Murdo Fraser
Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party · Scotland
“This has been quite a lively debate so far. I might take a slightly more sympathetic approach to Reform than other colleagues who have spoken. To be fair to Reform members, they have been on a steep learning curve in relation to how they approach debates in the Parliament.”
“After all the promises that were made about Reform members coming in to shake this place up, they cannot even get the basics right. If these are the foxes in the hen house, the chickens will be sleeping pretty safely tonight. That seems reflected in Reform’s most recent electoral performances.”
“I will make what I hope is a constructive suggestion, which is that it would be more helpful to have a debate on any one of those topics to allow us time to discuss the issues in detail. We will all be here for another five years, so Angela Ross should not fire all her bullets at once.”
“Murdo Fraser: I will give way in a second. The only things that have been left out are the NHS and justice. Virtually every topic in the remit of the Parliament is covered in the motion, as are some topics that are not in the remit of the Parliament.”
“Most significantly of all, we had a superb Conservative victory in the Aberdeen South constituency, with my good friend Douglas Lumsden winning just shy of 50 per cent of the vote—a massive swing from the SNP. Reform received just 2,478 votes, or 8.6 per cent of the total.”
“He will know that there is a necessity in the case of individual judgments for those involved to consider whether there is any basis on which an appeal should be mounted in a particular case.”
The complete record
Every one of 699 lines we hold for Murdo Fraser, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 9 of 14.
“It is a market of a billion people, many of whom are interested in purchasing Scotch whisky, which is currently suffering from extremely high tariffs that will reduce under that trade deal. That trade deal with India would never have been possible if Scotland was part of the EU. There was no interest in the EU in doing a deal with India. The deal was possible only because of Brexit. In her response to Mr Hoy, the Deputy First Minister said that she had welcomed the trade deal with India, and she did indeed. However, it is not the Scottish Parliament that votes on such trade deals but the House of Commons, and I will be very interested to see how her SNP colleagues there vote on that trade deal, given that that is where the support really matters. I am aware that I am over time, but I will get to the end in a moment.”
“The value of our exports to the rest of the UK is three times that of exports to the European single market. To leave the UK single market in order to rejoin the EU would be cutting off our nose to spite our face. We also see opportunities from the free trade agreement with India, which was progressed by the previous Conservative Government and is now being taken forward by Labour. At lunch time, I had the pleasure of meeting the Indian high commissioner, who is visiting the Scottish Parliament, and talking with him about the real benefits from that trade deal to both countries. It would have particular opportunities for the Scotch whisky sector, given the enormous marketplace that India represents for future growth.”
“As I pointed out in the chamber earlier, there is something of an irony in the stance being taken by the First Minister, reflected in the motion, which calls for Scotland to rejoin the European Union. The European Union currently faces a tariff on exports to the US of 15 per cent, whereas in the UK we currently face a tariff of only 10 per cent. As part of the UK, we have an opportunity to negotiate that tariff down, as the First Minister was trying to do. That opportunity would simply not be available to us if we were part of the EU, so the Scottish National Party’s plans to leave the UK in order to join the EU would be devastating for Scottish exports. We need to remember that our biggest export market for Scottish goods and services is the rest of the United Kingdom.”
“I do not understand why the Scottish National Party Government is not shouting from the rooftops about the tremendous export deals that have been agreed by Scotland-based companies. I fear that, once again, student politics is at play, rather than any serious recognition of the Scottish economy’s strengths. The Deputy First Minister referred to the First Minister’s visit earlier this week to the United States to meet President Trump to discuss the unreasonable tariffs on Scotch whisky and other Scottish exports. That is a welcome intervention by the First Minister. I am sure that he now realises how unwise it was to back so publicly Mr Trump’s opponent in the presidential election last year.”
“There was no mention from the Deputy First Minister of all the remarkable good news that has been all over the media for the past week, and nor can I see a single mention of it in all 18 pages of the document that the Scottish Government published today—“A Trading Nation: Updating Scotland’s Country and Sector Prioritisation”. The document is full of colourful pictures—I congratulate the school student on work experience who had a happy week in the Scottish Government, colouring in all the pages—but there is not one mention of the defence sector, which is doing so well for Scottish exports. There is reference to a sector called “Engineering and Advanced Manufacturing”—I wonder whether that is some sort of code for defence.”
“Does he agree that we need to extend every possible support to Babcock in its efforts to export frigates to Denmark? Murdo Fraser: Absolutely. Indeed, Mr Johnson has pre-empted my very next sentence, because I was about to talk about Babcock in Rosyth, which is part of the area that I represent. Babcock hopes to secure a contract, which is worth more than £1 billion, to build four frigates for the Danish navy. That is a real tribute to the expertise in naval vessel construction that we have established in Scotland, which is, again, based on Royal Navy contracts, and which shows the quality of the highly skilled workforce that we have in Fife and on the Clyde.”
“Curiously, though, there was no mention in her speech of the oil and gas sector. However, the even more significant omission was of the defence sector, which is, to be frank, astonishing in the context of recent news about support for Scottish shipbuilding. It was announced just last week that Norway has agreed a £10 billion deal for anti-submarine warships to be built in the UK, which will secure thousands of jobs at BAE Systems in Glasgow—investment that was possible only because the Royal Navy had already contracted with BAE Systems for the construction of type 26 frigates. That investment will support an estimated 103 businesses in Scotland. Daniel Johnson: I agree with the member about the importance of defence contracts.”
“She was right to highlight the tremendous success of exports such as Scotch whisky and Scottish salmon, which are flagships for the Scottish economy and are being exported around the globe. They are recognisable Scottish products that are growing our global brand. That is all to be celebrated. We also need to acknowledge, as Kate Forbes did, that there are serious challenges with tariffs in the US and elsewhere, which I will come to later. Between 2018 and 2022, global trade rose by 10 per cent, and in the same period, Scottish onshore exports fell by 12 per cent. Not everything in the garden is rosy. There were some glaring omissions in the Deputy First Minister’s comments. Scotland’s largest export by far is oil and gas, which represented 32 per cent of overall international exports in 2023.”
“I remind members of my entry in the register of members’ interests—specifically in relation to the hospitality that I have received from the Scotch Whisky Association. Since the parliamentary session started, this is the first proper chance that I have had to say that we are going to miss Kate Forbes in the chamber. I think that we all understand the reasons why she will step down from Parliament next year, but I genuinely think that she will be a loss to the Parliament. That view is reflected across the great majority of members—perhaps not every member—of the Parliament and by members of the business community, too. She will be a loss to the Government and to Parliament, and we wish her very well for the future. In that tone, I agree with what the Deputy First Minister said about the need to celebrate the success of Scottish exports.”
“Our commitment is demonstrated by our actions over the past nine years in keeping the workforce at both plants in employment. As I indicated, if we had not taken those steps in 2016, that would not now be the case.”
“As I indicated at the beginning of my statement, there are some commercially sensitive issues here, but I will seek to be able to provide further information on the guarantee value. The same applies to the securities. As Murdo Fraser will be aware, that data is published every year through an audit process and the value of the securities is identified. That changes depending on a range of factors, but that is published information. I have been working on the contingencies in various ministerial roles over a number of years. Extensive work has happened, within Government and using external advisers, to ensure that we have contingency plans in place for a range of options if some of the guarantee payments were to be defaulted on or for other situations in which we felt that we had to take further steps.”
“Is that a guarantee to workers at both plants that their jobs are secure? Ivan McKee: I reiterate that, if the Government had not taken the steps that it took in 2016-17, the plants would now have been shut for almost a decade. I might be wrong, but I think that Murdo Fraser was on the Finance and Constitution Committee with me at the point when we unanimously agreed that the deal was a good one and should be taken forward. On the value of the guarantee, I have indicated that payments of between £14 million and £32 million have been made every year. They have been made for the past nine years. The £586 million value has therefore reduced, and it is clearly moving on a quarterly basis.”
“At the time, he promised what turns out to have been a pie-in-the-sky proposal to create 2,000 new jobs in an aluminium car wheel factory, with apparently no thought as to where the workforce would come from—or, for that matter, where they might live. That is yet another broken promise. Can we really trust a word that this man says? Should Scottish ministers put much reliance on his statements? Let me ask three specific questions about the content of the minister’s statement. First, the minister stated that the original exposure of the guarantee was £586 million, which has now reduced. What figure does the guarantee now stand at? Secondly, what is the current value of the securities and how does that relate to the outstanding guarantee? Thirdly, the minister referenced contingency planning for the future of Dalzell and Lochaber.”
“I thank the minister for advance sight of his statement. Indeed, I thank him for issuing the statement, which the Scottish Conservatives requested due to concerns among both the workforce and the wider communities around Dalzell and Lochaber that were caused by negative media publicity about GFG Alliance’s financial viability. Sanjeev Gupta has a track record of broken promises. He said that none of his steel plants would close and that he would not give up on the workforce—a promise that has clearly already been broken. At the time when he acquired the Fort William complex, he promised not to break up the assets and that he would transfer parts of the estate to the local community. Those are two more broken promises.”
“Murdo Fraser: When is the SNP going to rethink its damaging policy on rejoining the EU, which would cause such destruction in the Scotch whisky sector? Richard Lochhead: If Murdo Fraser was paying attention, he would know that the Scottish Government does not want any tariffs on Scotch whisky, be they 15 per cent or 10 per cent. Just as his Government for many years failed the Scotch whisky industry in relation to the 75 per cent duty that was placed on every bottle of Scotch whisky, thanks to his party, the current UK Government has a lot to do if it is going to stand up for the Scotch whisky industry. It can address that in its forthcoming budget, as well as by following in the footsteps of the First Minister by raising the tariff issue with the United States and concluding the deal, now that the First Minister has set the scene for it.”
“I remind members of my entry in the register of members’ interests in relation to hospitality that I have received from the Scotch Whisky Association. I join my fellow co-convener of the cross-party group on Scotch whisky in welcoming any moves to reduce damaging tariffs and costs on the industry. However, I am surprised that the minister cannot see the contradiction in the Scottish National Party position. If we were members of the European Union, as the SNP demands, we would currently be facing 15 per cent tariffs on Scotch whisky exports, not the 10 per cent that we have as part of the United Kingdom. It is only Brexit freedoms—which we would not have if we were in the EU—that give us the opportunity to negotiate away those tariffs. [Interruption.] The Presiding Officer: Let us hear one another.”
“That figure represents 11.7 per cent of gross domestic product—twice the United Kingdom level. In practical terms, that means that if Scotland were to become an independent country, the Government of the day would have to find around £13 billion, either in tax rises or in public spending, just to mitigate the current level of UK fiscal deficit—”
“It is my great pleasure to open the debate on improving Scotland’s finances—an ambition that I am sure we all share across the chamber. To help to inform the debate, I note that, over the past few weeks, we have had two significant publications highlighting the state of public finances in Scotland. Just last month, we had from the Scottish Government the annual “Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland” report, which sets out what is, in effect, an income and expenditure analysis not just for the Scottish Government but for the totality of public spending in Scotland. The messages from that report are stark. The net fiscal deficit for Scotland now stands at £26.5 billion, which represents the gap between the amount of money that is raised here in taxes and the total that is actually spent.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the rural affairs secretary has had with ministerial colleagues regarding the potential impact on farmers and food producers of the introduction of meat-free days in public institutions, such as schools and hospitals. (S6O-04903)”
“One of the priority areas for the strategic partnership for Scotland’s festivals, which is led by Angus Robertson, is to look at that issue in greater detail. Murdo Fraser will also be aware of some of the wider support for artists, particularly the “Keep it fringe” fund, which is administered to reduce financial barriers for artists performing at the fringe. We need to look more broadly at what to do to keep the fringe accessible to as many artists as possible. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Question 2 has been withdrawn. Digital Exclusion 3.”
“Such is the success of Edinburgh’s festivals that, at one point last month, Edinburgh was the most expensive destination in the world for people to visit. There are concerns in the industry about the perception of Scotland as a high-cost destination. Does the Deputy First Minister agree with the evidence that we heard at the Economy and Fair Work Committee this morning that councils such as the City of Edinburgh Council need to take that into account when setting the visitor levy, which is coming down the track? Kate Forbes: Murdo Fraser is right to highlight the overall costs of the festivals. Accommodation costs are one of the biggest challenges across the fringe ecosystem because they affect artists, visitors and residents.”
“Remember that this is all with £2,600 more per head of population to spend than in the rest of the UK. With all that money, we should have public services that are so much better than everywhere else, and that we do not is an SNP failure. Our approach is simply this: let us put growth first, let us take the brakes off oil and gas extraction in the North Sea, let us get reformed, effective public services, let us invest in infrastructure and let us speak up for the victims of crime. Those are the people’s priorities and they are our priorities, too. 17:09”
“We should tackle the excessive regulation, such as the overbureaucratic short-term let rules, or the creaking planning system that needs to be fixed. There are other priorities that we have to tackle. The NHS has too many people waiting too long. Anas Sarwar was right to talk about the number of people in Scotland who are having to pay for private operations because they are simply waiting too long. I met a constituent at the weekend who is in exactly that position, waiting more than a year for a vital hip replacement and eventually having to dip into savings to go private. That is happening too often. Standards in schools are dropping below those of our competitor nations. There are growing issues of violence in classrooms and a failure to deliver vital infrastructure.”
“Keep fighting, Mr McKee—we are all behind you as you find these savings in the public sector. Ben Macpherson challenged us to come up with some positive ideas, so I will do just that for Mr Macpherson’s benefit. We make no apology for demanding a focus on growth, because growth provides wealth, growth provides more secure, better-paid jobs, growth provides less poverty, growth provides more disposable income, and growth provides higher tax revenues. What we should be doing is tackling the barriers to growth: the higher taxes imposed by the SNP in income tax and LBTT, the business rates that are hammering hospitality, and the visitor levy— throughout the summer, I heard so many businesses expressing their concern about a visitor levy coming in on top of all the other bills that they have to pay.”
“Kemi Badenoch is absolutely right in what she said today in Aberdeen, where she talked about the need to take the brakes off extraction from the North Sea. That economic underperformance comes at a cost. The Scottish Fiscal Commission talked about the economic performance gap, which is estimated to cost £1.058 billion to the public sector in 2025-26—that is £1 billion less in revenue than we should have thanks to SNP mismanagement. However, as Craig Hoy reminded us, Ivan McKee is riding to the rescue. We all hope that Mr McKee is successful in his battle with his Cabinet colleagues, who are apparently very resistant to his plans. According to information released under a freedom of information request, they have “raised considerable concerns” about Mr McKee’s plans.”
“GDP growth in Scotland was 0.2 per cent, while in the UK, under a dismal Labour chancellor who is holding back economic growth, the equivalent figure was 0.3 per cent. Scotland is growing at just two thirds the rate of even the dismal performance of the United Kingdom. Looking at the long-term trend since 2011, we see that, if the Scottish economy had grown at the same rate as the UK economy, it would be £10 billion bigger than it is today. That is the SNP’s record in government. When SNP members look at the figures, they say, “Go back to 2007.” Yes, it is right that, when we look at the figures from 2007 to 2011, we see that there was rapid growth in the Scottish economy. Why? It is because of growth in the oil and gas sector—the very oil and gas sector that the SNP wants to close down.”
“The other thing that we now know from the GERS figures is that public sector spend in Scotland is equivalent to 52 per cent of gross domestic product, which is among the highest levels of any country in the developed world. When SNP members talk about austerity, are they trying to tell us that more than half of our GDP being spent in the public sector is austerity? If that is austerity, what figure would they have us spend? Would it be 62 per cent or 72 per cent? They never tell us. They have huge sums of money at their disposal and they need to stop wasting it. I welcome the First Minister saying that there needs to be a focus on economic growth, and we agree. We have just had the growth figures for the second quarter of this year.”
“The net fiscal deficit for Scotland is now up to £26.5 billion, which is 11.7 per cent of gross domestic product and is double the UK level. That means that an independent Scotland would have to find £13 billion-worth of either cuts or tax rises. The Government never tells us how it would fill that gap. That figure means that the union dividend is now worth £2,600 extra for every man, woman and child in Scotland in fiscal transfers from other parts of the United Kingdom. People might think that, with all that extra money to spend on the health service, education, infrastructure and justice, our public services would be much better than they are in every other part of the United Kingdom. Patently, that is not the case, as we have heard in this afternoon’s debate.”
“George Adam said that Scotland should have a voice on those issues. He is right. Scotland does have a voice on them—we send 56 MPs to Westminster to speak for Scotland on them. I am sure that Mr Adam knows that some of them are SNP MPs and are utterly useless and incapable of doing their job properly. We should be spending our time here productively on the things that we can change, not wasting our time on the things that we cannot. As we would expect, we heard from Mr Swinney about independence. I was a little surprised that, in his comments on independence, he did not address the latest revelations from the Scottish Government’s “Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland” figures, which came out just a few weeks ago in recess.”
“Normally, at this stage in the parliamentary timetable, we debate the programme for government. Of course, we did that back in May, but this afternoon there is a good opportunity to look at the proposals from the Scottish Government and consider what we hear from the First Minister and what that tells us about this Government’s priorities for the period ahead. An illustration of what is wrong with the priorities of this Government is the fact that, when we look at the parliamentary timetable for this week, we see the entirety of tomorrow’s business being spent on international affairs—business that has nothing to do with this Parliament. I am sure that it is a great opportunity for people on the SNP benches and elsewhere to grandstand, but it is a literal waste of parliamentary time.”
“That is particularly important for businesses that operate in all parts of the UK and do not want to run different regimes that apply to different members of staff. For an Administration that claims to support growing our economy, it is curious that the Scottish Government takes that particular approach when business is so firmly opposed to it. The fact that Scottish Conservatives have concerns about the parent legislation is not, in itself, sufficient reason for us to vote against the legislative consent motion, so we will not do so. However, we have concerns that the legislation has been rushed through with insufficient thought and consideration of the wider economic impact. For that reason, we cannot support the LCM that is before us, but we will not oppose it. 16:04”
“However, if that leads to additional difficulties for businesses in hiring staff, which make them reluctant to do so, the overall impact can be negative. We have to see that against a backdrop where Labour’s ruinous increase in employer national insurance contributions is already having a negative impact on the wider economy and on businesses’ ability to attract and retain staff. As we would expect, the minister again set out the Scottish Government’s stated aim to see all employment law powers being devolved to this place. I understand why that is its position. However, that demand is opposed by business organisations across Scotland, which want to see a level playing field across the United Kingdom.”
“One of the most vocal critics of the bill has been the Federation of Small Businesses, which has expressed concern about the impact, on smaller businesses in particular, of having to cope with 28 changes in employment law simultaneously. Similarly, the Association of Professional Staffing Companies has expressed concern that conferring day 1 rights would have adverse effects on recruitment practices for risk- averse employers, who might, as a consequence, look at methods of pushing those risks on to others in the supply chain, such as staffing companies. Those are the potential unintended consequences of the bill’s proposals. Changes in employment law must strike a balance. On the one hand, giving greater rights to employees is generally beneficial.”
“The bill covers a range of subjects, including the regulation of zero- hours contracts; greater rights for flexible working; removing the three-day waiting period for statutory sick pay; removing the qualifying period for paternity leave and ordinary parental leave; expanding eligibility for bereavement leave; providing employees with additional protection from harassment; and removing the two-year qualifying period for unfair dismissal claims. Although Scottish Conservatives would agree with some of the measures that are set out in the bill, we have concerns about the overall economic impact of what is being proposed. Business organisations have expressed concern that the rules on unfair dismissal that it is proposed to change would make it less attractive for businesses to hire staff.”
“During the previous debate, I observed that 11 members were in the chamber. I see that we have now increased that number dramatically—to 17. Such is the quality of the debate this afternoon that members are flooding in to hear our exchanges. I hope that we can improve that quality as we go on. The legislative consent motion that is before us relates to the Employment Rights Bill, which, as we have heard, is UK-wide in effect. It is a wide- ranging piece of legislation that was introduced by the Labour UK Government, implementing plans that had been proposed in a Labour green paper published in September 2022.”
“The secondary legislation that will be produced in the Westminster Parliament will not come to the Scottish Parliament for scrutiny and will not be subject to an LCM process. Scottish ministers have said that any lawmaking in this area by the UK Government will be subject to their consent. However, it will not necessarily come to the Scottish Parliament for consideration or scrutiny. The bill allows UK ministers to introduce regulations that might align the UK more closely with the EU. Conversely, it also allows UK ministers to further depart from EU rules. Given that the Scottish Government’s stated position is to align more closely with the EU—which, incidentally, we do not necessarily believe is in the interests of Scotland or its economy—it is curious that Scottish ministers seem so relaxed about agreeing to grant legislative consent.”
“The bill relates to public safety, efficiency, effectiveness, environmental impact and other standards, as well as metrology issues, and it applies to tangible products. As the minister outlined, the Scottish Government initially did not recommend that the Scottish Parliament consent to the bill but has since had a change of heart. The LCM before us proposes that consent be granted. We have a number of concerns about the bill as it stands. It gives very extensive powers to ministers in the UK Parliament. It is best described as a framework bill, and the full extent of those powers will not be clear until we see the relevant secondary legislation, perhaps some months or years down the track. Therein lies part of our difficulty with it.”
“I am sure that the packed chamber and the many millions of people who are riveted as they watch at home will be disappointed to know that I will not be taking all of my six minutes—unless I get lots of interventions, of course, which I would welcome. I will make a brief contribution to the discussion on the legislative consent motion relating to the Product Regulation and Metrology Bill, for which the third reading in the House of Lords was completed on 4 June. As we have heard, the purpose of the bill is to ensure a level playing field for businesses that operate online or on the high street, to ensure the maintenance of high product standards, and to support businesses and promote economic growth—a very worthy and positive set of intentions.”
“It is up to the other parties in the Parliament, whether the Tories or Labour, to set out their spending plans. The envelope is the envelope, and it will be very interesting to see whether they would divert from our spending plans and, more importantly, what they would cut from those spending plans. We will wait and see what they bring forward. The Presiding Officer: It would be very helpful if all front-bench members could set a good example to the rest of the chamber.”
“Shona Robison: Murdo Fraser forgot to mention the growth in the areas of welfare spending in which we have devolved powers, which required the establishment of Social Security Scotland. What I have set out today is an achievable and deliverable workforce reduction plan that can be implemented in a way that focuses on back-office and corporate costs. The plan will make a sizeable contribution to the overall cost reduction that I have set out in my statement, alongside the other work that Ivan McKee set out in his statement. We will not do what the Tories have done—put forward unaffordable proposals for £1 billion of tax cuts that they have no way of funding. [Interruption.] The Presiding Officer: Members. Shona Robison: We will set out our spending review at the end of this year.”
“In May 2022, the then SNP Cabinet Secretary for Finance and the Economy, Kate Forbes, who I do not see in the chamber, pledged that the Scottish Government would reset the public sector, return the size of the workforce to pre-Covid levels and freeze the pay bill. We now know that all three of those promises were broken. The public sector pay bill has ballooned, while the civil service full- time equivalent head count has gone up from 17,700 in 2019 to 27,400, which is a staggering 54 per cent increase. At the rate of reduction of 0.5 per cent a year that has been announced today, how many years will it take to get the public sector workforce back to pre-Covid levels, as promised? I make it 70 years. Does the cabinet secretary agree with my arithmetic?”
“Humza Yousaf: To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on what support it is providing for humanitarian assistance in Gaza. (S6O-04841)”
“On the issue of another referendum, we now know that dozens of anonymous pro-independence online accounts calling for another referendum went dark on 12 June after the Israeli air force took out Iranian cyber infrastructure. Does it not concern the Scottish Government that its central policy objective is being actively backed by the terrorist state of Iran as part of its campaign to weaken the United Kingdom? Angus Robertson: Mr Fraser should be very careful about seeking to smear people in this country who believe that it should be a sovereign state. That position is held by the majority of people elected to the Scottish Parliament, and it is beneath the member to seek to smear a majority in Parliament, notwithstanding our differences on the issue. Gaza (Humanitarian Aid) 8.”
“There is also an underspend of £18 million in relation to the Scottish National Investment Bank. I am sure that Murdo Fraser understands that, when deals are being taken forward at the end of the year, we do not want to rush into them; we want to make sure that we do them properly in the interest of making the investment effective. If such deals slip into the following year, that is absolutely to be understood, because they are significant capital investments. There was also a slight underspend in relation to the city and regional deals programme. Again, given the nature of those multiple programmes across the country, we would expect there to be potential for some slippage in some of those investments. I think that that answers the questions that Murdo Fraser raised.”
“According to the figures that we have just seen from the Government, the underspend in the Deputy First Minister’s economy and Gaelic portfolio is £106 million. That is a staggering 7.4 per cent of the total budget in that department. It is responsible for growing the economy, for the enterprise networks and for VisitScotland, all of which have seen their budgets slashed by the SNP in recent years. If growing the economy is so vital to the Government, how does the minister explain that underspend in that vital spending department? Ivan McKee: There are a few technical reasons for that. There is the redress, relations and response underspend of £36 million, which followed a reclassification by the Office for National Statistics post the year end.”
“However, the SNP decided that that grant could not be given, because of its policy of not funding “munitions”. Shame on it,”
“Against that backdrop, we might expect the Scottish Government, which claims that it stands up for Scotland, to look to support the industry, seize those opportunities in full and create more jobs and apprenticeships. Instead, we see negativity and downright hostility. One of the sector leaders, Rolls-Royce, planned to establish a specialist submarine welding facility on the Clyde—an £11 million investment to deliver a world-leading facility to support the construction and maintenance of the submarine fleet. That project had been in development for years and would have reduced costs, cut carbon emissions and created high-value jobs—just the sort of project that we should welcome and support. The project depended on a critical £2.5 million grant from Scottish Enterprise.”
“We should celebrate those successes, but we should also recognise the opportunities for the future. Every western Government that is faced with the situation in Ukraine, instability in the middle east and an increasingly isolationist US Administration is devoting more resources to military spending. In last week’s spending review, the Chancellor of the Exchequer promised that defence spending would rise from 2.3 per cent to 2.6 per cent of gross domestic product by 2027. If delivered, that will equate to an £11 billion uplift in spending, providing real opportunities for Scotland, not least in the upgrading of the nuclear submarine fleet at Faslane. There are massive opportunities to grow our exports to nations across the world that are similarly increasing their defence spending, to earn more wealth for this country and create more jobs.”
“Is it not something of an irony that we can have world-leading shipbuilding on the Clyde and at Rosyth, building ships for the Royal Navy, but the SNP Government cannot even supply two ferries from its nationalised shipyard at Port Glasgow? We have Leonardo, known for many years to people in Edinburgh as Ferranti, building world- leading avionics and supplying radar systems for Lockheed Martin, among others. We have Thales, employing almost 800 people across two sites in Glasgow and Rosyth. In Glenrothes, which is in my region, we have Raytheon building the javelin anti-tank missiles, which are being deployed so effectively right now by our brave Ukrainian allies, taking out the Russian tanks that are illegally invading their country. We should be proud of that.”
“As of 2023-24, the United Kingdom Ministry of Defence spends almost £2.1 billion per year in Scotland— that is more per head of population in Scotland than in the rest of the UK. We not only make military equipment for the UK here in Scotland; we export, very successfully. The total contribution of the aerospace defence and security industry to Scotland was estimated at £3.2 billion in 2022. That sector employs 35,000 people, including 1,500 apprentices. Right across Scotland, we see companies providing high-quality, well paid jobs in the science, technology, engineering and mathematics sector. BAE Systems is building frigates on the Clyde for the Royal Navy and directly employing 2,700 people. At Rosyth and Faslane, Babcock is supporting more than 3,000 jobs.”