Kevin Stewart
Scottish National Party · Scotland
“They don’t want you. The Presiding Officer: Let us hear one another. Anas Sarwar: Five years ago, the SNP promised recovery and failed. Is it not the case that the next five years must be about Scotland recovering from John Swinney and the failing SNP?”
“In 80 per cent of disciplines in the national health service, there are no waiting times whatever beyond 52 weeks. That is the Government taking action to improve the circumstances in the national health service. Anas Sarwar talked about a potential change of Government. People in Scotland need to be really wary about all of this.”
“Now, Anas Sarwar turns round and says that everybody was foolish to vote for that man Keir Starmer, whom he had argued that we should all vote for. That tells us that Mr Sarwar is a man of poor judgment that the people of Scotland should not listen to and will not listen to on 7 May. Free Bus Travel 3.”
“[Interruption.] Gillian Martin: There might be groans from those to the left of me, who do not want to grow our economy by investing in new technologies for our energy, but Kevin Stewart is absolutely right: that is a key example of how the constraints of devolution mean that we are, effectively, trying to deliver societal and economic tr…”
“When it comes to the current situation in the middle east, decisions by the Scottish Government to increase the amount of electricity that is generated in Scotland from low-cost renewable sources has put us in a position whereby electricity bills should be a lot lower for people in Scotland, and are a clear example of why those powers sho…”
“The cabinet secretary pointed out in her statement that the SNP Government has increased the amount of electricity that is generated in Scotland from low- cost renewable sources and has put Scotland in a more energy-secure position.”
The complete record
Every one of 413 lines we hold for Kevin Stewart, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 7 of 9.
“Now that that false hope has gone, Russia’s aggression has intensified. Meanwhile in the holy land, there was not even the pretence of a ceasefire this Easter. The situation in Gaza remains dire, with the conflict remaining intense and civilian casualties continuing to grow. I hesitate to use the word “casualties”, as it is clear that, in many cases, civilians have been deliberately targeted. The word “victims” is more apt. However, although bombs and bullets have killed many in Gaza, with most victims being women and children, it is starvation and disease that are bringing apocalyptic levels of suffering to the children of Gaza. I take this opportunity to join the late Pope’s calls for a ceasefire in Gaza and in the holy land, and I praise him for his constancy in doing so.”
“Rarely has the international situation been so bleak on so many different fronts, from Russia’s war of aggression in Ukraine and Israel’s genocide of the Palestinians in Gaza to America’s trade war with the entire world. We are seeing the rise of the far right globally, with their lies and disinformation, which have become accepted by many in our world. These are truly dark days. There is no immediate end in sight for the conflict in Ukraine, with Ukrainians being given just enough support to hold ground but not enough to win. To make things worse, President Trump insists on plundering any riches of Ukraine that Russia has yet to steal as the price of his half- hearted support. Although Russia announced an Easter ceasefire, it did not stop raining down missiles on Ukraine.”
“If Mr Swinney believes that ministers deserve that increase of £20,000, he should tell us about it—I will give way to the First Minister. I will give way to the cabinet secretary, to Angus Robertson, or to Jim Fairlie— The Deputy Presiding Officer: If you could conclude, Mr Ross— Douglas Ross: Can no Scottish Government minister defend it? Maybe that is why we are debating the international situation today. Maybe that is why the SNP Government chose a topic that it is not in charge of—because it cannot answer simple questions about an area for which it has responsibility. I think that the people of Scotland can see that. They can see that this is a Government that takes them for granted, that provides massive pay rises for its ministers and that cannot even hold itself to account. 16:42”
“Will the member give way? Douglas Ross: No, I will not. My point is clear: Parliament could have been discussing those issues today. I will say it again, because there was a slight interruption. Can any of the ministers on the front bench say that they deserve, and have earned, their £20,000 increase? [Interruption.] I am quite happy to continue to wait; I have about another minute, because of the intervention, so I am just going to stand here and wait. If any of these highly paid Scottish Government ministers can defend their £20,000 increase to the public, they should tell us now. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Mr Ross, I ask you, if you could, to return to the topic of the debate this afternoon in your remaining 30 seconds or so. Douglas Ross: I make the plea again—come on.”
“There is also an opportunity for hydrogen to play a critical part in Grangemouth’s transition—I know that Kevin Stewart has a long-standing interest in hydrogen. We can lead the way in hydrogen production, and our hydrogen action plan clearly sets our strategic ambitions. I note that the Scottish Government is investing £5 million in Ineos Olefins & Polymers Europe’s select phase fuel-switching programme as it seeks to transition to hydrogen.”
“We have said that for a number of years, but the urgency is now heightened in light of the publication of project willow’s report, which makes it crystal clear that a decision on the Acorn project by the UK Government is required as part of determining Grangemouth’s long-term viability. It is not fair on those behind the Acorn project to make them wait indefinitely for clarity. I have raised the issue with the UK Government. Again, I call on it to prioritise the Acorn carbon capture and storage project, and I call on members of the Parliament to join forces with me in making that call. Kevin Stewart also asked about sustainable aviation fuel, which can be a critical component of the transition, but legislation is required in order for the regulatory changes to be made and the necessary mechanism for revenue certainty to be established.”
“During the election campaign, Labour pledged to save Grangemouth. It did not. The Labour Government also continues to deny resourcing for Acorn, Scotland’s carbon capture and storage project; it has failed to take the strides that are required to ramp up sustainable aviation fuel production; and no action has been taken to change hydrogen storage and transportation regulations. All of that could have benefited Grangemouth. What are Scottish ministers doing to get their Labour UK Government counterparts to get the finger oot on those issues in order to save and create jobs? Kate Forbes: We urgently need the UK Government to give a positive decision on the Acorn project.”
“To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to reported comments made by the chair of the North Sea transition task force that the North Sea’s future should be a “national mission”. (S6F-03982)”
“To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the potential impact of the United Kingdom Government’s spring statement on the Scottish budget. (S6O-04534)”
“Likewise, although a decade ago we were promised that we would be £1,400 better off together, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation concludes that the average family will be £1,400 worse off by 2030. Although we will always strive to be that beacon of progress and hope, as the waves of despair from this Labour UK Government’s actions crash against us— The Deputy Presiding Officer: You need to conclude. Kevin Stewart: —it is more clear than ever that Scotland must unshackle herself from the UK’s sinking ship and chart her own course as an independent nation. 17:04”
“The UK Government says that they will be fine, if they get a job—but we are yet to hear where all those jobs for people who cannot wash, dress and toilet themselves are. The UK Government is also, of course, doing its level best to destroy the economy and ensure that there are fewer jobs by imposing a brutal national insurance jobs tax. For those who are caught between the UK Government’s brutal cuts and economic mismanagement, we in Scotland must strive to remain a beacon of hope in the sea of British despair. However, the impact of Labour’s spring statement will also hit home in the Scottish budget, with the OBR predicting a cumulative reduction in Barnett consequentials of £1 billion over the next five years.”
“Poor mental health among our young people therefore is a problem. Maybe benefits need to be reformed. However, rather than reforming PIP for the better, Liz Kendall chose simply to restrict PIP to people who score at least four points in a single category—a move that will consign thousands of disabled people to economic destitution. Across the PIP scale, to get four points, someone must require physical assistance to do a task. However, needing supervision with a task gives only two points. As Lorna Slater said, it will be those who require supervision with a day-to- day task who will bear the brunt of the changes. As it stands, a disabled person who needs supervision to wash, dress, eat, toilet and understand complex decisions would be entitled to the highest level of PIP. Soon, they will receive nothing—not a single penny piece.”
“With the stroke of a pen, the Labour UK Government has subjected disabled folk to the most despicable of cuts. The UK Government justifies those brutal cuts because, in its view, too many young people are faking poor mental health. That view flies in the face of independent mental health research. This year, the UK ranks bottom in the world for mental health, below war-torn Afghanistan. Although the UK is very much the worst, it is not unique, with a decline in mental health seen in all countries. The average mental health score in English-speaking countries has declined from 90 in 2019 to only 60 today, with young people suffering most. Globally, in 2019, 19 per cent of young people struggled with poor mental health. Today, the figure is 46 per cent, and 55 per cent in the UK.”
“Thatcher famously said that her greatest achievement was the new Labour Party, and perhaps Liz Truss is grinning to see this Labour Government outdoing the previous Tory regime in trampling poor, ill and disabled people underfoot. Let us face facts. The impact of Labour’s cuts will be devastating. The UK Government’s own analysis shows that 3.2 million families will be financially worse off, with an average loss of £1,720 per year. The same analysis from the Labour Government reveals that its welfare cuts will push 250,000 people, including 50,000 children, into poverty, with the poorest households £500 a year worse off. Although the poor will be worse off due to the spring statement, it is disabled people that Labour has singled out for special punishment.”
“Spring is supposed to be the time when we see the first green shoots of hope after a long winter of despair, but there were no green shoots in the UK Government’s spring statement this year. Instead, the Labour chancellor announced a new round of broken promises—austerity mark 2—and a budget that is balanced on the backs of the most vulnerable for the benefit of the richest. We were promised change, but the only change that there has been is change for the worse. The spring statement was a reverse Robin Hood budget: taking from the poor to give to the rich. The Resolution Foundation reports that, by 2030, the poorest 10 per cent in society will be worse off under this Labour Government than they were under the Tories, while the richest 10 per cent will do even better under Labour than they ever did under the Tories.”
“Alasdair Allan: Despite the significant criticisms that I have made of the UK Government, I have to say that we have had a good conversation and, more than that, good co-operation with the UK Government in attempting to progress the issue. However, as I mentioned, what was significant about our conversations about a social tariff is that people want it to be based on a simple system, not an applications system that, almost by definition excludes the most vulnerable people. They want it to include factors such as income, rurality and benefit entitlement. The most important thing that came through, however, was that the system must not be based on an applications process, because that will simply exclude the very people who need it.”
“During the general election, the Labour Party pledged to cut household energy bills by £300. Instead, we have seen price hikes, the cap rise and household bills rise by almost £300. We have also seen the slashing of winter fuel payments for our older folks, and we are about to see Labour benefit cuts. I was pleased to hear in the statement that the energy social tariff working group has finished its work and that the minister intends to pass on its findings to the UK Government. Has the UK Government been interested in looking at a social tariff to help those folks who are the poorest and most vulnerable in our society, so that they can afford their bills?”
“I believe that the Land Reform (Scotland) Bill— which aims to improve our system of land ownership, land use, and rights and responsibilities, ensuring that our land contributes to a just society while balancing public and private interests—is the way forward. I hope that we can continue to engage with the cabinet secretary on the issue and get it right for all the people of Scotland. 16:42”
“It says that the bill contains “vital” provisions to ensure that farm tenants have fair access to future public funding and future commodity markets; that it implements some “long overdue” changes to the rent test; that it ensures a “just transition” to alternative land uses for tenants who are facing the loss of land; and that it modernises compensation for deer and reared game damage. The association believes that the bill strives to balance the rights of tenants and landlords, and, in the meeting that we had, we heard very definitely that, in many cases, the rights favour the landlords to a huge degree. I have to be honest: I was taken aback by some of the commentary that came from tenants about the way that they had been treated. We absolutely need to continue on the journey towards a fairer and more equitable society.”
“Some landowners and land managers have parcels of land that are spread right across the country, and they will not be sharing machinery or anything like that. It is one thing that we can look at, but there are a number of other things that we have to look at, in my humble opinion. We have heard a lot today about many of the stakeholders, but there are a few folks who have been missed out, and it is very important to capture what some of those folks have said. I will turn to the Scottish Tenant Farmers Association, because I joined the call in talking to—and more importantly, listening to—tenant farmers. The STFA supports the general principles of the bill, and, in its submission to us, which came yesterday, it talks a fair amount about part 2.”
“At the end of the day, we know that many landowners have large parcels of land that might fall outwith the thresholds that have been put in place, even though they have a huge number of landholdings. Edward Mountain: Will the member give way? Kevin Stewart: I will give way very briefly to Mr Mountain. Edward Mountain: Has the member thought of a way of resolving that? If the landholding is not contiguous, should its inclusion be based on a commonality of machinery, management and staff that makes it contiguous as far as land management plans are concerned? If one landholding is in Orkney and one is in Lewis, they should not be seen as being contiguous. Kevin Stewart: That was not brief, and no, I do not necessarily agree with that, but it may be one of the things that can be looked at.”
“Many members have quoted Andy Wightman and have used statistics that he has provided to show that land ownership is now even more concentrated in the hands of the few. Four hundred and twenty-one landowners own 50 per cent of privately owned rural land. That figure was 440 in 2012. Nine hundred and twenty landowners own 60 per cent of privately owned rural land. That figure was 989 in 2012. Two thousand, five hundred and eighty-eight landowners own 70 per cent of that land. That figure was 3,161 in 2012. We have gone backwards in some regards, which is why we need to continue our journey on land reform. We should ensure that those who have landholdings that are not contiguous are captured in the bill.”
“I join colleagues in thanking all the folk who have given evidence to the committee and those who have continued to engage, even today. I was late in joining the committee, and I had to do a wee bit of a catch-up. As I am the member for Aberdeen Central, which is the only constituency in the north-east of Scotland that does not have a farm, there has been a lot of learning along the way. Today marks another step on Scotland’s journey towards a fairer and more equitable society. The Land Reform (Scotland) Bill represents a way forward in our on-going commitment to transform land ownership and management in our country. It is not right that the ownership and control of much of Scotland’s land remain concentrated in the hands of the few.”
“To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking to tackle Islamophobia in Scotland, in light of reports of an attack on a mosque in Aberdeen at the weekend. (S6F-03920)”
“We cannot be complacent in all this, and we must build on the hard-won gains that we have already seen. However, I suggest that we have a lot to be optimistic about—although, today, we have heard more of the pessimism than the optimism. 16:05”
“As that trend expands globally and new developments allow more care to be carried out at home, we in Scotland are well placed to harness progress in the area thanks to the extra funding in the budget that will extend the hospital at home programme to 2,000 virtual beds. Homes are important. We should not lose sight of the fact that a home is not just a roof over our heads but the foundation on which we build good health and social care. The reality is that many health and social care interventions are delivered in the home, but if that home is inadequate, unstable or non-existent, those interventions are compromised. That is why I am pleased that the budget includes not only an increase in the affordable housing supply budget, but increased funding for aspects of home improvement and adaptations, which is important.”
“CHERI is a research-based medical education centre that focuses on theory-driven research to inform new approaches to teaching and learning throughout the continuum of healthcare education. As such, it is a great example of how we can leverage the work of our universities that goes beyond simply new devices and gadgets. I also want to talk about hospital at home, the acute clinical service that takes staff, equipment, technologies, medication and skills that are usually provided in hospitals and delivers that hospital care to people in their own homes. That is a real game changer for people and the NHS, allowing folk to receive the best medical care in their own home rather than in a hospital ward.”
“Kevin Stewart: I urge NHS Grampian to move quickly and to stop mucking about on the issue. UCAN is another example of the use of new technology. The robots that are used for operations in UCAN are partly there because of lobbying that I did in the past to ensure that Government money went into those new technologies. I completely agree with Douglas Lumsden, and I say to NHS Grampian: get on with it. Innovation must also be focused on the NHS of tomorrow, including the training of new healthcare workers. At the risk of being somewhat parochial and again bringing Aberdeen into the equation, I must acknowledge the great work that is being done at the centre for healthcare education research and innovation at the University of Aberdeen.”
“Just as important as early detection is the fact that early diagnosis can lower healthcare costs by preventing expensive advanced treatments while reducing the burden on emergency services. Being more efficient allows the health service to do more with the same resources. Innovations in diagnostics are coming thick and fast, and it is clear that AI will play an important role in the area. Douglas Lumsden: For once I agree with everything that Kevin Stewart has said. He talks about different pathways and improved pathways. I am sure that he is aware that, in Aberdeen, the UCAN swift urological response and evaluation— SURE—unit is now delayed by 15 months because the NHS board wants to move where the unit will be. Will he join me in urging NHS Grampian to resolve the issue quickly, so that the unit can be set up as quickly as possible?”
“Although we have seen staggering innovation in the field of critical care in recent years, we need a real focus on earlier treatment. Central to that is early diagnosis. By detecting illnesses in their nascent stages, we can unlock a cascade of benefits. Neil Gray: Kevin Stewart makes an important point. We have been focusing in the debate on the technical and medical device innovation, but Kevin Stewart points to the pathway innovation. I pray in aid the example of the rapid cancer diagnostic services, which are diagnosing cancers earlier, saving people’s lives and giving people better outcomes. Kevin Stewart: I will follow on from that. Treatments are often more effective when administered early, leading to better outcomes and increased survival rates, with reduced long-term complications and improved quality of life for patients.”
“As part of the collaboration, Aberdeen City Council, North Ayrshire Council and South Lanarkshire Council will work with us over the next two years to share learning from all parts of the system and test approaches that strengthen and accelerate action to improve health and reduce health inequalities. That valuable work will link into our upcoming population health framework, which will focus on prevention and early intervention, targeting action in the areas and communities that are most in need. The Presiding Officer: We move to general and constituency supplementary questions. Concise questions and responses will be appreciated. NHS Grampian (Funding)”
“Last month, Aberdeen City Council, North Ayrshire Council and South Lanarkshire Council teamed up with Public Health Scotland and the Institute of Health Equity for a collaboration for health equity in Scotland to introduce positive changes at a local level in health, life expectancy and quality of life. Will the First Minister outline how the Scottish Government will follow the progress of the collaboration, and will he join me in encouraging a similar roll-out to local authorities across Scotland? The First Minister: We are pleased to be working with Professor Sir Michael Marmot and Public Health Scotland through the collaboration for health equity in Scotland.”
“Liz Smith’s amendment mentions “growth”, which is a dirty word to some in the chamber, but she is right that it is vital. To that end, investment in infrastructure, such as the A9, is essential. We need to get Scotland moving to foster renewal and cut bills. 15:31”
“Labour’s national insurance hikes will cost businesses £25 billion and lead to fewer jobs and higher costs for people. I am afraid that Paul O’Kane is in total denial on this. Paul O’Kane: Will the member give way? The Deputy Presiding Officer: The member is bringing his remarks to a close. Graham Simpson: I would be very happy to take the intervention. The Deputy Presiding Officer: The member is already at seven minutes 40 seconds, and I think that it is probably time to bring his remarks to a close. Graham Simpson: Okay. Speaking of costs to businesses, we can also look at business rates relief, which was applied at 40 per cent in 2025-26 in England. Business rates here, in Scotland, will apply only to hospitality and music venues, and so retail loses out. That will have a major impact on our struggling high streets.”
“The cost of living affects us all but, for too many, it has gone beyond what is acceptable. Transport is the engine of the economy. People and goods need to get about. People can sit and shiver at home as they try to cobble together enough money to pay the council tax but, at some point, they will have to go out. Even though the Government has abandoned its daft target of a 20 per cent reduction in car miles, that should not stop it from encouraging more people on to public transport by making that more affordable. We have debated this before: reintroducing peak fares on trains—a move that this Parliament rejected but was ignored on—not only makes things more expensive but is likely to lead to fewer people using trains. Cheaper and simpler fares lead to 10 million more journeys, according to The Times this week.”
“According to a survey of 234 businesses that was conducted last month, 88 per cent of Scottish businesses have said that high energy costs are impacting investing decisions—which goes back to what Fergus Ewing said—while 77 per cent say that it has forced them to put prices up for customers. We must not forget Labour’s disgraceful scrapping of the winter fuel payment. On the subject of benefits, if a Conservative Government said that it would cut the welfare bill by £6 billion, the members opposite would be apoplectic. However, we now have the bizarre situation of a number of Labour MPs backing such a move— including my own, East Kilbride and Strathaven’s Joani Reid. [Interruption.] If Paul O’Kane wants to intervene, he is welcome to do so; however, I notice that he does not want to.”
“Ofgem chief executive Jonathan Brearley said: “We know that no price rise is ever welcome”— he is right about that— “and that the cost of energy remains a huge challenge for many households”— most households— “But our reliance on international gas markets leads to volatile wholesale prices, and continues to drive up bills, which is why it’s more important than ever that we’re driving forward investment in a cleaner, home-grown system.” Even GB Energy, which has been mentioned— that ill-defined vehicle to deliver goodness knows what—might be getting its budget cut before it has even started.”
“I am pleased to hear Graham Simpson say that we need to reform energy markets. Can he tell us why the Conservative Government, which has not long left office, did not attempt to do that? Graham Simpson: It should have looked at that, because the issue is serious and affects everyone—businesses as well as individuals. However, the UK does not have the highest bills in Europe. That accolade falls to Germany, which has the highest electricity prices—which, as I pointed out last week, is connected to its getting rid of nuclear power. We should not worry, of course, because Labour promised to cut energy bills by £300 a year. However, bills have gone up. As Liz Smith pointed out, from April, the annual energy bill for a household that uses typical amounts of gas and electricity will go up by £111 a year, to £1,849.”
“There is of course an opportunity for the new UK Government to award track status to Acorn, as well as the funding associated with it, in the comprehensive spending review. That is what the letter from industry experts has asked for, and that is what I have been asking for. I have had many meetings with my counterpart, Ed Miliband, and there is a recognition that the Acorn project should be given track status. However, it is to the Exchequer that I make my plea—and to which we should all make our plea. There is a chance for the chancellor to right the wrongs of what Kevin Stewart has outlined about Scotland being an afterthought and to put in the money and the investment so that we can get the project off the ground at long last.”
“On Friday I had the pleasure of meeting some amazing apprentices from nexos in Aberdeen, and I heard about their hopes for the future. The fact that there has been no decision on Acorn, the backtracking on Great British Energy and the energy profit levy on oil and gas have led to a sense of betrayal in the north-east and a feeling that Scotland is seen as an afterthought by Westminster. Can the cabinet secretary assure me that she is conveying the strength of feeling to the UK Government about Labour’s failure to back projects such as Acorn, which is without doubt holding back private investment and putting jobs at risk? Gillian Martin: I thank Kevin Stewart for that particularly incisive illustration, from talking to people who are working in the oil and gas and energy industry, of how important it is that we get certainty here.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to promote hydrogen production and usage in Scotland. (S6O-04408)”
“Given that, would it not be better to use our own fruits of production to grow our economy in Scotland? I understand that long-term steady growth in Scotland is not that attractive to politicians in the Westminster bubble, with their eyes on the imperial capital and the next election, and their desperation to stay in their jobs. For them, the quick buck from throwing ever-increasing amounts of money into London and the south-east is much more attractive, but that is exactly why we are in the position that we are. Years of Westminster short-termism have been causing long-term pain for no gain. It is time for independence. 15:44”
“That is because, fundamentally, London does not have the land to support its economy, and every natural resource, from energy to food and water, must be shipped there from somewhere else. Given that Scotland is the source of much of the natural resources that London uses, London is benefiting from our fruits of production in a way that we are not. It gets worse year on year, with every bit of growth that is eked out of London making the resource deficit worse. We can debate the historical merits—although I would rather not—of investing in London during the days of empire but, either way, those days are gone. It is clear that, for many years, investing in London and the south-east has been a long-term drag on Scotland and other UK nations and regions.”
“Can we really be surprised that decades of starving investment in Scotland to fund even higher spending in the London bubble results in London increasing its lead at the expense of Scotland? Although the data from the OECD undeniably shows that years of investment in London has not served Scotland or other UK nations and regions well, it does not tell us why. For that, we need to look at the factors involved in production, which include land, labour and capital. Quite simply, land and labour in London are among the most expensive in the world, and that requires ever- increasing amounts of capital investment to compensate. That means that vital capital investment is going not towards actually growing the economy but simply to cancel out the negative factors of costly land and labour.”
“What Thatcher began with miners and steelworkers, Starmer is determined to finish with oil and gas workers, with little investment in a just transition. Last year, we began with a promise of £28 billion of investment in the new green economy. However, the investment—and the jobs that go with it—has disappeared like sna aff a dyke. The much-vaunted GB Energy commitment to Aberdeen has now been reduced to a shared office and the promise of a few hundred jobs that will arrive some time in the next 20 years. Of course, we can also ask: where is the money for the Acorn carbon capture and storage project? Meanwhile, investment in London continues apace, with the total UK capital spend per person in London being £2,237 last year, in comparison with the figure of £1,789 per person in Scotland.”
“However, it is the small eastern European nations that strode on to the world stage as independent countries that are marching to the sunlit uplands, and not the UK nations and regions. The GDP per capita of the median UK region now sits snugly between the median regions in the former eastern bloc countries of Lithuania and Slovenia. It is a plain fact that, over the past decades, we have been dragged down while those independent European nations have pulled themselves up. However, the new Labour UK Government, rather than accepting that the policy of London and the south-east first has failed, is just as determined as Thatcher was to continue down the path of failure that will see Scotland’s potential continue to be smothered.”
“Will he therefore take the advice of Scottish Financial Enterprise and urge his Government to cut income tax in Scotland and recruit some of those skilled workers to Scotland, so that we can grow at a similar pace to the rest of the UK? Kevin Stewart: Funnily enough, I was just going to come to the London financial sector. We have been promised that Scotland’s wealth flowing south to be invested in London would pull the rest of us up, and that, thanks to the broad shoulders of the UK, we would all march into the sunlit uplands of imperial splendour, but the exact opposite has happened. Since Thatcher began the campaign of using Scotland’s wealth to turn the City of London into a global financial centre, the cold war has ended and we have watched the iron curtain fall.”
“Quite simply, the UK is a country where the top 10 per cent are lapping it up while the rest of us are falling behind. That, by itself, is shameful, but it does not tell the whole story. Inequality in the UK also occurs at a regional and national level. Again, we can turn to the OECD for the plain facts. On GDP per capita, Greater London ranks 11th out of 419 regions in the OECD database, but the median UK region ranks only 179th. The gulf between London and the rest of us is not an accident. We have been told for years that a pound that is spent in Croydon is worth more than a pound that is spent in Scotland—a Boris Johnson catchphrase, if I remember rightly. Craig Hoy: Is Mr Stewart aware that one of the engines of the London economy is the financial services sector?”
“Scotland has extraordinary economic potential. We have been inventors in the past, we have innovated in oil and gas and we have key sectors such as renewables, food and drink, tourism and high-technology research that would do even better if investment was put into play by the UK Government. Let us look at current regional inequity in the UK. Although the subject of economic regional inequity in the UK can descend into heated public debate, what is not up for debate are the plain facts. For those facts, we need to turn to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, whose data should be beyond political debate. It comes as no surprise to me that, according to OECD official data, the UK ranks 27th out of 31 countries for income equality.”
“He will be familiar with the H100 Fife programme, which the First Minister officially opened and which is trialling use of hydrogen in domestic settings.”