oil and gas industry and for the north-east of Scotland. We have seen headline after headline in The Press and Journal this week on the damage that the energy profits levy is having. I assure Labour Party MSPs that that was not scaremongering— we must all brace ourselves for what is coming next. My party has called it an “oil and gas emergency”, and that is by no means overdramatic. It is an emergency, and we need to brace ourselves for a tsunami of job losses across the sector after today’s budget. As the Office for Budget Responsibility revealed earlier, the EPL will remain, but the intake from it is tailing off dramatically as it kills off the industry and thousands of jobs with it. It is completely wrong.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what progress it is making on reducing audiology waiting lists at NHS Grampian. (S6O-05204)”
“Gillian Martin: The sectoral marine plan is underpinned by comprehensive impact assessments that identify opportunities and constraints for development. Those assessments are informed by the latest scientific evidence and extensive stakeholder engagement, including that from the fishing sector.”
“We have a fundamental role to play in managing the marine space. We are clear that the expansion of offshore wind must be achieved sustainably and with the consideration of other industries. The sectoral marine plan, which we are currently updating in consultation with all interested parties, is underpinned by comprehensive impact assessments that identify opportunities— [Interruption.] Deputy Presiding Officer, It is very difficult to deliver the answer. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I get that. Please resume your seat for a second. I am a bit weary of all the sedentary chit-chat. When a member has the floor, that is the member whose voice we want to hear. We do not want to hear any other voice.”
“It is a little bit strange that an energy spokesperson from another party, who would like to be standing where I am right now, would completely and utterly miscall a huge part of the energy sector and not give it support. It is astonishing that someone who represents the north-east, and who wants to continue to represent the north-east, would say to the people of that area that he is not interested in the future of the North Sea’s floating offshore wind or offshore wind. [Interruption.] The Deputy Presiding Officer: Mr Lumsden. Gillian Martin: It is a very strange attack, but I am not in the business of giving political advice to Douglas Lumsden. I meet representatives from the fishing industry regularly, and I meet Elspeth Macdonald from the Scottish Fishermen’s Federation regularly. I saw her this week, albeit informally.”
“What fishermen are asking for is simple—protection from reckless spatial squeeze, recognition that fishing must remain an integral part of Scotland’s future, and a moratorium on new offshore wind until the full impact on our fishing grounds is fully understood. Will the cabinet secretary urgently get around the table with our fishermen to ensure that they are not sacrificed on this Government’s ideological pursuit of net zero, and will she also instruct developers to engage constructively with our fishermen to ensure that they are properly compensated for their loss of fishing grounds? Gillian Martin: If I am in ideological pursuit of anything, it is prosperity and economic growth for the people of Scotland.”
“I thank the cabinet secretary for advance sight of her statement, but it seems rather tone deaf of her to come here and talk about the jobs of tomorrow when jobs of today are being lost at Mossmorran and right across the North Sea oil and gas sector, with the Government’s presumption against new oil and gas. However, north-east fishermen will be dismayed to hear that the Government wants to sell our fishing communities down the river yet again, given the announcement. With it, the Government is sticking two fish fingers up to our fishermen. The scale of these projects is massive, and each and every time a new project is consented, it severely restricts where our fishermen can fish.”
“Can the cabinet secretary confirm whether she flew business class to Brazil and the total cost of the trip for her and her officials? Can she explain why that money would not have been better spent on constituents who are seeing their communities ruined by monster pylons and battery storage? Gillian Martin: A Government does international engagement as a matter of course. It is very important that every Government—whether it is a devolved Government in Scotland, the UK Government or any other Government—engages with international partners on items of great importance. Climate change is a global emergency and it requires an international response. Douglas Lumsden knows that every Government will have expenses associated with any international travel, and he knows how to find out my expenses for that trip. Clyde Metro Proposals 2.”
“The debate has highlighted the challenges that are faced by communities in Stranraer, Wigtownshire and across Dumfries and Galloway. We are acting on the motion’s calls, investing in GP recruitment and retention, expanding diagnostic capacity, improving ambulance response times and increasing the number of community beds. We will continue to work with local communities to ensure that future health policy reflects their needs. I invite members to support those reforms and to work collaboratively across the Parliament to ensure that we deliver equitable access to care for every person, wherever they live. Meeting closed at 18:39. Correction Ben Macpherson has identified an error in his contribution and provided the following corrections.”
“Being a fellow member of a regulated health profession, Carol Mochan will understand that the barriers to that do not all lie in the Government’s hands; there are barriers within the professions, but it is important that we continue to pursue that. I assure Tim Eagle that NHS Grampian has hospital at home. There are 35 patients a day using that service at the moment, and there are plans for expansion to respiratory and other areas. I am sorry that I have not managed to respond to everyone’s points. I want to finish the debate by saying a huge thank you to our health and social care workforce for their resilience and for their innovation. It is very clear that there is a lot of innovation across the country, including in rural areas.”
“Sharon Dowey raised some issues about audiology, which is a recognised challenge in our healthcare service and we are working to improve that. The issues with dentistry were largely caused by Brexit and the pandemic. The south of Scotland was particularly dependent on European dentists but we have taken action to try to improve that situation and we are seeing the benefit. I agree with Carol Mochan’s point about apprenticeship and local earn as you learn, which would also be helpful in my area. There has been some progress on that front, with nurses, including mental health nurses, training in situ, but we need to expand it to other professions.”
“Dumfries and Galloway’s home first work is a great example of shifting care into local settings, as is the investment in hospital at home around the country, flow navigation centres and, as we have mentioned, Near Me. Work with communities to co-design services that reflect local needs is vitally important. Christine Grahame: Will the minister take an intervention? Maree Todd: I have a number of issues to cover before I finish. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I am not sure that I can give you an awful lot more time back. Maree Todd: I have taken a good number of interventions. Let me wrap up with some of the specific points that were raised during the debate. I say to Douglas Ross that I am more than happy to chase that response for the save our surgeries group.”
“Maree Todd: I am proud of the Near Me technology, which is now used all over the UK and in Ireland. It came into its own during the pandemic. It was developed in Caithness, in my constituency, because of the challenge of travelling down to the hospital and it is now well used all over the UK. It could do with being used more, in fact. We are continuing to expand diagnostic and treatment capacity at Galloway community hospital and other hubs. We are improving ambulance response times by reducing hospital delays, enhancing triage and increasing safe treatment at home or in community settings. The provision of community beds and step- down facilities has been increased to reduce delayed discharge.”
“Those are issues that we face all over Scotland. There is no doubt, however, that the national treatment centre programme is delivering for everyone in Scotland. The national treatment centre in the Highlands is delivering beyond what was expected. People are saying to me just how amazing the experience is. Christine Grahame: There is a model in the Borders called Near Me, which would in fact have dealt with Douglas Lumsden’s issue. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Ms Grahame, can we have your microphone? It might be tucked away. Christine Grahame: Everything is on. That would have dealt with the very serious issue that Douglas Lumsden raised. A patient can have a video call with their allocated consultant about an issue so they do not have had to make such a journey just for a consultation. That is operational in the Borders, using videos.”
“Will the minister take an intervention? Maree Todd: I am quite short of time. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I can give you the time back, minister. Maree Todd: That is fine. Douglas Lumsden: We are talking about fairness. Last week, my dad went from Aberdeen all the way down to Glasgow to the Queen Elizabeth or the national treatment centre— whatever it is called—because he requires a cataract operation. He travelled for five hours to get down there, spent 15 minutes in an initial consultation and then spent another five hours going back. Where is the equality in that? Maree Todd: Brian Whittle talked about increasing digital access to healthcare. It sounds to me as though there was no need to put hands on Douglas Lumsden’s dad, so that should have been a Near Me consultation rather than a 10-hour round trip.”
“Sadly, we are witnessing the self-inflicted deindustrialisation of much of Scotland as a result of both Governments’ anti-hydrocarbon rhetoric. There are two neighbouring plants at Mossmorran. Exxon has made its announcement, but we still have the Shell natural gas liquids plant. What discussions have taken place with Shell on whether its NGL plant remains viable, given the loss of Exxon’s ethylene plant? Kate Forbes: That is a very important question, and it is precisely why my officials engaged with Shell this afternoon. Shell confirmed that its Fife natural gas liquids plant is a separate operation from the Exxon Fife ethylene plant. As such, it does not anticipate any direct impact on its Fife NGL plant operations or jobs. I hope that that gives important reassurance.”
“These irresponsible plans risk pushing fishermen out of their traditional grounds and jeopardising the future of our fleets and stocks.”
“That is why our amendment today highlights the proposed Moray Firth FLOW-Park, which local communities and fishermen fear will reduce vital fishing grounds, threaten livelihoods and drive yet more spatial squeeze. This debate cannot ignore the scale of the spatial squeeze that has been driven by the SNP Government’s approach to offshore wind. Since 2022, ministers have approved 32 offshore wind projects, followed by another 12 in 2023 and a further 32 zones identified for future development. That is more than 36GW of capacity. When our party leader Russell Findlay was in Fraserburgh last week, he warned that Scotland’s fishing industry cannot become a “casualty of green energy obsession”. He is absolutely right.”
“That is a disgrace. Rhoda Grant tried to defend that today, but she is trying to defend the indefensible. Both of Scotland’s Governments are failing the sector. Labour is selling out access and short- changing the Scottish fishing sector. The SNP is attacking fishing from the domestic side, wants to take us back into the dreaded CFP and prefers turbines over trawlers. No wonder communities feel squeezed from every direction. The Scottish Conservatives stand firmly with Scotland’s fishing industry. We believe in sustainability and viability. We agree with the Scottish Fishermen’s Federation when it calls for space at sea and for its members not to be pushed aside by unplanned, top-down development.”
“After decades of Scottish frustration under the CFP, after regaining control of more than 25 per cent of catching opportunities post-Brexit and after incomes having risen significantly, we now have a First Minister who believes that returning to the CFP would be part of Scotland’s national mission. That mission would hammer Scotland’s fleet, and Scotland’s fishing communities know it. Let me also address the UK Labour Government’s role. The Labour-EU trade agreement, which extended EU access for 12 years, has rightly been described as “a total capitulation” by the Scottish Fishermen’s Federation. At the same time, as is noted in the SNP motion today, Labour is scrapping ring- fenced funding for fisheries and is allocating Scotland just 7.78 per cent of a £360 million growth fund despite Scotland landing more than half of the UK’s catch.”
“This is the same Government whose officials advised ministers to dismiss concerns about spatial squeeze and told them not to mirror the language of industry, despite the Scottish Fishermen’s Federation warning that the sector risks being “crushed” by competing demands on our seas. This is the same Government that, in the latest consultations, is still proposing new restrictions across 19 sites. That is a disgrace. The cabinet secretary cannot stand here today talking about supporting fishing communities while the Government’s planning decisions, budget cuts and policy proposals undermine those very same communities. Perhaps the clearest example of all is the SNP’s ambition to rejoin the European Union and, with it, the dreaded common fisheries policy—something that was applauded by SNP back benchers today.”
“Let me be clear that we agree with the principles in the SNP motion—of course, Scotland deserves a fair share of UK funding. The Labour Government has shown a complete disregard to that. Of course, we want strong fishing opportunities and a sustainable future for the fleet—nobody disputes that. However, the motion deliberately ignores a very uncomfortable truth: the SNP’s record on supporting Scotland’s fishermen is one of confusion, contradiction and neglect. This is the same Government that tried to impose highly protected marine areas—a plan so detached from coastal reality that it was forced to scrap it after an overwhelming backlash.”
“Scotland’s fishing industry is one of the great pillars of our coastal and island communities. It is a sector that provides renewable, climate- smart food; that supports thousands of jobs; that anchors local economies; that prevents rural depopulation; and that is woven into the cultural identity of places all around our coast. I welcome a debate on fishing, but it should not escape notice that this is the first Government-led debate on fishing in more than two years. Only after repeated calls from the Scottish Conservatives has the Government finally turned its attention to a sector that it claims to champion. If the Scottish Government truly cared about fishing communities, we would not have waited years for a Government-led debate on fishing to come to the chamber.”
“Ariane Burgess: —will be on local fishing. I move amendment S6M-19739.1, to insert after “economy”: “further recognises the central role that Scotland’s low- impact fishing fleet plays for those communities, both economically and environmentally, and believes that the fund should prioritise that fleet; accepts that all parts of Scotland’s fleet, not just the low-impact sector, will continue to experience a spatial squeeze without proper spatial management for fisheries, based on science and with strong local input;”. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call Beatrice Wishart to speak to and move amendment S6M- 19739.4. 15:57”
“It is good to see that Rhoda Grant also raised the point about space-based planning and investing in marine science, but I cannot support the Labour amendment where it points the finger at the Scottish Government. Reading between the lines, it appears to suggest that Scottish fishers and coastal communities are being punished because the Scottish Government did not negotiate in the way the UK Government wanted it to. That is not constructive and inclusive leadership. The amendment in the name of Tim Eagle reflects the unease that I am hearing from constituents about the Moray Firth FLOW-Park, and I sympathise with his amendment. However, I feel that the plans are at such an early stage that we cannot yet say what the impact— Tim Eagle: Will the member take an intervention? The Deputy Presiding Officer: The member is concluding.”
“Yes, fishers are getting scientific advice that runs counter to their aims, but that advice is crucial if there are going to be any fish to catch in the future. Although I completely sympathise with those in the industry who find the science frustrating, we must look at the issues through a long-term lens and view it as a form of insurance for coastal communities of the future. I ask the cabinet secretary to prioritise the low-impact fleet during the allocation of the fishing and coastal growth fund. I will turn to the other amendments. I agree with Beatrice Wishart that the Scottish Government must provide guarantees that it will distribute the funding that it has received in a proportionate manner.”
“This is a challenging situation for fishers who rely on cod, but it is a challenging situation that we find ourselves in because the science has not been enforced strongly enough in regulations. The second way in which you could read the “challenging advice” line in the motion is more problematic. I think that I heard from the cabinet secretary that it is not intended this way, but those two words could be read as meaning that the advice is challenging because it is frustrating the aims of the fishing industry. I could choose to be cynical, given that the marine directorate has repeatedly shown itself to be more inclined to follow economic concerns than the science. Is this Government science led or not? Being science led is important for the sake of fish and the coastal communities that live off them.”
“Although I whole-heartedly agree with a lot of what the Scottish Government is saying today, one element of its motion needs clarity, reflection and pause—that is, the reference to the challenging advice on key stocks. We could choose to read the issue in two ways. On the one hand, we could argue that the advice is indeed challenging—cod and mackerel are on the precipice—not just because of overfishing but because of bycatch. The actual level of cod mortality has been estimated by the United Kingdom Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science as being 62 per cent higher than quota limits in recent years. To allow stocks to regenerate, cod should not be fished unless safeguards are introduced. For example, there should be a higher eligibility bar for quotas to ensure that the stock can recover.”
“Will the member give way? Ariane Burgess: I need to make progress. The Scottish Greens’ amendment to the Scottish Government’s motion seeks to reflect another aspect of fairness that must be addressed—namely, the need for spatial management for fishing, which would relieve the severe pressure on all fishers as well as our marine environment. We need a system that allows us to identify areas in which we should or should not fish that fully adheres to the science and comes with strong local input. We must also look at how we can better support low-impact fishing, which will die out if we continue to allow trawlers to operate pretty much anywhere they please or if bad actors continue to be able to factor paltry fines into their business plans.”
“I am sure that Mr Lumsden will appreciate that—in the spirit of moving at pace with those opportunities, as the Parliament is always keen for us to do—if we were to go through an entire legislative process, we would probably still be talking about the issue this time next year.”
“Through ScotZEB 2 funding, 44 buses were purchased from Alexander Dennis, whereas 171 were purchased from Yutong in China. The Deputy First Minister has said that ScotZEB 3 will be different. Will that require a change in the law? If not, is that an admission that ScotZEB 2 got things wrong? Kate Forbes: I urge Mr Lumsden to look at the letter that Fiona Hyslop sent last week to the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee. In that letter, which sets out the contents of ScotZEB 3, she stated that the new phase will build directly on ScotZEB 2 and will involve a fair and open competition, with a focus on operators of public service routes. The scheme guidance is being finalised, and ScotZEB 3 will open for applications in early December.”
“Independent analysis warns that ill-judged policies could put up to 100,000 jobs at risk across the UK and strip out tens of billions of pounds of investment. The Scottish Affairs Committee has warned against accelerating decline, while clean energy jobs are not yet coming on stream at the pace that is required. We witnessed that this week at Aberdeen harbour, where redundancies were announced on the back of the oil and gas downturn. We are going to be using hydrocarbons for years to come, so let us do that in a responsible way that uses home-grown production that supports British jobs and provides revenue for our vital public services. Let us get behind our oil and gas workers. I move amendment S6M-19637.3, to leave out “opposes” and insert “supports”. 15:14”
“Labour’s position is hardly clearer. Its front bench has said that “our future does not lie in more oil and gas”,—[Official Report, House of Commons, 4 February 2025; Vol 761, c 658.] while pressing ahead with a headline 78 per cent tax rate and scrapping investment allowances that underpin jobs and investment. That uncertainty drives away capital investment and places Scottish jobs at risk. In 2021, Anas Sarwar tweeted that it was time that Nicola Sturgeon opposed the ecological threat of the proposed Cambo oilfield, and yet, this week, he seems to have had a change of heart and pretends to be a supporter. He is so treacherous that he could be mistaken for Alan Carr, and that all matters because, at the end of the day, we are talking about people and their livelihoods.”
“We have jet set Gillian Martin, who spends her time cosying up to wind developers and selling off Scotland’s countryside, but fails to stand up— The Deputy Presiding Officer: Mr Lumsden, I caution you against using nicknames. Douglas Lumsden: I am sorry, but she is jet set in a way, Presiding Officer. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I would also caution you against challenging the chair. I have made my concern clear. Douglas Lumsden: Okay, Presiding Officer. We have the former First Minister Nicola Sturgeon in favour of a presumption against oil and gas; wannabe First Minister Stephen Flynn, pretending to be a friend of the industry; and John Swinney, with splinters in his backside from trying to sit on the fence, not telling us whether he supports or opposes Rosebank—but we all know that he is no friend of the industry.”
“However, the champagne socialists are too stupid to understand that. If people care about the climate, they should care about where we source what we still use. Rosebank is a strategic project. It will bring £8.5 billion in direct investment and support around 2,000 jobs and it could add up to £25 billion to the wider economy, with up to 300 million barrels recoverable— Patrick Harvie: Will the member give way? Douglas Lumsden: I am sorry, but I do not have time. That will mean pay packets for families, orders for the supply chain and tax revenue for public services. My constituents in the north-east understand that reality because they live it every single day. The industry is vital for Scotland, and yet the SNP ties itself in knots.”