Dave Doogan
MP for Angus and Perthshire Glens · Scottish National Party · United Kingdom
“I note that the Minister has failed to quash the rumours about Acorn, so let me try another imminent Labour party betrayal of Scotland’s energy. At a time when bills are set to be £1,000 higher than the Labour party promised, the Chancellor is inexplicably going to increase the unit price of gas.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“There is real fear in Scotland this morning that the Labour party is about to embark on another big betrayal of Scotland’s energy. After abandoning Grangemouth and costing thousands of energy jobs in Scotland, the UK Government now seem set on withdrawing funding for Scotland’s carbon capture industry.”
House of Commons28 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“May I, on behalf of all SNP MPs past and present who have had the tremendous good fortune to work under the guidance and tutelage of Tom as Clerk of the House, express our gratitude and support for the motion?”
House of Commons22 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Indeed, Tom’s support was so instructive, so comprehensive and so helpful to the SNP that I had no option but to conclude that he, too, must be a freedom fighter committed to the cause of Scottish independence. Accordingly, I scoured the SNP membership list to check for his entry—alas, his name appeared not.”
House of Commons22 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Industrial hemp is at the forefront of innovation in agriculture, and my constituent Martin Cessford is a farmer at the forefront of that in Scotland. Hemp has great promise for industrial, health, climate and building applications.”
House of Commons10 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In the coming weeks, energy bills will rise again for households across the United Kingdom; within the last few days, five major mortgage lenders have pushed up mortgage prices for households across the United Kingdom; and within the last few hours, the cost of a barrel of oil has gone to over $100, pushing up prices at the pumps for moto…”
House of Commons9 September 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
1,432 lines on record for Dave Doogan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, without an account. Most recent 500 lines shown. Search to find more. Page 8 of 10.
This is not an official version of UK Parliament proceedings. It reproduces the published record and links to it; the official version is the one UK Parliament publishes.
“On the point the Minister just made about the notional value of estates, I think I can help him, because that is where he is going wrong, and where he has taken his Government up an agricultural cul-de-sac. When it comes to agriculture, what is important is not the notional value of the estate, but how someone came by that estate—whether they used billions of pounds of money on which they should have been paying tax in order not to pay tax, or whether they inherited the family farm from the generation that went before. That is the differentiation that the Treasury should be making. The value is irrelevant; the Minister should focus on the nature of the inheritance or acquisition.”
House of Commons10 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“T7. Do the Secretary of State, his officials and his chiefs have a plan to implement the additional resource from 2.5% of GDP when it arrives? If they do not, we will be faced with lengthy delays while procurement plans are put in place. Is this a case of ministerial prevarication, or is there a serious plan? If 2.5% arrives but there are no plans for procurement ready to hit the ground running, we will actually be no further forward than we were at 2%.”
House of Commons10 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“What will workers in Scotland be thinking right now, as they watch the UK Government, and a Scottish Minister, going out of their way to accelerate the decline in North sea oil and gas jobs, in advance of replacement jobs coming onstream, as they can see at Grangemouth? Does the Minister not understand that the reduction in attrition to North sea oil and gas production must be commensurate with a reduction in demand and an increase in renewables jobs? He has got that mix all over the place.”
House of Commons10 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“No amount of rowing back by the US State Department can change the fact that what the United States President intimated earlier this week amounts to ethnic cleansing. Are the UK Government of the same view that, if prosecuted, his plan would amount to ethnic cleansing? If not, what do the UK Government understand ethnic cleansing to be? I have heard an awful lot of warm words from the Government and ambition about what we believe in, what we stand for and what we have delivered around the immediate humanitarian crisis, but let us not forget that the horrors that have happened over the past 18 months are due to the vacuum created by international inaction over the plight of the Palestinians for the last 50 years. What will this Government do to change that drastic situation?”
House of Commons6 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Interestingly, the Prime Minister could not tell me when he will next be visiting Scotland, but does he agree with the withering assessment of the eminent politics professor Sir John Curtice, who says that the current UK Prime Minister is “the worst thing that ever happened to Anas Sarwar”? If he does not—and he should—does he think that it is stripping Scottish pensioners of their winter fuel payment, abandoning workers in Grangemouth or attacking the national insurance payments of farmers that has catastrophically torpedoed Labour in the polls in Scotland? When he does get a date, he can even bring his Chancellor with him to back him up on the numbers—assuming that she is still Chancellor by then.”
House of Commons5 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This matter must be so important if it consumes so much of the Minister’s credibility and £18 billion of taxpayers’ money. One would think there would be more than four Government Back Benchers here to speak about it. Is it that they do not care, or do they lack the literacy to discuss these issues? The Minister said on the “Today” programme this morning that we have passed the situation on to the White House, that we await its feedback and that, when we receive it, we will know exactly where we stand as a Government. Is that the type of sovereignty he is after?”
House of Commons5 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“What would help bill payers is the £300 cut to energy bills that the Labour party promised in its manifesto. Instead, bills went up £149 in October, they went up £21 in January, and they are going up again by £99 in April. Can the Minister explain where the source of this departmental ineptitude lies, and would she like to apologise to the people of these islands for writing cheques that her party cannot cash?”
House of Commons4 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It says on the cover that this is about growing the UK economy, but the statement’s substance is much more about growing the English economy. It has a passing reference to Wrexham and a nebulous acknowledgement that the Government will “build a pipeline of investable propositions…starting with strategic partnerships in the Glasgow city region”. Will the Chief Secretary perhaps flesh out what that means and, at the same time, explain why he did not allocate any funding to reimbursing Edinburgh University for the supercomputer, invest in SAF in Grangemouth, or invest in the Acorn project in the north-east?”
House of Commons29 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Let me try to help the Minister understand where the Opposition’s concern is coming from: it is because of the realisation, or suspicion, that the arbiter of when and how 2.5% is realised is not the Secretary of State for Defence but the Chancellor. This is a Chancellor who scarcely understands the fundamentals of economics, much less the fundamentals of defence and the threat environment that these islands face. What will the path to 2.5% look like? Is there a date, or is it when certain criteria are met? Also, the Minister be clear on who the final arbiter will be? Is the Treasury saying, “2.5% when you need it,” or “2.5% when we decide it”?”
House of Commons27 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Will the Minister please respectfully pause the measure, take some time to think about this, and come up with something that will actually deliver for the Treasury but not push our family farming sector under.”
House of Commons23 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This measure is now revealed to be spectacularly ill-considered, leaving aside the fact that it is also a breathtaking betrayal of farmers, who were promised before the election that this would not happen. The measure groups intergenerational farmers with speculative millionaires seeking to dodge tax by getting involved in farming. It has put an immediate brake on investment in farming, which threatens to lower yields and drive up food prices. That then threatens to put inflationary pressures on the UK economy, which is already in a perilous state. This Government cannot just agree with the OBR when it suits them. They must agree with the OBR regardless of what it says.”
House of Commons23 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That follows a previous investigation showing that goods, including luxury cars, fossil fuels and items that can be weapons—or whose components can be converted into weaponry—have been flowing between the UK and Russia since the beginning of Russia’s war in Ukraine. Surely the Secretary of State must be concerned that inaction elsewhere in Whitehall is potentially putting men and women in uniform in the UK’s armed forces at risk from Russia’s malign aggression.”
House of Commons22 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I welcome the Secretary of State’s statement and the actions it details to intervene in Russian activity in the waters around these islands. I also commend the diligence and professionalism of those men and women in uniform in the Royal Navy, Royal Fleet Auxiliary and the RAF. He said in his statement, though, that the UK will “continue to lead the way” on sanctions against Russia’s shadow fleet, but the UK is not leading the way on sanctions, is it? A Sky News investigation last week found out that the Government have no record of how many investigations they are carrying out into breaches of Russian sanctions.”
House of Commons22 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Neither the US Federal Reserve nor the EU Central Bank are engaged in active quantitative tightening, but the Bank of England is. The Bank of England is costing the public finances in the region of £13 billion a year as a result of a fire sale of UK Government bonds. Last time I spoke to the Chancellor about that, she said that that was because of the Bank of England’s operational independence, which we all value, but that is not a licence for impunity. What discussions will she have with the Bank of England about releasing UK Government debt in a way that benefits everybody in the UK?”
House of Commons21 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The right hon. Gentleman will know, as all of us in this room do, that in GB we enjoy some of the most competitively priced fresh produce available anywhere in Europe and that is precisely because of the investments in production technology that family farms have made over generations. Is he concerned that at a stroke this Government, myopic about the workings of agriculture, have made them immediately—overnight—stop that investment, and consumers will feel that in food prices?”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The right hon. Gentleman is giving a comprehensive analysis of his concerns regarding this most vital of services to many parts of Scotland, including as far south-east as my constituency, and the people who make their living on the sea there. As the right hon. Gentleman says, this debate is about the future service. Would he like to see the Department and the MCA specify in the contract that a successful bidder will make certain cultural undertakings, if he thinks that is preferable to be prescribed? Does he agree that if the cost of providing a 15-minute response time seems expensive, the cost of failing to rescue lives will seem very much more expensive?”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We are where we are, and relatively content we are too, but in future negotiations with contractors for this service the Government have to understand that, in their pursuit of value for money in Government services, there are many, many places to look before they look here.”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The hon. Gentleman is laying bare the sentiment and bravery of the crews that operate these helicopters. They do whatever they can hopefully to bring safety and security, if not comfort, to people in coastal communities right around the British Isles. I may be the only rotary wing aircraft engineer in Parliament—I certainly like to think I am, anyway. Helicopters are inherently expensive, and it is incumbent on the Government to acknowledge that. That expense brings with it tremendous value. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that, as the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael) said, this is about the future?”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Minister rightly acknowledges the point made by the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael) about the use of search and rescue helicopters for ambulance services, which is a perfectly reasonable thing to do in extremis; it is not their job but they can do it. That happens in Scotland despite NHS Scotland funding two air ambulances and two fixed-wing aircraft, which is not the case in England. Is the Minister aware of any Government plans to introduce NHS-owned and operated airborne ambulance services to protect coastguard services in England?”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is beyond parody that His Majesty’s Chancellor would throw herself at the mercy of the Chinese Government and come back with £600 million in revenue over five years. Is she aware that £600 million in revenue is less than one ninetieth of HSBC’s annual profit? This is what she is holding up as a major achievement of the Treasury’s trade mission. My right hon. Friend the Member for Aberdeen South (Stephen Flynn) very reasonably asked what the Chancellor will do when, not if, her fiscal rules are breached. Will she increase borrowing, raise taxes or cut spending, not over five years but this year?”
House of Commons14 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am unconvinced, to use parliamentary language, by the Minister’s reassurance that the lights did not almost go out last week. I am also unconvinced by his saying that the system is robust and resilient. This is the Minister who told electors in Scotland that energy bills would come down by £300 under this Government. They have gone up, and will go up twice more. Given the perilous gas storage situation—it is at 1%, compared to the 25% the EU enjoys—what steps will he take to de-stress the system by accelerating investment in long-duration energy storage?”
House of Commons13 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Sadly, it is England 4, Scotland 0—it is like a football match.”
House of Commons7 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for giving way, and I apologise for chuntering from a sedentary position earlier; that was not very polite of me. He says that we need to see an end to the SNP’s “buy now and pay later” approach. Of course, he will be familiar with the fact that the SNP Government, or any other Scottish Government, must have a balanced budget every year, so what does he mean by “buy now and pay later”?”
House of Commons7 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“They also heeded the SNP’s pre-Budget call for greater investment in the NHS, which will be very welcome as we try to recover from covid and staffing challenges. But aside from those two things, on which the SNP gave the Government a menu, the Budget has been an unmitigated disaster for Scotland and Scotland’s economy. It has imposed billions of pounds of service cuts and tax rises that will hit working Scots in the pocket and do very little, if anything, to deliver on the promise that the people of the United Kingdom were offered as a prospectus in the run-up to the election.”
House of Commons7 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Vaz—we always have to say that, but in this instance, I genuinely mean it. I am grateful to speak on this issue. When I saw this coming up on the agenda for Westminster Hall, I thought, “Goodness me, who has brought this?” It turns out that it is the Government. I thought, “That is all right. Well, let’s see what the facts are because this Budget had precious little in it to be welcomed in Scotland.” I will start with that which could be welcomed for Scotland. Thankfully, the Chancellor heeded the SNP’s manifesto call to change the fiscal rules to allow more investment in capital infrastructure. That was good and welcome, and it will be helpful.”
House of Commons7 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I hope they get great benefit from that money but it does not fully compensate them for what they have lost, and no mistake. The tax rise of £40 billion represents the biggest since Norman Lamont in 1993. Do not forget that when this Government came in, they inherited the highest tax burden in living memory, or certainly since the end of the second world war at least—”
House of Commons7 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I hope that that money will be spent and make a great difference, but it will not compensate the Western Isles and the Northern Isles one bit for the money that they have lost as a consequence of Brexit. The hon. Member for Livingston (Gregor Poynton) and many of his colleagues herald this as the largest Budget settlement for the Scottish Government, as though Budget settlements go up and down. But they continually go up: every latest Budget settlement is the biggest Budget settlement since the last one. As various Bills have passed through the Chamber, I have not run out of opportunities to point out to the Government how the basics of fiscal policy and economics work, and here we are again. All power to the communities of the hon. Member for Na h-Eileanan an Iar (Torcuil Crichton).”
House of Commons7 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Yes, the highest—so it is not as if there was some kind of low-taxation holiday spree and the Labour Government came in and put taxes up to compensate for it. Taxes were already the highest that anybody can remember and now they have gone up again by the highest amount in 32 years. It is absolutely eye-watering. The Chancellor’s refusal to step back from cutting the winter fuel payment from around 900,000 pensioners is absolutely— [Interruption.] They are chuntering that the winter fuel payment is devolved.”
House of Commons7 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“No. Let us get it on the record that the fuel payment did not use to be devolved and that, at the same time as it was devolved, they went and cut the budget. That is the Labour Government at a UK level for you. So yes, I know it is devolved.”
House of Commons7 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Chancellor will presumably then do what the UK Government always do when Labour in Scotland ask them to do something: absolutely nothing, if not the exact opposite. The hon. Member for Livingston also talked about energy. He should go up to the north-east of Scotland to talk about energy: we are six months into this Government and there is no evidence whatever of GB Energy making any impact in Scotland. The last time I checked, it had one employee and was based in Manchester. The hon. Member also talked about the investment that would be realised. Somehow, the Acorn project in Scotland —the most deliverable carbon capture, usage and storage project across GB—is still not being funded by the Labour Government, despite their funding a further two CCUS projects in England, in addition to the two already there.”
House of Commons7 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Government think they will raise over £20 billion but, by the Treasury’s own measure, that figure is down to around £10 billion after they have made all the compensations. It is a massive swage of pain for very little gain in investment. In moving the motion, the hon. Member for Livingston said that we in the SNP are keen to spend the extra money we will get but not to say how we would raise it. Actually, I will tell him how we would raise it, and our way would be much more cogent than what the Labour Government in Westminster have said they will do. Over and above that, in a Scotland-specific context the hike in duty on Scotch whisky was, in the words of the industry itself, “an indefensible tax grab”. Yet somehow we are expected to believe that everything will be okay because Anas Sarwar is going to speak to the Chancellor about it.”
House of Commons7 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“No. If the hon. Gentleman can get one of his colleagues to intervene, I will give way to them. The Government’s decision to raise national insurance was like them showing that they do not know how the real economy works without showing that they do not know how the real economy works. It is a punitive lowering of the floor and increasing of the rate to try to wring out of employers the money required to recover the economy. It is a drag on employment, investment and wage rises. It is absolutely unforgiveable and totally counter to what the Labour party stated, ahead of the election, was its aim: to create a Budget for growth. There will be absolutely no growth as a consequence of that autumn statement.”
House of Commons7 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“What about investors in the agricultural sector? Scotland’s agriculture is a very much larger part of its economy than overall UK agriculture is of the UK economy, but I am sure the Chancellor never bothered to speak to anybody in Scotland about her raid on farms through her farmers’ death tax. Labour could have done something progressive to stop outside investment and farmers disrupting that market, but they did not and they threatened the very existence of Scottish agriculture. What would the SNP have done? We would certainly not have put this colossal fiscal drag on the economy of Scotland. We would have made sure that what we did was progressive and proportionate and that it would increase economic growth. I am sure Labour Members are not very supportive of an income tax in Scotland—”
House of Commons7 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Inflation is set to rise to 2.6% and interest rates by 0.25% just; mortgage rates, after a brief period of respite, are on course to rise again. For years, people up and down these islands, especially in Scotland, have been hammered by the cost of living crisis. They, alongside small businesses, will be looking at this hatchet job by the Labour party and wondering what on earth will be coming next. The Institute for Fiscal Studies, no less, has pointed out that somebody will pay for these higher taxes; that somebody will be the ordinary working person. The Office for Budget Responsibility estimates that there is only a 54% chance that the Labour Government will meet their own fiscal rules through this Budget, raising the question of why the Chancellor thinks this amount of economic pain is worth such a low level of fiscal gain.”
House of Commons7 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“During the debate on the autumn statement, I said that it was fantastic news that the Government, to be fair, had made sure that the money was there for the infected blood scandal and that the postmasters were properly compensated. Neither of those two scandals was of the UK Government’s making—well, not deliberately of their making; certainly not the infected blood scandal—but the WASPI women’s situation was. We now know the Government have turned their back on those people in the most reprehensible way possible. The Chancellor promised a growth Budget and the hon. Member for Livingston says it is a growth Budget, but sadly it will “leave GDP largely unchanged in five years”. The inflation forecast will compound that.”
House of Commons7 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Like the hon. Lady, I am very hopeful that we will see Berwick Bank approved and into the construction phase as quickly as possible, to cement Scotland’s enviable position as the renewable powerhouse of Europe. She shares that ambition with me, but what we are talking about is due process. It ill behoves elected Members of any stripe or any Parliament to meddle in the statutory process of a consenting major development; that will unwind in the way it unwinds, but I very much hope it is positive and expedient. I turn to the Women Against State Pension Inequality—the WASPI women. They will absolutely have been left wondering what they have done to deserve such a catastrophic betrayal by the Labour party of their very modest and reasonable ambitions.”
House of Commons7 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“They do not want to talk about Brexit, but I do, because it cost the UK £30 billion a year and Scotland £10 billion a year, which would otherwise have been a great increase in the economic output of Scotland and the rest of the UK. My final point is that the UK Government could scrap nuclear weapons. In four years, the estimated budget has gone up from £44 billion to £100 billion over a 10-year period. An awful lot of investment could be made in Scottish communities with that money, which would boost Scotland even more. We already enjoy the highest number of GPs, nurses, midwives and teachers per head in Scotland; nowhere else in the United Kingdom can touch our level of provision. The Labour party are just going to have to suck that up.”
House of Commons7 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“That is fine, Ms Vaz; I am just closing now. I do not think Members will be speaking for 10 minutes, but that is not my job. On the progressive income tax regime implemented by the SNP in Scotland, I should say that Labour criticised us when we had the powers and did not use them, and criticised us when we had the powers and did use them. If the UK Government had mirrored our fiscal policy on income tax, they would have raised about £16.5 billion across the United Kingdom. That would not have been reduced to £10 billion because of compensations that they would have had to make, because there would not have been a raise on employer’s national insurance; they would not have had to compensate anybody.”
House of Commons7 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The hon. Gentleman mentions the litany of failures, as he sees them, in Scotland’s NHS. How then does he explain that spending per head is greater than it is the rest of the UK, that the number of doctors per 100,000 people is higher than it is the rest of the UK, that the number of nurses per 100,000—”
House of Commons7 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Does the hon. Member agree that money talks? Despite how we might argue here in Parliament, money talks. Is he concerned that the yield on UK Government gilts over 30 years is now 5.22%, which is even higher than when Liz Truss tanked the economy?”
House of Commons7 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The cost of the 10-year equipment plan for the Defence Nuclear Organisation stood at £44 billion in 2019. In 2022, it went up by 27% to £60 billion, and in 2024 it inflated by 62% to £99.5 billion. Can the Secretary of State reassure us that the MOD has not lost the run of itself on this worst-of-all defence procurement debacles? What personal commitment can he give the House that he has the foggiest idea what to do about it?”
House of Commons6 January 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Q10. Before the election, this Prime Minister said he would lower energy bills by £300. Since he took office, they have gone up by £149. He said he would protect the winter fuel payment, but now he is in power he has stripped it off our pensioners. And he lined up for many photos with WASPI women, saying he would have their backs, and he has just betrayed them in the most scandalous way possible. This is now the defining characteristic of this one-trick phony Prime Minister who says one thing and does another. In Scotland, the SNP is 16 points ahead in the polls. Does he understand why the people of these islands, especially those of us in Scotland, treat him with such contempt?”
House of Commons18 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Minister gets ahead of himself. He says the Government have moved at pace to resolve the situation; the situation is not resolved. He criticises the last Government for not securing a deal; his deal is not secured either. The last time we talked about this, we talked about the President-elect not being keen on the deal and the Chagossians not being properly consulted on it. When will he come back to the House on this situation and tell us something positive about this cack-handed deal?”
House of Commons18 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The hon. Lady is making a tremendously informed speech and demonstrating a level of understanding of primary care and the care sector that we could only dream of from the Government. Is it her concern that many charities, voluntary sector organisations and GP surgeries are already operating on the thinnest margins of financial sustainability and that this measure will torpedo the very organisations that protect our communities from absolute chaos? Secondary care cannot do it alone; it is upheld by primary care and the care sector. Is she as concerned as many other hon. Members that this will cause absolute chaos?”
House of Commons17 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The hon. Member is very kind to give way. Twice in the past couple of minutes, he has used the word “ultimately”—“Ultimately we will have to do this, and ultimately we will have to do that.” It is “actually” that he should be saying. You actually have to make sure that there is funding, not ultimately—that can wait for another day. Actually is what will happen as soon as this legislation comes to pass—you will be in an absolute quagmire.”
House of Commons17 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The hon. Gentleman talks about the expansion of early years childcare, but that will not be of much use if nurseries shut down because they cannot pay their national insurance. Does he understand that dynamic?”
House of Commons17 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The hon. Lady is making a compelling case of logic as it applies to early years provision, and I do not think anybody in this place could argue with the logic she advances. Is it not so robust, however, that it also applies to primary care, hospices and charities, if it applies to nurseries?”
House of Commons17 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Not one Labour Scottish MP made a speech to protect Scotland’s interests. But Labour MPs from Scotland were there to nod through and vote through the cut to the winter fuel payment, freezing Scotland’s pensioners; Labour’s bedroom tax, entrenching poverty in Scotland; Labour’s two-child limit, punishing the poorest in Scotland; taxing Scotland’s oil and gas sector to the brink of extinction; attacking Scottish agriculture; and gouging Scotch whisky. They were all here to make sure that that happened and to speak to that, so I will leave the people of Scotland to draw their own conclusions about this particular lack of activity from Scottish Labour MPs.”
House of Commons17 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Yet again, we see key sectors of the Scottish economy hammered by a London Treasury out of touch, out of ideas and, if this goes through, demonstrably out of control. Higher education, agriculture, and oil and gas are all demonstrably larger elements of the Scottish economy than they are of the English or UK economy. This Government, with NICs and other specific tax increases or allowance removals, are hammering particularly important elements of the Scottish economy. As usual, what England wants Scotland gets. The Labour Government’s national insurance increase will be a disaster for Scotland’s healthcare providers, voluntary organisations, nurseries, universities and colleges, but who on the Labour Benches has come along to speak up for those organisations in Scotland? Nobody.”
House of Commons17 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We in the SNP have consistently highlighted the brutal impact that Labour’s tax rises will have on GPs, charities, care homes and other sectors, with organisations warning that deep cuts will be made to the services they provide—vital services that are no less essential to communities and individuals than secondary care services just because they are received in the community or from a charity. That is why we have tabled amendments 4, 5, 6 and 26 in my name and the names of SNP colleagues. On higher education, the University of Edinburgh was last month reported to have opened a redundancy process for staff as a result of Labour’s tax hike, and Universities Scotland is warning of a potential £45 million tax burden for Scottish universities.”
House of Commons17 December 2024Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗