Thomas Kerr
Reform UK · Scotland
“Will the First Minister arrange for as many items as can be found to be gathered together and displayed as the Murrell collection? Will he also arrange for some items to be gifted to Scotland’s museums and galleries as permanent exhibits and a tribute to SNP governance?”
“No comment. The First Minister: Oh, it is all very funny to Mr Kerr. He is always laughing at things. Mr Kerr was laughing at the substantial points made by Daniel Johnson in the debate in which Mr Kerr trivialised the attacks on Muslim members of our community, which is an absolute disgrace.”
“Does he agree that this part of Scotland’s history must not be lost? The First Minister: No. I am going to get on with delivering for the people of Scotland. The Presiding Officer: That concludes First Minister’s question time. I will allow a two-minute break for a change of places. Prison Population”
“Surely he must take responsibility for that, look himself in the mirror and own up to that. Thomas Kerr: I will tell you what shows respect, Presiding Officer: taking an intervention, which the member did not do when I tried to intervene on him. It is quite funny how that works. I will not take the blame for what happened in our streets.”
“Thomas Kerr: I will not; I am going to make some progress. That is why Reform Scotland believes that we must have an honest conversation about local connection and housing allocation. People who have spent years contributing to a community should not feel like strangers in their own communities.”
“We have seen this show before, and members can ask Keir Starmer and the Labour Party where it gets them just a few years in. This afternoon’s debate is titled “Scotland needs Reform: five years to 2031”. Why? Because this is the start of our party showing the country that Reform can and will win.”
The complete record
Every one of 39 lines we hold for Thomas Kerr, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account.
“Does he agree that this part of Scotland’s history must not be lost? The First Minister: No. I am going to get on with delivering for the people of Scotland. The Presiding Officer: That concludes First Minister’s question time. I will allow a two-minute break for a change of places. Prison Population”
“Will the First Minister arrange for as many items as can be found to be gathered together and displayed as the Murrell collection? Will he also arrange for some items to be gifted to Scotland’s museums and galleries as permanent exhibits and a tribute to SNP governance? Can I suggest that the fountain pen that Nicola Sturgeon used to sign her resignation letter should go to the People’s Palace to become the people’s pen? Similarly, the two toilet seats could go to Perth to sit alongside the stone of destiny, and the £3,000 coffee machine could sit beside the declaration of Arbroath to show how political priorities have changed. Will the First Minister encourage the people of Scotland to write to us with their proposals? We cannot allow these items to be auctioned to the highest bidder, who will take them into private collections abroad.”
“No comment. The First Minister: Oh, it is all very funny to Mr Kerr. He is always laughing at things. Mr Kerr was laughing at the substantial points made by Daniel Johnson in the debate in which Mr Kerr trivialised the attacks on Muslim members of our community, which is an absolute disgrace. If anyone who voted Reform was watching Mr Offord’s question to me just now, I think they would think what a waste of time it was to vote for Reform, because that was an insulting lot of drivel from Malcolm Offord. Malcolm Offord: It is the last day of term, so, on the same theme, I will say that the items bought by Peter Murrell with money stolen from the Scottish National Party are now part of Scotland’s political history and that the saga will be taught to future generations of Scotland’s children.”
“Reform’s position is straightforward: build more homes; prioritise local connection; restore fairness to the housing allocation; recognise the pressures created by rising demand; and put the people of Scotland first rather than prioritising strangers who broke the rules and jumped the queue to get here. Scotland is broken and Scotland needs reform. Reform has arrived in this chamber. I urge members to back our motion, and let us get to work. The Presiding Officer: That concludes the debate on Scotland needs Reform: five years to 2031. National Security (State Threats) Bill”
“For years, too many politicians in this chamber have refused to engage honestly with the housing issue, and now the public are feeling the consequences. People should not receive condemnation for asking perfectly reasonable questions. The truth is that Scotland’s housing challenges cannot be solved by pretending that difficult issues do not exist. They can be solved only by action, and that means building significantly more homes—no more broken promises. It means recognising that every housing policy must begin with the people already here who are struggling to find a place to call home, because Government exists to serve its citizens. That should be the starting point of every decision that is made in this chamber. The interests of Scottish residents should come first.”
“Thomas Kerr: I will not; I am going to make some progress. That is why Reform Scotland believes that we must have an honest conversation about local connection and housing allocation. People who have spent years contributing to a community should not feel like strangers in their own communities. People who were born in an area, who work there, who pay their taxes, who volunteer there and who raise families there should know that their connection matters. A local connection must carry weight. Unfortunately, too many people across Scotland feel that their concerns are dismissed the moment that they are raised, particularly when those concerns relate to migration and asylum. Let me be clear that compassion and common sense are not mutually exclusive. A country can be compassionate while recognising political limits.”
“Successive Governments have failed to build enough homes, failed to plan for future demand and failed to put the interests of local communities first. What is the result of that? A housing system that is under immense pressure. Waiting list numbers are high; temporary accommodation numbers are high; homelessness levels are high; private rents are high—the list goes on. Yet, too often, when those concerns are raised, politicians reach for excuses rather than solutions. Scots deserve better than that. The truth is that housing is governed by one unavoidable reality: supply and demand. If demand rises faster than supply, pressure increases. If more people require housing than there are homes available, waiting lists grow. That is just simple maths. Lloyd Melville: Will the member give way?”
“We have seen this show before, and members can ask Keir Starmer and the Labour Party where it gets them just a few years in. This afternoon’s debate is titled “Scotland needs Reform: five years to 2031”. Why? Because this is the start of our party showing the country that Reform can and will win. In this debate, the chamber has heard real people with real expertise offering a real alternative. Reform’s 17 MSPs have sat in this chamber and used our time to evaluate our broken politics. Now we offer solutions. Scotland is broken and Scotland needs reform. Nowhere is that truer than in Scotland’s broken housing system. Housing is one of the biggest issues facing Scotland today, not because politicians talk about it so often but because ordinary people are living with the consequences of SNP failure on housing.”
“Surely he must take responsibility for that, look himself in the mirror and own up to that. Thomas Kerr: I will tell you what shows respect, Presiding Officer: taking an intervention, which the member did not do when I tried to intervene on him. It is quite funny how that works. I will not take the blame for what happened in our streets. It is utterly shocking, and any act of violence should be called out. Trying to put the blame for that at my door is utterly shameful and the member should hang his head in shame. George Adam: Think of the words you used. Be honest with yourself. The Presiding Officer: Mr Adam. Thomas Kerr: That brings me to this afternoon’s debate. SNP members can delude themselves all they like by shouting that they won and that we lost, but John Swinney’s Government is built on sand and it will quickly sink.”
“They see a First Minister who will not comment on police investigations such as the one into Peter Murrell or on the attack in the Calders in Edinburgh, but who will comment on another horrific attack because it suits a political narrative. We have said it once and we will say it again: we in Reform condemn all acts of violence that take place in our streets, no matter what. George Adam: Will the member take an intervention? Thomas Kerr: I am up for a laugh—go for it. George Adam: I am glad that Mr Kerr is up for a laugh. We talk about respect in this chamber and he has just shown absolutely none whatsoever. Mr Kerr talks about condemning violence and so on, but his language—his language in particular— is to blame for everything that happened across our country over the past weekend.”
“We have been elected by its people to do the job of delivering, but we can do so successfully only if the people buy into the process. Today, we have heard a lot of bravado from SNP MSPs, but let me roll out some cold, hard facts for them. More than 2 million people did not vote in May’s election. The SNP won fewer than 900,000 votes, its result was down 10 per cent on its result in 2021 and it lost six seats. I am not saying that in a gleeful way—the SNP won—but I am saying it because there is a growing disillusionment with politics and politicians out there in the country. Scotland is hurting. Inside our forgotten working- class communities, people feel abandoned by a political establishment that has ignored them.”
“When I arrived in the Parliament, I used the phrase, “The fox is in the hen house.” Judging by the reaction of our opponents today, I would say that that saying is pretty true. Alex Cole-Hamilton compared us to the Third Reich. Daniel Johnson used the word “fascism”. Daniel Johnson: Will the member give way? Thomas Kerr: No, I will not. The irrelevant lot sitting next to us— [Interruption.] The Presiding Officer: Excuse me, Mr Eagle. Thomas Kerr: How dare the irrelevant lot sitting next to us lecture us about how good an Opposition they were. They did that without a hint of irony, despite where they now sit and how far they have fallen in the polls. We were also lectured about grievance and division by the SNP—a party that is all about division. You could not make it up. We are all here to serve Scotland.”
“Max Bannerman: Although I am enjoying Mr Fraser’s performance as the grandest of grandees in this Parliament as he gives us all a lecture on proper parliamentary procedure, will he offer an analysis of why, after 10 years as the Opposition in the Parliament, his party has been reduced to a rump of 12 seats and we are now sitting where he used to sit? Murdo Fraser: I do not think that I could ever be as grand as Mr Bannerman. I am afraid that he is out of date. He is referring to results from a month ago; I am referring to results from just last week. The tide has turned already. It is the Scottish Conservatives that are on the way up, and it is Reform that is on the way down. [Interruption.] I will happily give way again, Presiding Officer.”
“On the issue of electoral performances, will the member remind us where he currently sits in the chamber and how many members are on the Tory back benches? He might get the leadership role at some point, but that would be quite irrelevant at this point. Murdo Fraser: Oh, Mr Kerr! I do not think that it is my leadership ambitions that people in his party need to worry about. Let me turn, if I can, Presiding Officer, to the substance of the motion. There is much in Mr Offord’s motion that we would agree with. Time does not permit me to deal with every policy issue. Max Bannerman: Will the member take an intervention? Murdo Fraser: Yes, Mr Bannerman.”
“To ask the Scottish Government how it supports the development of skills and encourages apprenticeships, in light of reported concerns that young people are steered towards some degree courses that offer limited value. (S7O-00119)”
“It is important that we look at what is available to those who are on lower incomes and recognise that other people are struggling. We do that with things such as free tuition and free prescriptions that are available to all. We will continue to target our response to those who are in child poverty, while never forgetting that others are also finding the cost of living difficult.”
“Will the SNP finally put its money where its mouth is and make work pay and cut tax to ensure that we tackle child poverty and in-work poverty, which have ripped across Scotland’s forgotten working-class communities for far too long? Shirley-Anne Somerville: Unsurprisingly, I do not agree with Mr Kerr’s assessment of the problem or his suggested solution. We have a progressive tax system in Scotland, which we have just heard about in the previous statement from my colleague Hannah Mary Goodlad. That system allows us to deliver public services in Scotland that are not available in the rest of the UK. We ask those who are on higher incomes—not those who are on lower incomes—to pay more tax; they also benefit from some of the public services that are universally available.”
“I thank the cabinet secretary for advance sight of her statement and for the published report, which I am sure will make for very interesting summer reading. I welcome the announcement of the review of how we measure child poverty. Although I await the detail, I will work constructively with her on that. However, I am afraid that the consensus ends there, because I believe that the best route out of poverty is not a handout but a hand-up with work. That is why the statement will not cut it. I have an idea that the cabinet secretary could sign up to immediately that would support plenty of hard-working parents, many of whom are in work but remain in poverty, which is to cut tax.”
“With regard to funding, there have been challenges, which have been recognised and covered in the media. I want us to sit down and work with a range of partners, recognising that there are many shared interests and funders, to identify an appropriate funding package to make sure that that work can be delivered. With regard to the commitment from the Scottish Government, I will endeavour to keep Parliament up to date.”
“The member’s two central points were about the funding that the Scottish Government will bring forward and the securing of ongoing community engagement. I want to be clear that the work must be community led—I sought to reflect that in my statement. I want to ensure that the work of the partnership group that we bring together complements that engagement and provides national support for something that is community led. I am open to all suggestions from members to ensure that the voices of communities are heard. Too often, communities, particularly those in places such as the east end of Glasgow, had things done to them, not with them. This is their People’s Palace, and I want to make sure that their voices are not just heard but integral to what comes next.”
“Lastly, unless I am mistaken, there is no solid announcement of funding—but then, we do not have a by-election coming up in Glasgow. Will the minister tell Glasgow, therefore, how much the Government will cough up to help the redevelopment go forward? Tom Arthur: I highlight that the commitment in Aberdeen was a manifesto commitment—I want to put that on the record to avoid any dubiety or misunderstandings that members may innocently stray into. However, I welcome the member’s question, which recognises the importance of the People’s Palace and winter gardens, and the fact that it is cherished by many, not only across the east end of Glasgow but across Scotland. Indeed, many members in the chamber will have childhood memories of visiting it, perhaps as part of a school outing.”
“I draw members’ attention to my entry in the register of members’ interests, as a sitting councillor on Glasgow City Council. I thank the minister for providing advance sight of his statement. I will focus my question on the People’s Palace in Glasgow. Reform members welcome the announcement, although, as a Glaswegian, I regret that it has taken so long. The images that we saw leaked a few years ago from inside the winter gardens were devastating for Glaswegians. The museum is a pillar of working-class history and heritage for our city, and it is vital. Will the local community therefore be involved in the partnership group that has been announced, in particular the hard- working and dedicated local activists from the Friends of the People’s Palace, Winter Gardens and Glasgow Green group?”
“Will the First Minister outline what assessment, if any, the Scottish Government has made of the cost of providing taxpayer-funded legal aid to asylum seekers and refugees in Scotland? Does he consider it fair that taxpayers are funding legal representation for strangers who are accused of crimes, while many Scots struggle to access legal services themselves?”
“Before I start my remarks, I say to Mr Johnson that if he is going to hurl abuse—childish, petty insults— across the chamber, the least he can do is be decent and allow an intervention to come back rather than hide away. That was shameful.”
“I will try not to take it to heart, but I am genuinely disappointed by the fact that Mr Kerr has, I presume, just read out a bit of the press release that he is about to issue on this matter. Once he has done that and we have got past the rhetoric, I will work together with him if he wishes to come forward with proposals and suggestions. I will perhaps leave my comments there for the moment.”
“Thomas Kerr: If the cabinet secretary is serious about tackling the housing emergency, rather than focusing on a party-political gimmick, will she put back in place local connection for social housing and finally prioritise local people over strangers who have arrived here illegally? Shirley-Anne Somerville: I will try hard, in my first discussion with Mr Kerr, to very gently say a few things to him. This is a statement about the first homes fund. That is why it talks about the first homes fund. We can discuss other things in questions following other statements and in other debates in due course. He can, indeed, speak to the minister with responsibility for planning, who is sitting right behind me, if he wishes to discuss planning.”
“The statement includes nothing of substance on social housing, nothing on planning reforms—it does not tell the country who the planning minister is—or on cutting red tape and bureaucracy to make building easier for developers, and nothing on the provision of assistance to people who are struggling in working-class communities such as mine, many of whom can only dream of having large savings to set aside for a deposit. Today’s announcement will do very little to help them. The cabinet secretary knows that a pathetic 10,000 quid handout will not work. It is a smokescreen simply to grab headlines instead of delivering. Indeed, the likelihood is that prices will rise across the country. The Presiding Officer: Question.”
“I welcome the cabinet secretary to her post and thank her for providing advance sight of the rhetoric that we have heard. Bluntly, that is exactly what her statement is. It is yet another wasted opportunity from a failing Government. It is another gimmick, not a real solution. The cabinet secretary should know that the Government cannot spend 20 years digging a hole and then expect applause for arriving with a ladder. Although there are bits of the statement that I and Reform welcome, including the proposals to help first-time buyers, we await the detail. Let us be honest—the policy will not even scratch the surface when it comes to tackling the housing emergency.”
“At decision time, Reform will not endorse the appointments of this tired and knackered Cabinet. Scotland does not need another recycled Government pretending to be revolutionary; what Scotland needs is seriousness, competence, accountability and a Government willing to focus relentlessly on jobs, schools, hospitals, policing, infrastructure, energy and economic growth. That is the standard that Reform UK Scotland will continue to demand in the chamber. After nearly 20 years of SNP Government, the central question that faces the Parliament is no longer who can deliver independence. The real question is who can deliver competence. On the evidence that is before us, the SNP has failed yet again to provide an answer. 14:56”
“Sadly, given the parliamentary arithmetic and the large bloc led by the Bearsden Che Guevara, I fear that that is unlikely. Instead, Reform will play our part and be a constructive but effective Opposition. We will not oppose for the sake of opposing. [Interruption.] I seem to have upset people. We will not challenge for the sake of challenging but, unlike those other parties in Opposition, we will not remain silent either. Reform is not in this chamber to make pals with the cosy establishment; we are here to oppose them. We are here to be the voice for Scotland’s forgotten communities the length and breadth of this country, who each and every one of you has failed and left behind. Those are the people who sent us here and those are who we will fight for in this Parliament.”
“Reform Scotland has arrived in this chamber and, given the slimmed-down Cabinet, it appears that our ideas and values now sit in the Scottish Government. We said during the election that we must focus on the day job and stop wasting time on reserved matters, and the First Minister has abolished the energy and constitution portfolios from the Cabinet. We said that we need to cut Government waste, have a bonfire of the quangos and put economic growth first, and a new department has been created. However, as is normal with the SNP, the devil will be in the detail. Rhetoric is easy; delivery is hard. If this Government has genuine proposals to make Scotland more prosperous, cut tax, invest in enterprise and prioritise Scots over strangers, we will support them.”
“My ultimate favourite is how the First Minister has us reliving an episode of “Yes Minister”, because only in John Swinney’s Scotland could a bid to cut Government bureaucracy start by creating a brand-new Government post: the cabinet secretary for administrative affairs—sorry, I mean the Cabinet Secretary for Public Sector Reform— Ivan McKee. That move has set up a battle royale between the reforming cabinet secretary and the rest. He will want to save money, and every other cabinet secretary will want to spend it. The First Minister will no doubt need to mediate every fight, so it is no wonder that he has kept the constitution for himself for some slight relief. On a serious note, I and Reform Scotland genuinely welcome Mr McKee to his post, and I wish him well as he tries to fix the mess that his party has created.”
“I fear that world leaders will no longer be calling the Scottish education secretary asking for advice; indeed, she might want to redial and ask for some herself, given the Government’s record on schools. We also have the ever fresh-faced new Cabinet Secretary for Economy, Tourism and Transport, who I suspect is already planning his £2 bus fare journey straight into the First Minister’s job. However, given the length of an SNP transport secretary’s service these days, I suspect that he might come to regret that poisoned chalice being handed to him by the First Minister. The new Government could play out like a reality TV show or a classic comedy. We have seen Neil Gray and Angela Constance play job swap, while the country goes back to the future with Shirley- Anne Somerville in the social justice portfolio.”
“Indeed, the SNP was re-elected on a record low vote share—2 million Scots did not vote—and the majority of voters wanted change, with a bigger turnout for parties that are against the First Minister’s separatist agenda. Yesterday’s Cabinet announcement was sold to the country as renewal, but what exactly has been renewed? After years of bloated bureaucracy, endless quangos, vanity projects and constitutional obsession, the SNP Cabinet suddenly want Scotland to believe that they are born-again reformers. The public are not fools. Let me examine this new, fresh team. I start by welcoming Scotland’s new Cabinet Secretary for Education, Culture and Gaelic to her place. Although developers and house providers across the country will heave a sigh of relief, Scotland’s teachers and pupils will be hiding under a desk.”
“Fair play—he fought the election saying that he wanted a historic mandate and he achieved that, so, on behalf of Reform Scotland, I congratulate him and his party on their victory. Yesterday, Scotland was presented with what John Swinney described as a new Government. After looking carefully at the line-up, I must say that the SNP has achieved something remarkable: it has managed to reshuffle the deck chairs without changing the direction of the ship. After nearly two decades in power, the SNP no longer resembles a Government with ambition. The First Minister is back in office, but let us not kid ourselves—the enthusiasm that Scotland holds for his Government is abysmally low.”
“As this is my maiden speech, I start with a thank you to the people of Glasgow for sending me here. It is the honour of my life to represent the communities of the place that I am proud to call home, and I pledge that I will do all that I can to deliver for my city and to do those people who sent me here proud. I know that having this speech, of all speeches, as my maiden speech is rather unconventional, but what is it that they say? Start as you mean to go on. Although it is customary for maiden speeches to be heard without interruption, most MSPs in the chamber know that I always welcome a bit of audience participation, so I hope that they do not disappoint. Speaking of disappointment, I welcome the First Minister to his post.”
“We all need to get on the same page and prevent such disorder from happening in the first place.”
“The scenes that we witnessed in Glasgow at the weekend were beyond disgraceful, but let us be blunt—they happen way too often. Glaswegians should not have to live with such violence, vandalism and behaviour every year, and clubs must take responsibility. Does the minister agree that, rather than taxpayers, Celtic Football Club and other teams must start paying the bill for disruption and destruction when such incidents happen? Angela Constance: As I intimated in my original answer, which I will repeat for clarity, governing bodies and individual clubs must step up and use their influence to help to tackle this continued misconduct. My view is that nothing should be off the table now. I will do what I can within my powers, as will any minister in this Government, but no solution should be off the table.”
“I, Thomas Kerr, do swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to His Majesty King Charles, his heirs and successors, according to law. So help me”