Kirsty McNeill
MP for Midlothian · Labour (Co-op) · United Kingdom
“I was delighted to meet key farming stakeholders at the Royal Highland Show, where we discussed the structural pressures facing the livestock industry in Scotland.”
“There is simply no excuse for this kind of senseless violence and antisocial behaviour, and I am very saddened to hear about the impact that it has had on my hon. Friend’s constituents. I agree that the vast majority of young people want to improve their lives and contribute to their communities.”
“Our Pride in Place programme is supporting local people to shape the future of their areas. We are investing up to £480 million in 24 Scottish neighbourhoods over 10 years, including Springburn and Sighthill in north-east Glasgow.”
“It is not a question of using devolution as a shield; it is a question of proper accountability. Farming is a devolved matter, and the SNP Scottish Government have not delivered for Scotland’s farmers.”
“Too many young people are spending their early years of adulthood out of work or education. The youth guarantee is our commitment to ensuring that every young person across Great Britain can access support in order to earn or learn.”
“It is absolutely no surprise to me that a representative of the Scottish National party does not want to talk about its own record on young people. Shamefully, youth worklessness is much more intense across Scotland—including the hon.”
The complete record
Every one of 314 lines we hold for Kirsty McNeill, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 7.
“The order was considered by the Scottish Parliament, having been considered by the Health and Social Care Committee, and it will be considered in the other place. I now turn to the purpose of the draft order. The Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill is a Member’s Bill introduced by Liam McArthur MSP. It is currently before the Scottish Parliament and seeks to create an assisted dying regime in Scotland. I am acutely aware of the sincerely and strongly held views on the topic, and I emphasise that the UK Government are neutral on the matter of assisted dying. It is a matter for MSPs in the Scottish Parliament to determine whether there should be an assisted dying regime in Scotland.”
“I beg to move, That the Committee has considered the draft Scotland Act 1998 (Modification of Schedule 5) Order 2026. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Twigg. The draft order was laid before the House on 17 December 2025. As with all orders made under the Scotland Act 1998 that we have considered since the start of this Parliament, the order is the result of close collaborative working between the UK and Scottish Governments. The order before us is made under section 30 of the Scotland Act, which provides the power for the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament to be altered. Specifically, it enables modifications to be made to schedules 4 or 5 of the Scotland Act. Orders made under that provision are subject to the affirmative procedure in the UK and Scottish Parliaments.”
“The draft order’s change to the legislative competence is specifically designed to allow for that to be retained, because we think that the UK Government have an appropriate role in the overarching regulation of medicines across the UK. That is why it is, and will remain, reserved. However, we do want to enable the Scottish Parliament to introduce provisions that could confer power in that way—in a way that simultaneously maintains the integrity of the UK medicines regime and allows the Scottish Parliament to debate that which is legitimately inside their competence.”
“The UK Government’s role in medicines regulation is to set and oversee the UK-wide statutory framework that ensures licensed medicines are safe, effective and of high quality before they can be supplied to patients. In our view, it is critical that regulatory consistency is maintained across the UK. It has been a key priority post the EU exit, and we have prioritised avoiding any divergence between regulatory approaches. The limited nature of that change will ensure that the overall integrity of the UK-wide medicines regime is retained, whether the Scottish Parliament approves the McArthur Bill or not. Staying with that line of questioning, the hon. Member for Perth and Kinross-shire asked why the Secretary of State will continue to have the final say over how that power is used.”
“I thank hon. Members for their contributions and consideration—I hope to cover all the points raised in turn. I will begin with reflections from the hon. Member for West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine, who asked why this debate was not conducted on the Floor of the Commons. As he will know, because we have sat opposite each other in this space many times, Scotland Act 1998 orders are generally considered in Delegated Legislation Committees and subsequently put to the House by a motion, so that is entirely in keeping with normal practice. The hon. Member for Perth and Kinross-shire asked for clarification of the UK Government’s role in medicines regulation and, indeed, a justification for that.”
“It is required and desirable because we believe the integrity of the medicines regulatory regime should be maintained across the United Kingdom. We are trying to strike a balance. We want to give the Scottish Parliament the ability to confer the power to Scottish Ministers to identify in this case, and in only this case, that substances and devices that could be used in assisted dying are able to be so used if that is the will of the Scottish Parliament. Of course, that is provided that that is done by way of subordinate legislation made with the agreement of the Secretary of State. The order also provides that the Scottish Parliament may confer powers on the Secretary of State to regulate such substances and devices by subordinate legislation. In our view, they are separate matters and we are trying to find a balance between the two.”
“Let me just put on the record my great thanks to the Committee and its Chair, my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow West, for their scrutiny. I hope I will cover all the points that she raised.”
“The provisions in this order are incredibly narrow and time-limited. It is appropriate that it is done in a delegated legislation environment. Members are doing all manner of business of the House and, indeed, the business of their constituents.”
“However, consideration is being given to whether it might, in some cases, be possible to amend the provisions to limit the scope of the powers so that they can be more clearly understood to be for purposes that are within the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament.””
“The Scottish Government have noted that the details of what a future section 104 order might contain are still being worked through, so it would not be possible for us to say in advance what our response to a request for a section 104 order would be, because no such request has been forthcoming. To clarify for the Committee, in correspondence to the Scottish Parliament, the Scottish Government have stated: “'It is likely that some, if not all, of the relevant provisions will need to be handled through a section 104 Order which, as outlined previously, will mean that they need to be removed from the Bill to be dealt with in that way.”
“I am here to lay out the Government’s view on the Scotland Act order. I am not the diary secretary for my colleagues—I do not think the hon. Member would expect me to be. We are here to debate this order. The Chair of the Scottish Affairs Committee and indeed other members of this Committee have raised repeatedly a question that I hope I addressed in my opening remarks. But let me reiterate the view about why a section 30 and not a section 104 order is the appropriate way to get done what we need to get done today. This is for two reasons. A section 104 order cannot be invoked until a Bill has had Royal Assent. Likewise, it cannot be used to confer regulatory powers, which is specifically what the Scottish Government asked for in the intergovernmental conversations that we had.”
“Although the Government remain neutral on assisted dying, we believe that our approach with this draft order is appropriate.”
“We have concluded that it is appropriate to provide for temporary, and temporary only, devolution of legislative competence in a section 30 order, because it is seeking to address a very specific issue. We are considering a very narrow and technical order that provides the Scottish Parliament with a time-limited ability to include powers in the Bill to identify and regulate substances and devices that could be used in an assisted dying regime. It is important to be clear that the draft order enables the Scottish Parliament to do that, if it chooses—it in no way compels it to. The decision on whether to create an assisted dying regime in Scotland remains, as it should be, a decision for Members of the Scottish Parliament.”
“It is their choice to make, but whatever that is, we believe it is our constitutional responsibility to facilitate the progress of legislation through the Scottish Parliament. A number of questions were asked about the justification for a time limit in the draft order. The time limit reflects two things. First, it reflects that this is not a permanent—perhaps to the displeasure of the hon. Member for Perth and Kinross-shire—alteration to the devolution settlement, and secondly, that it would not be appropriate to pre-empt consideration by any future Scottish Parliament and attempt to bind it in that way. The section 30 order on an independence referendum illustrates that there is a precedent for including a time limit in a section 30 order.”
“As per the correspondence between the Scottish Parliament and Scottish Government, we understand that the Scottish Government will seek the agreement of the UK Government after the Bill passes. That will ensure that practitioners are protected should they choose to opt out of an assisted dying service. We expect to agree in principle to take forward that order, but it will be considered in the usual way, once we have actual legislation to look at. The hon. Member for Perth and Kinross-shire also asked whether, in effect, failure to pass this draft order would have the practical effect of stopping legislation progressing in the Scottish Parliament. That is our view. We must pass this today to give practical expression to whatever choice the Scottish Parliament makes.”
“The time limits in this section 30 order mean that it would no longer be within the Scottish Parliament’s legislative competence to do so. Instead, subject to the Secretary of State’s approval, they would be able to revoke or amend the regulations that have been made under those powers. I will take a moment to answer the question that the Chair of the Scottish Affairs Committee raised about receiving a copy of the response to the report in a timely fashion. We have responded, and I am grateful to the Committee for submitting it, but her points about timeliness and courtesy are well taken. I will make sure that courtesies are observed in future. The hon. Member for Perth and Kinross-shire asked about whether the UK Government would consent to a future section 104 order request.”
“Officials of both Governments are working through a range of scenarios, but what we cannot do is table an order about a Bill that has not been passed. There are ongoing discussions, as we would hope and expect, but we cannot use a section 104 order until a Bill has received Royal Assent. The Chair of the Scottish Affairs Committee has asked for clarification on whether the Scottish Parliament would be able to amend or repeal the Act’s regulation-making powers in a future Scottish parliamentary Session. I am pleased to clarify that if the Bill is passed and contains regulatory-making powers authorised by a section 30 order, it would not be possible for the Scottish Parliament to amend or repeal those regulation-making powers in a future Session.”
“It is an example of devolution in action, it is about the UK Government working with the Scottish Government to deliver for the people of Scotland, and it reflects the continued strong co-operation between the Scottish and UK Governments.”
“The Scottish Government’s regulations introduce additional support—the carer additional person payment—for those who receive carer support payment and care for more than one person; extend support for carers from eight to 12 weeks after the death of the person they care for; and introduce a new Scottish carer supplement which, for most carers, will replace the carer’s allowance supplement that is currently paid under section 81 of the Social Security (Scotland) Act 2018. The order will ensure that the Scottish Government’s changes to the carer support payment are reflected in reserved benefits. In summary, the order makes consequential amendments to UK legislation to reflect the introduction of changes to the carer support payment in Scotland.”
“The order makes amendments to the relevant UK and Northern Ireland legislation as a consequence of the Carer’s Assistance (Miscellaneous and Consequential Amendments, Revocation, Transitional and Saving Provisions) (Scotland) Regulations 2025, which were made on 6 November 2025 and will come into force, in respect of the provisions relevant to this order, on 15 March 2026.”
“Scotland Act orders are a demonstration of devolution in action, and I am pleased to say that the Scotland Office has taken through 12 orders since the Government came to power in July 2024. The Scotland Act 2016 devolved responsibility for certain social security benefits, and employment support, to the Scottish Parliament. This included carer’s allowance, which the Scottish Government replaced with the carer support payment in 2023. This order was introduced to make provisions in consequence of further changes that the Scottish Government have made to their carer support payment. The Scottish Government requested the order, and the UK Government worked collaboratively with them on the draft, showcasing devolution in action.”
“I beg to move, That the Committee has considered the draft Social Security (Scotland) Act 2018 (Carer’s Assistance) (Consequential Modifications) Order 2026. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Christopher. The draft order was laid before the House on 8 December, and I am grateful for the opportunity to debate it. As with all the Scotland Act orders we have considered since the start of this Parliament, this one is the result of collaborative working between the UK and Scottish Governments. The order will be made under section 104 of the Scotland Act 1998 which, following an Act of the Scottish Parliament, provides the power for consequential provisions to be made in respect of the law relating to reserved matters or the laws elsewhere in the UK.”
“I thank Members for their contributions. I not only thank the hon. Member for West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine for his support for the technical nature of the change, but note and share his view that the Scottish Government are indeed incredibly careless with taxpayers’ money. I would go further and say, on behalf of the Labour Government, that they are addicted to wasting money. That point is noted and is a point of agreement between us. I thank the hon. Member for Mid Dunbartonshire for her party’s support for the changes. This instrument demonstrates the UK Government’s continued commitment to work with the Scottish Government to deliver for Scotland. I commend the draft order to the House. Question put and agreed to.”
“First, I pay tribute to my hon. Friend’s very passionate advocacy for higher education in Scotland. He will be well aware that the Scottish Government have received an additional £11 billion since the general election, money that could have been spent on Scotland’s world-class universities and colleges, but as a recent Audit Scotland report shows, those institutions have been put under immense stress, with Scottish colleges suffering a 20% cut in real-terms funding since 2021. That is utterly shameful.”
“I agree with my hon. Friend that Scotland’s young people have been appallingly let down, which is why it is time for a new direction. I would, of course, be delighted to meet him and representatives of Heriot-Watt to discuss Scotland’s desperate need for a new direction.”
“As we come to the end of the debate, and indeed the end of the year, it is a good time to reflect on what we have achieved together across this House. From the Labour perspective, we are proud of our local growth programme, which will deliver real, visible benefits for communities right across Scotland. The Pride in Place programme and impact fund will see up to £292 million invested in regenerating Scottish communities, which will transform neighbourhoods across Scotland. That funding will revitalise our high streets and town centres. It will create jobs, boost productivity and improve safety, security and connectivity. Local communities are at the very heart of Scottish life, and the Scotland Office is proud to back them.”
“From many Members across the House, we have rightly heard commendations of lots of Scottish laddies. I want to even it up a little and put on the record some commendations for Scottish women. We heard from my hon. Friend the Member for Dunfermline and Dollar about Queen Margaret, but I am sure the House will join me in paying tribute to Jane Haining, recognised as “Righteous Among the Nations” in the Holocaust and most recently commemorated in Edinburgh; to Mary Barbour, who showed that when working-class women come to fight for working-class women, there is nothing they cannot achieve; to Jennie Lee, without whom we would have no Open University; and to Mary Somerville, whose achievements were quite literally astronomical.”
“Friend the Member for Glasgow West (Patricia Ferguson), who chairs the Scottish Affairs Committee, whose work I commend, talked with great passion about how, as Scotland, we have to forge a place where people can come together, and although we might not agree on everything, we have to find ways to agree about more. My hon. Friends the Members for Edinburgh South West (Dr Arthur) and for Bathgate and Linlithgow (Kirsteen Sullivan) gave moving tributes to the extraordinary community groups in their constituencies, which I was delighted to hear about. Some of them I have visited and I look forward to learning more about others. My hon. Friend the Member for Paisley and Renfrewshire South (Johanna Baxter) paid a moving tribute to the children of Ukraine. I know we all commend her for the work she is doing to see their safe return.”
“I can refer to stories in Midlothian too, which are similar to those that have been mentioned on the Floor today: one person waiting 120 weeks on a CAMHS waiting list; parents talking about the fact that they had been referred to an urgent ear, nose and throat waiting list, but will still be on that list for two to three years with a child in pain; and a woman in excruciating pain who has been waiting for a gynaecology appointment since the start of the year. What is the answer to that from the SNP? It is simply, “Look at England.” That is of no comfort at all to any of our constituents, and I suspect that that complacency will be roundly rejected in May. My hon.”
“Member for Arbroath and Broughty Ferry (Stephen Gethins) asked us to comment on the Government’s commitment to devolution, and I am pleased to reassure him too. Devolution is not simply a destination and it is not even a process; it is, to my mind, a habit of mind that the Scottish Government have simply never acquired because they are obsessed with centralising inside Scotland and talking about what powers will come to Scotland and not what powers will be distributed inside Scotland to communities, where they belong. My hon. Friend the Member for Na h-Eileanan an Iar (Torcuil Crichton) and the right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale (David Mundell) talked about how, despite the very best efforts of our NHS staff, the state of Scotland’s NHS should shame us all.”
“Member for Mid Dunbartonshire (Susan Murray) talked about the ferry fiasco and how terrible it was for islanders. That is true, but it also speaks more widely to a deep sickness at the heart of a Scottish Government who are much more interested in announcements than achievements. The hon. Member for Dumfries and Galloway (John Cooper) suggested that this Government are sending money to the Scottish Government without worrying very much about what will happen to it. I can assure him that, on the £11 billion that has been sent to the Scottish Government as a result of this Labour Government’s decisions, we will be watching like hawks. That money is intended to be spent on Scotland’s public services and Scotland’s communities, and if it is not, we Scots will ask, “Where’s the money gone, John?” The hon.”
“Friend the Member for Dunfermline and Dollar began the debate by paying tribute to working men’s clubs, institutes and miners’ welfare. I am delighted that he did so, because it gives us a chance to reflect on the fact that not only do we belong to those kinds of institutions, but they belong to us. They are theatres of self-help and community power, which is exactly what this Labour Government’s Pride in Place programme is all about. The hon. Member for West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine (Andrew Bowie) and I do not agree on much these days, but we do agree on this: Scotland has too long been troubled by division. I suspect our remedies for that division would differ, but I believe that we need a new direction with a Government focused resolutely on public services and growth—a new direction offered by Anas Sarwar. The hon.”
“However, our accomplishments should not be measured only in medals and milestones; they should be measured, as for all Governments, in the lives that we change. We secured places in Scotland for Afghan women medical students whose futures were thrown into uncertainty. By opening our doors, we offered not just education, but hope and dignity. As we look outward, Scotland is strengthening its place in the global economy. Labour’s trade deal with India is set to grow the Scottish economy by £190 million every year, in a transformative partnership that opens new markets for our businesses and deepens our ties with one of the world’s fastest-growing economies. Together, those achievements tell a powerful story: Scotland is a nation that leads, welcomes and builds. It is in that spirit that I welcome today’s debate. My hon.”
“Indeed, in June we invested £750 million in the UK’s largest supercomputer at the University of Edinburgh—headquartered, of course, in Midlothian—which has so often been at the forefront of scientific progress. We have achievements on the world stage that speak to our spirit and resilience. Honestly, I cannot believe it took until the contribution from my hon. Friend the Member for Glenrothes and Mid Fife (Richard Baker) for it to be mentioned in this House that Scotland has, of course, qualified for the world cup. We are also, with Glasgow, hosting the Commonwealth games next summer and will be in a position to showcase not only our sporting ambition but our ability to welcome the world with warmth and confidence.”
“Scotland has always punched above its weight, and it is right that we take this moment to celebrate what our nation contributes to the world. We are, as we have heard often today, a nation that helped to lead the industrial revolution. We have long been a world leader in engineering, philosophy, science and medicine, and we continue proudly to be a key contributor to Scotland and the UK’s defence capability. Our contribution is woven into the fabric of global progress too. In recent years, we have added new chapters to that story—from advances in renewable energy and medical research to the cultural and creative excellence that resonates far beyond our borders. Our world-class universities are advancing innovation in quantum, clean energy and life sciences, and this Labour Government continue to support them.”
“I would like to begin by taking the opportunity to thank my hon. Friend the Member for Dunfermline and Dollar (Graeme Downie) for securing this debate. I thank him, the hon. Member for North East Fife (Wendy Chamberlain) and my hon. Friend the Member for Carlisle (Ms Minns) for the very interesting history lessons they gave us today, from which I learned a great deal. It is fitting that we are holding this debate to mark St Andrew’s day—even if it is slightly after the date itself. Let me take the opportunity to thank all Members across the House and wish them a very happy, albeit belated, St Andrew’s day. The occasion remains important, as it invites people across Scotland, the United Kingdom, and indeed the world, to reflect on Scotland’s heritage and contribution to our collective UK story.”
“Yes, we have deep pride in being Scottish, but it is pride with a purpose, because if we remain focused on our common purposes of stronger growth, fairer opportunities and resilient communities, Scotland will not simply be part of the UK’s prosperity; it will be at the very heart of it.”
“We also focused on ensuring job security for 350 skilled workers at Harland & Wolff shipyards in Methil and at Arnish. We have secured a deal worth £10 billion to supply Norway with Type 26 frigates, securing 2,000 jobs in Scotland until the late 2030s. Of course, we did not stop there. We are firmly committed to tackling child poverty, having removed the two-child cap, which will change the futures of 95,000 Scottish children. As we mark St Andrew’s day—a moment when we celebrate Scotland’s history, identity and shared values—we are reminded of the strength that we can draw from solidarity across these islands.”
“That means that since the general election the Scottish Government have received an additional £11 billion. We have announced £14.5 million to back Grangemouth’s transition to a hub for low-carbon technologies, and a further £20 million for Inchgreen near Greenock, which will upgrade the port’s dry dock; £20 million has been found to support the regeneration of Kirkcaldy’s town centre and seafront; and £25 million will be released following the full sign-off of the Forth Green freeport. All in all, the UK Government will be investing more than £2 billion in local and regional growth programmes in Scotland. That is alongside the biggest upgrade in workers’ rights in a generation, with a pay rise for 200,000 of the lowest-paid Scots.”
“I am always delighted to commit to oomph and would be delighted to meet all relevant MPs from the Borderlands growth deal, to which I know the right hon. Member is very committed. I am following it closely. Our Brand Scotland effort promotes Scotland’s exports, culture and global reputation. We fund a range of initiatives, including delivering trade missions to key markets and supporting our overseas network to undertake Scotland-specific promotional activity. We have delivered a number of successful ministerial visits—to Norway, Japan, Spain, Washington DC and New York—and we recently supported a major trade mission to Shanghai by Glasgow city chamber of commerce. We are seeing the results of having a UK Government with Scotland at their beating heart. The Budget provided an extra £820 million for the Scottish Government.”
“Over the last year, this Government have taken action to fix the foundations of our economy, to put the public finances on a sustainable path and support growth. Despite the UK economy being forecast to be the second fastest growing G7 economy this year, and despite private companies such as Iberdrola investing £10 billion in Scotland’s energy sector alone, there is more to do. The recently published Muscatelli report shows that under the SNP, economic growth has been ignored, and the unique potential of communities across Scotland has been held back. That is why today the Chancellor will set out a Budget to boost economic growth in each and every part of the UK.”
“The SNP Government are clearly not doing what is required to drive growth in Scotland, but I say to the hon. Member that we are dealing with the legacy of 14 years of Conservative economic mismanagement, including their catastrophic policy of austerity, their mismanagement of the pandemic, and a failed Brexit deal. Members do not have to take my word for it: the current leader of the Conservative party has been clear that the Conservatives have no plan for growth.”
“I could not agree more. Since the election, this Government have delivered an extra £5.2 billion in funding for the Scottish Government, so they should be making life easier for Scots, but that money is being completely wasted by the SNP. What do we have to show for this record-breaking settlement? We simply cannot waste another decade with this failing SNP Government. It is long past time for a new direction.”
“The hon. Gentleman and I have discussed this issue many times, and he is aware that we are striking a fair balance between supporting farmers and fixing the public services on which all our rural communities rely. We have taken a fair and balanced approach that protects family farms, while also fixing the public services that we all rely on, including our own constituents.”
“The hon. Gentleman is perfectly well aware that the majority—three quarters—of those claiming agricultural property relief will be completely unaffected. However, what will affect every single person in Scotland is the Chancellor’s Budget that is set to help with living standards, to drive growth and to put the financial management at the heart of our public finances.”
“Immigration is a reserved issue and the Home Secretary set out last week an asylum policy that will work for all parts of the United Kingdom. It contains the most sweeping asylum reforms in modern times, commensurate to the scale of the issues before us. These reforms will restore control, contribution and fairness to the system. I am proud that our country has always been fair, tolerant and compassionate, and this Government will always defend those values.”
“What Scottish Labour supports, like the rest of the Labour party, is a system that is both humane and restores control, and that is in the best interest of communities and those seeking asylum and to migrate. We are proud to support the policy, and we know that the rest of the country wants a system that has both control and fairness as its guiding principles.”
“I am sure that the whole House will join me in remembering those children who have drowned in the channel, and I could not agree more with my hon. Friend. There is nothing progressive or humane about a system that incentivises people to take terrible risks. I commend my hon. Friend for all the work that he has done with those seeking asylum and refuge over very many years.”
“Through the Pride in Place programme, we are investing almost £500 million to revitalise communities across Scotland. As part of that, the Scotland Office has recently completed the collection of evidence from MPs, MSPs, local authorities and community groups to inform the selection of 14 new neighbourhoods that will each benefit from £20 million over 10 years.”
“I can confirm to my hon. Friend that she will not have long to wait. It is in all our interests to get things coming down the chimney as soon as possible.”