Douglas McAllister
MP for West Dunbartonshire · Labour · United Kingdom
“West Dunbartonshire is one of eight local authorities that make up the Glasgow city region deal. The local authority is delivering an ambitious project to create a major industrial and commercial development on the former ExxonMobil terminal site on the Clyde.”
“We are inadvertently helping to fund infrastructure on stolen land. We should be funding peace, not obstacles to peace, and not apartheid. Furthermore, the settlement enterprises know exactly what they are doing and they know that it is wrong.”
“Yes, I agree entirely with my hon. Friend, who makes a very good point. I think all hon. Members in the House have had the same volume of correspondence from our constituents, emphasising the strength of feeling up and down the United Kingdom. Today, the situation in the west bank and East Jerusalem is at breaking point.”
“For my constituents in West Dunbartonshire, a community geographically far removed from Palestine, the horrific injustice being inflicted on the Palestinian people resonates deeply.”
“Later, as provost during the 2014 Gaza war, I made the decision to fly the Palestinian flag from Dumbarton town hall—the municipal buildings. We were the first council in Scotland to do so. Yes, that was met with a backlash, but it sent a message of hope.”
“In May last year, we also rightly suspended negotiations on a free trade agreement with Israel. But guidance and warnings are no longer enough. We must ensure that the illegal settlements have no viable economic future. On 7 June, I proudly signed the letter co-ordinated by my hon.”
The complete record
Every one of 294 lines we hold for Douglas McAllister, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 6.
“At the heart of Labour values is an inherent belief that background should not be a barrier to success, and the removal of the two-child limit is a clear and welcome expression of that commitment. This is the change that we promised and it will make a real, tangible difference to so many families in my constituency. The removal of this limit is only part of this Labour Government’s plan for change, and for tackling poverty in a sustained way. The Chancellor’s decision to reduce the level of debt repayments taken from universal credit means that 1.2 million of the poorest households keep more of their award each month. This is a straightforward change, but one that will have a real impact on family finances in West Dunbartonshire.”
“There are many families in my constituency that struggle every single day to make ends meet, and I see children starting life on the back foot through no fault of their own. My wife works in education, and for many years she worked in a primary school in my constituency where it was common for children to arrive hungry, having had nothing to eat at home. I remind the House that these are not just statistics. These are children skipping meals and living in cold, damp homes because their families cannot afford to buy sufficient food, never mind pay the heating bill. These children are the next generation in West Dunbartonshire, and they should not be denied the same opportunities as others. Every single child matters.”
“It is where I live, and it is where I want our children and young people to succeed. By scrapping the two-child limit, we will directly benefit 2,260 children in West Dunbartonshire. Last year, over 4,500 children in my constituency were living in poverty, and despite the claims of those who oppose the Bill, more than 60% of those households with children in poverty are working families. I see parents turning to food banks not because they have failed, but because the system has failed them. In some parts of West Dunbartonshire, over 65% of people are living in relative poverty. In 2024, this meant that eight children in every classroom of 30 in my constituency were growing up in poverty, while more than 12,000 households struggled with fuel poverty. Those figures underlie why the Bill will make such a difference.”
“I rise to support the Bill and do so proudly on behalf of the families I represent in West Dunbartonshire. The two-child benefit cap makes poor children poorer. It punishes children for their circumstances and it has no place in our United Kingdom. Tackling child poverty is a proud Labour tradition and one that this Government have been proactive in pursuing from the very outset. This will deliver the much-needed change that we promised to my constituents. West Dunbartonshire is a constituency with pockets of significant deprivation, but it is also one that is built on a proud legacy of hard work, fairness and a strong sense of community. For too long in my constituency, too many families have been held back by the two-child benefit cap—a policy that does not reflect my values.”
“As Member of Parliament for West Dunbartonshire, I have the honour of following in the footsteps of a very distinguished predecessor, Lord McFall, the Lord Speaker, who steps down this week after 40 years at Westminster. He has served my community and our democracy with great wisdom, courtesy, grace and humility. Will the Leader of the House join me in expressing gratitude for his decades of service, and send both him and his wife Joan our warmest wishes?”
“I have no doubt that my 6,000 WASPI women will be very angry about this decision. Will today’s announcement mean that the legal proceedings challenging the Government’s original decision will continue? What plans do we have, if any, to get round the table and try to avoid legal proceedings?”
“The gender pay gap for full-time employees in Scotland widened from 2% in 2024 to 3.5% in 2025. It is utterly unacceptable that, on the SNP’s watch, women in Scotland are earning less for the same hours. What can the UK Government do to improve matters for women across the country?”
“T3. The SNP Government dropped the ball on an £11 million investment, led by Rolls-Royce, in building a specialist welding centre on the Clyde—a vital opportunity to support the Royal Navy. It is only thanks to this Labour Government providing £2.5 million of support to the programme that it is going ahead. Does the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster agree that, at a time of rising global uncertainty, my constituents deserve better than the flaky student union politics of the SNP Government?”
“Q4. West Dunbartonshire is set to benefit from record UK Labour Government investment: £60 million of local growth funding has just been announced for the Glasgow city region, to add to the £20 million for Dumbarton’s town centre regeneration, the £20 million Pride in Place funding for my home town of Clydebank, and the £1.5 million in impact funding. Does the Prime Minister agree that this is in stark contrast to the SNP, which abandoned our communities, and demonstrates the difference that a Labour Government make to West Dunbartonshire and to Scotland?”
“Exactly 3,000 days ago, my constituent Jagtar Singh Johal was imprisoned in India, and 3,000 days later, he remains arbitrarily detained. He faces the death penalty on trumped-up charges, having been brutally tortured to make a confession. While in opposition, our Prime Minister rightly recognised my constituent’s detention as arbitrary. We need to do more than just raise his case with Indian counterparts. My constituent was acquitted in March last year of all charges, but now faces essentially eight duplicate cases based on the same evidence. Does the Foreign Secretary or the Minister agree that this is clearly double jeopardy, as recognised under Indian, international and UK law, and will the Government make that clear to Indian counterparts?”
“In my constituency, on 5 November last year we experienced not only horrific effects on animals but unacceptable criminal conduct and large-scale chaos. Police riot vans were deployed after a 40-strong mob pelted people, local businesses and cars with explosives, and emergency services were attacked at several locations. Bonfire night is just an excuse for antisocial behaviour now, frankly, as are the weeks before and after. Does my hon. Friend agree that the SNP Scottish Government need to get a grip? Their failure to deliver the promised legislative protections has left communities such as West Dunbartonshire exposed.”
“Will the Minister update the House on the progress made in her positive discussions with the Scottish Government relating to the provisions of non-means tested legal aid? Will Scottish families enjoy the same access to justice as those in the rest of our United Kingdom, and at the same time?”
“Caritas Internationalis is just one of the 37 international aid organisations that Israel has sought to ban or deregister. This will have a severe impact on humanitarian aid delivery in Gaza. At midnight mass, Christ the Redeemer church in the west bank adorned its Christmas tree not with baubles, but with the names of the lands expected to be occupied or already stolen by illegal settlers. What support can the Church provide to these brave Christians in Occupied Palestinian Territories?”
“The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, in his statement to the House on 11 November, advised that he would “retake” the earlier decision of the Government on the question of how 1950s-born women were affected by the maladministration of pension age changes communication. I have almost 6,000 WASPI women in my constituency, and they are rightfully impatient for this matter finally to be resolved. Does the Leader of the House expect the Secretary of State to update the House soon? If so, when is that expected?”
“In preparing for this e-petition debate, I clicked on the House of Commons Library service, which invites Members to look at a Government tracker produced by the registered charity and independent fact-checking organisation Full Fact. Did the hon. Member click on that and look at its findings in relation to the 86 pledges from the Labour party manifesto?”
“Last month, I visited Portnellan farm in my West Dunbartonshire constituency. I received a very warm and courteous welcome from husband and wife farmers David and Freda and their son Chris. The Scott-Parks run their family farm and were keen for me to hear and see at first hand the challenges that they face in ensuring that the next generation can continue to farm at Portnellan. I listened to their request that we review the original proposals. Does the Minister agree that 85% of all farming estates will now be protected from inheritance tax but, importantly, that we will maintain the original principle that tax avoiders should not use land to avoid tax at the expense of hard-working family farmers such as the Scott-Parks?”
“The Minister advised in his statement that consular cases of British citizens detained abroad are at the heart of the work of the Foreign Office, and he provided an update on some of those cases. My West Dunbartonshire constituent Jagtar Singh Johal has remained arbitrarily detained in India for more than eight years; in two weeks’ time, it will be 3,000 days. What is being done to secure his release, beyond just raising his case with Indian counterparts? We have been doing that for eight years with no effect.”
“This is such welcome news for Grangemouth and Scotland just prior to Christmas. My thanks go to the Minister and all Departments that worked jointly to secure the deal. It is a pity that the SNP could not bring itself to mention the Grangemouth investment earlier today at PMQs—perhaps after decades of failure, the SNP cannot recognise success. Does the Minister agree that both the SNP and the Tories sat on their hands while the future of jobs at Grangemouth was at risk? Does he agree that today’s announcement demonstrates that Scotland needs a Scottish Labour Government in Holyrood to secure more good jobs?”
“A response from the Government is expected by Christmas; I hope that that response will recognise the sentiment in our report that continued momentum on Grangemouth’s future is vital. Project Willow must not be left to gather dust while jobs are at stake. Communities that have powered our economy for generations deserve certainty and a fair future.”
“Friend the Member for Rutherglen (Michael Shanks), said that announcements will be forthcoming on the investment proposals brought forward by the National Wealth Fund. I understand that the first project to be funded on the site was announced today: a groundbreaking biotech company using by-products from whisky distillation, which is jointly funded by both the UK and Scottish Governments’ £3 million of investment and hopes to deliver over 300 good jobs. That announcement is welcome. The timescales of establishing future industries at Grangemouth and the jobs that they will create all hinge on the types of investment proposal put forward. I commend the Committee’s report to all hon. Members.”
“That is yet another example of Scotland’s rapidly changing industrial base. As we move away from our reliance on fossil fuels, industrial transition will only accelerate. For our national resilience, we must learn from these cases. The Grangemouth case has illustrated the need for the Government’s active stewardship in the energy transition. Our report recommends that the Government set out clear principles that outline the conditions and actions that underpin a just transition. We recommend principles that emphasise the importance of early Government intervention, proactive engagement with workers and communities, and a focus on decent jobs. Those principles should draw on best practice and ensure that transitions are fair and planned, not rushed and reactive. Last month, the Minister for Energy, my hon.”
“We heard oral evidence from Petroineos, the company that owns the refinery, from its parent company Ineos, from union representatives, from Project Willow and from the Forth Valley college, which provides the skills support for former refinery workers. Our report concluded that both Governments should have acted sooner to set in motion plans for the site’s future and to prepare for resulting job losses. That lack of action created an employment gap and hardship to the local community that could have been avoided. We said in our report that Grangemouth is the “canary in a coalmine” and a stark warning of what is to come. That warning proved prescient: just a few months on from the publication of the report, ExxonMobil announced its plans to shut the Mossmorran ethylene plant in February 2026.”
“The refinery’s closure has left some 400 employees and the wider Grangemouth community facing deep uncertainty. The Prime Minister’s pledge of £200 million through the National Wealth Fund for future industries at the site was welcome, as was the Scottish Government’s announcement of £25 million to help establish a just transition for Grangemouth. The extra £14.5 million announced in the Budget was another welcome boost. However, the Government have not yet set out how that will be delivered and how it will tangibly result in jobs. The Committee visited the Grangemouth site during our inquiry.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Western. I thank the hon. Member for Brigg and Immingham (Martin Vickers) for securing this important debate. I speak in my capacity as a member of the Scottish Affairs Committee, which has recently published a report, “The future of Scotland’s oil and gas industry”, as part of our inquiry into Scotland’s role in the UK’s energy transition. I thank the hon. Member for allowing the report to be tagged to this debate on the Order Paper. The closure of the Grangemouth oil refinery, following the Petroineos announcement in November 2023 that refining operations would cease at the site, was a key focus of our report. The Grangemouth oil refinery operated for over a century, and was Scotland’s only oil refinery before refining officially ended in April this year.”
“Clause 18(e) provides for non-means-tested legal aid to bereaved family members at inquests. The Bill is intended to introduce UK-wide legislation. I understand that the Minister has engaged in positive talks with the Scottish Government over a number of months because of the devolved nature of Scottish legal aid at fatal accident inquiries. Are we any further forward with those talks? Will the Scottish people enjoy the same access to legal aid as the rest of the UK?”
“It could be raised in several formats—ideally, by them giving evidence, but there are other ways. They can try to introduce it in the course of the prosecution case. There is a judge filter—the judge will not allow any old reasonable excuse to be put to the jury—but if the judge is satisfied that it is right for it to go to the jury, ultimately it will be for the jury to assess. The juries did assess that in those examples where public officials were providing information in exchange for money.”
“Tom Guest: From a practical point of view, in prosecuting misconduct in public office we do not generally have a problem with that—although I will come on to situations in which we do—because you have already shown that a police officer is doing something very serious indeed. The chances of them establishing that they had a reasonable excuse for that are very slim indeed. For context, it is quite rare that that is successfully raised because the prosecution should already have shown that something pretty serious has happened. To give an example, we did have cases where public officials were providing information in return for money. On one view, that was a form of corruption, but their defence was, “I have a reasonable excuse for that.” Let me just run through how that works.”
“Q My question is to Tom. Under the clause 12(5) defence of reasonable excuse for a seriously improper act of misconduct, what do we regard as the “sufficient evidence” described in clause 12(6)? You said that the defendant simply needs to raise that, but to what standard? What is sufficient and, in a jury trial, who decides that? Is it for the jury to decide if the defence has been laid out, or will there be judge guidance to the jury? The standard of the burden of proof falling on the Crown to disprove it is pretty high—it is “beyond all reasonable doubt”. That is my concern.”
“To build on one of the points mentioned earlier, the reasonableness and proportionality of legal representation will be linked to conduct, to a degree. The assessment by the coroner of whether the public authority’s level of representation is proportionate will very much flow from whether the coroner believes the public authority is acting and following their duty of candour and their duty to assist the investigation, and is being open, frank and transparent. If they are, there will be few concerns about their level of legal representation, but if they are not, there will be big concerns about their level of legal representation, because that will be seen as a mechanism to block rather than comply with their duties. Does that make sense?”
“One of the points they made, which was slightly surprising to me—I think Richard alluded to this earlier—was that they do not necessarily see parity as being about the number or seniority of the lawyers that represent either side in the inquisitorial process. Because of the completely different role that a bereaved family have in an inquest—as opposed to a public authority—it is probably understandable in many circumstances why a public authority might have a bigger legal team. If the duty of candour works in practice, and if public authorities genuinely want to assist the coroner to carry out their investigations, they may need a larger legal team to assist them properly. I would not say it is as simple as just numbers and seniority.”
“Of course, there are other situations in which means-tested legal aid will be made available, particularly when more than one family is involved who want representation, or at least preparation for the inquest rather than the advocacy itself. At the moment, there is not a cap in respect of the preparation and advocacy aspects of work on inquest cases. That is probably right, because the system is already over-bureaucratic and underpaid. The creation of a cap, or people having to extend the level of legal aid they can access at different points in time in an inquest process, is just going to act as another barrier to ensuring adequate representation. Parity is a really difficult question. I have been speaking about this to our members who are inquest specialists.”
“Chris Minnoch: On your first question, there is an issue around non-means-tested legal aid becoming available and so the case coming into scope at that stage, at the point at which the public authority is appointed as an interested party. Some of our members have expressed concerns that the appointment—the actual point at which an authority becomes an interested party—might be quite late in the process. It could be not when the inquest is opened, but perhaps closer to when the proceedings commence. An awful lot of work needs to be done in the intervening period, and that can last a long time. We are already talking to the Ministry of Justice about whether, although that is currently written into the Bill, it is the best way to determine the point at which non-means-tested legal aid is made available.”
“Q First, the Bill provides for non-means-tested legal aid, but how should that work in practice, Mr Minnoch? Should the grant be uncapped, in respect of time and line, with no limit? Or do you envisage that there should be blocks of work with specified limits? Secondly, if a public authority has a team of, for instance, one senior and two juniors, why should a bereaved family be represented by perhaps only one junior counsel? That really would not be parity of arms. The Bill talks about members of bereaved families, but how many members of that family are we talking about? Is it one specific next of kin? We heard evidence earlier from a witness who talked about a divorcing couple. Would they both be granted legal aid?”
“Over time, one of the things we will be able to learn is what sort of costs should be expected for this work, and once we know what the norms are, it may be possible to move to a system where there are stages or caps where people know, “This is the expected level of costs for that. If you’re going to exceed that, maybe you would need to get specific authority”, but we do not have that information at the outset. That will be something to develop in a number of years, once the evidence comes through.”
“Yes, it does. Thank you. Richard Miller: I will add one point on the costs aspect. Firms will not be given a blank cheque here; they know that when they submit their bill of costs to the Legal Aid Agency, it will be very closely scrutinised. Any costs that the Legal Aid Agency considers were not necessarily and reasonably incurred will be disallowed, and firms know they will be subject to that level of scrutiny when they undertake work, so they are, by definition, very cautious about what work they do. They do not want to do a whole load of work that they are not going to get paid for, so there is a very significant control of the costs from that assessment by the Legal Aid Agency.”
“There is no better way to recognise the daily struggles of our carers, their love for the people they care for and their contribution to our society. I thank all our West Dunbartonshire carers, as well as all the unpaid carers across our nation.”
“I am incredibly fortunate to have Carers of West Dunbartonshire in my constituency. It is a wonderful organisation that provides outstanding help, support and guidance to our unpaid carers—from opportunities to rest, talk and recharge their batteries to essential advice on how to break down the barriers to obtaining financial help, housing and the tailored resources they so desperately need. However, I want specifically to congratulate Carers of West Dunbartonshire on its book launch last month, which I was privileged to attend—all proceeds go to the charity. The book, “Above and Beyond” by author Lynn Jolly, is reasonably priced, at just £10 a copy, and available in all good bookshops this Christmas. It is a collection of real-life short stories from carers who attend the West Dunbartonshire organisation.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Vaz. My contribution will be brief. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Shipley (Anna Dixon) on securing this debate to consider inequalities faced by unpaid carers. It was also my great pleasure to attend the parliamentary reception last night organised by Carers UK on the eve of Carers Rights Day—which is, of course, today. It is the 25th anniversary, and I believe this year’s theme is, “Know your rights, use your rights”. To mark the occasion, Carers UK prepared a report highlighting the inequalities faced by the UK’s invisible army—the 5.8 million unpaid carers across our nation. I was struck by the figures in that new report revealing that one third do not know where to go for financial guidance and 41% are unsure what benefits they are entitled to as carers.”
“T2. In June this year, the average wait time for a driving test in the UK was over 22 weeks. That backlog is holding back learners in my constituency. Can the Secretary of State outline what action she is taking to deliver extra tests and remove those barriers for young people in West Dunbartonshire?”
“Will the Leader of the House join me in again congratulating the Scotland men’s national football team on qualifying for the 2026 world cup? The entire team are heroes, not least John McGinn from my West Dunbartonshire constituency, who is a former pupil of my old school, St Columba’s in Clydebank. Does the Leader of the House recognise that: “We’ve got McGinn, Super John McGinn, He’s Stevie Clarke’s man, He’s better than Zidane”? Does the Leader of the House agree that he is, in fact, super John McGinn and will he congratulate the entire team?”
“Hundreds of my West Dunbartonshire constituents, and thousands more across the country, were served notice of the termination of their family protection funeral plan by CMutual and Maiden Life UK. All are members of credit unions, and they are elderly and vulnerable. They have paid in thousands of pounds over the years, but will be left with absolutely nothing on 30 November. Will the Leader of the House agree to an urgent debate on the subject in Government time, and ask the Chief Secretary to the Treasury to conduct an urgent investigation?”
“The Bill provides for parity of representation, and will expand non-means-tested legal aid so that bereaved family members can secure advocacy at inquests where a public authority is an interested person, but it does so, as I understand it, only in England and Wales. Of course, justice is a devolved issue, but can the Minister confirm that, despite months of engagement with the Scottish Government on this UK-wide legislation, the SNP Government have failed to confirm that non-means-tested legal aid will be available in Scotland, resulting in Scots families still relying on charity to gain access to justice—”
“My constituents Stacy, Caitlin, Julia and Alison maintain that the current rates of maternity and paternity pay are woefully inadequate. One advised me that they delayed having children until they were financially secure, and it is unlikely that they will consider having a second child. Does my hon. Friend therefore agree that, while introducing parental leave as a day one right is a welcome first step, the review of parental leave should include a significant rise in the rates of statutory pay to at least the level of the national living wage, and six weeks for dads on 100% pay? Current pay is far below basic living standards, and families in my constituency cannot afford leave.”
“The UK Government are investing more than £41 million of funding in my constituency, including the recently announced pride in place award. That will unlock the potential of my West Dunbartonshire constituency, matching the level of ambition I have to regenerate our town centres and communities and make them fit for the future. Does the Secretary of State agree that this is in stark contrast to the SNP, which has given up on our communities right across Scotland and in West Dunbartonshire?”
“We have new technical excellence colleges, new defence academies and new clean energy colleges, but not in Scotland, because further education and skills are devolved to the Scottish Government. The Scottish Auditor General’s report, published this month, showed that funding for Scottish colleges has been cut by 20%. Does the Secretary of State agree that only Scottish Labour can stop the SNP systemically hollowing out Scottish colleges and robbing Scots of all ages of opportunities, including in my West Dunbartonshire constituency?”
“Health is obviously devolved to Scotland, but this is a UK-wide issue. My constituents Ewan, Robert and Louise are among a group living with PoTS and they too advise of unacceptably lengthy waiting times for a diagnosis—causing many years of untold suffering. Does my hon. Friend agree that greater support for this syndrome is needed right across the UK?”
“The Prime Minister’s statement on the middle east included a celebration of our newly formed relationship and trade deal with India. Did his discussions with Prime Minister Modi last week also include raising the case of my West Dunbartonshire constituent Jagtar Singh Johal? If so, did the Prime Minister insist upon Jagtar’s immediate release and return home to his family in Dumbarton? He has been arbitrarily detained for eight years in India. Enough is enough. Prime Minister, it is time to bring him home.”
“Scotland has the worst drugs death figures of any nation in Europe, and they have increased again, with 607 suspected drug deaths in the first half of this year. Six years ago, the SNP Scottish Government declared a “drug death emergency”—just another example of soundbite announcements with no actual delivery. They have had two decades to tackle this issue, but the truth is that they have failed. None of them is here tonight. Does my hon. Friend agree that the independent evaluation panel will determine the Thistle’s efficacy and, ultimately, its future beyond the three-year pilot, and that that gold-standard service is not an either/or but must work in tandem with a range of other recovery services?”
“One of the most effective steps taken by this Government to help reduce the Crown court backlog is the record increases to criminal legal aid. Fewer criminal barristers and solicitors will not help to tackle case waiting times. Scotland is experiencing unacceptable delays in solemn cases coming to trial, made worse by the inadequate funding of Scottish legal aid by the Scottish Government. Does the Justice Secretary agree that unless we significantly increase legal aid fees across the UK, the current criminal defence model is unsustainable and we risk the collapse of our court system?”
“Thanks to Labour’s fiscal rules, the Government have unlocked private investment in UK infrastructure and strengthened investor confidence. The 10-year infrastructure strategy will revitalise all parts of the country’s economy, including in Scotland and in my constituency of West Dunbartonshire. Does the Chancellor agree that the UK Labour Government have put Scotland at the heart of economic growth, with unprecedented support for Scottish industries, jobs and public services, in stark contrast to the SNP Scottish Government?”