Seamus Logan
MP for Aberdeenshire North and Moray East · Scottish National Party · United Kingdom
“I have seen in my own lifetime, in the land of my birth, how information can be hidden in the name of national security when in fact the interest is not that of the nation but of the Government of the day. That is why I believed that amendment 20 was important, and I am glad to say that 24 MPs from across the House agreed with me.”
“The intent of the amendment, which is supported by Members from a wide range of parties across the House, was to ensure that we here in Parliament, who are elected by the people, would, through the Intelligence and Security Committee of the House, have had oversight of any decision by the head of an intelligence service to hide informatio…”
“I rise to speak as a member of the Bill Committee and principally in support of amendment 20 in my name, which seeks to provide a necessary layer of democratic parliamentary scrutiny of the actions of the intelligence services. I listened very carefully to what the members of the ISC present—the hon.”
“The only other thing I want to say before I finish is the old French saying, “plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose”. We need to be careful about the implementation of this law, so that we do not see the repeat of these mistakes at some point in the future. In conclusion, I reiterate our support for this legislation.”
“That said, I cannot let today pass without making some reference to the fact that, considering the long journey that we have been on—considering the meetings; considering the way in which the Bill Committee was forced to truncate its work into a very limited period; considering the negotiations that followed; considering the pulling of th…”
“Before turning to my amendment, I must acknowledge the work of the Hillsborough families and their supporters for their courage, tenacity and determination over the past 37 years, which has brought us to this point today.”
The complete record
Every one of 599 lines we hold for Seamus Logan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 12.
“The hon. Gentleman is speaking about the transport challenges that people face in rural communities. We know that the Government have plans to introduce additional charges for purchasing an electric vehicle, which seems paradoxical when we are trying to encourage people to be more environmentally friendly. Does he agree that the Government should think carefully about support for people in rural and isolated areas when they consider that policy?”
“The hon. Gentleman is speaking very powerfully about the need for connectivity around coastal ports. Is he aware that the two largest towns in the UK with no railhead, Fraserburgh and Peterhead in my constituency, have been left in exactly that position after the Beeching cuts of the 1960s? Does he agree that, if the Government bring forward a new strategy for these areas, they have to look at rail connectivity?”
“Following recent evidence of a long-term increase in colorectal cancers in the under-50s, the Scottish Government are calling on the National Screening Committee to extend eligibility for bio-screening kits to improve outcomes. I understand that Australia has reduced its screening age to 45. Will the Secretary of State join the Scottish Government in urging the NSC to review the recommended age for starting screening, so that more lives may be saved?”
“The only other thing I want to say before I finish is the old French saying, “plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose”. We need to be careful about the implementation of this law, so that we do not see the repeat of these mistakes at some point in the future. In conclusion, I reiterate our support for this legislation. I commend the work of the many determined and tenacious individuals who have brought us to this point, not least the Hillsborough families, who suffered the terrible loss of their loved ones and the industrial-scale cover-up that followed. Today is about them and everyone who will benefit from their efforts.”
“I have seen in my own lifetime, in the land of my birth, how information can be hidden in the name of national security when in fact the interest is not that of the nation but of the Government of the day. That is why I believed that amendment 20 was important, and I am glad to say that 24 MPs from across the House agreed with me. Before I conclude, I have to make reference to something that the Minister said earlier. She talked about stress-testing elements of the Bill and said that a full timetable would be brought forward in due course. It sounded to me as if, even if the Bill passes through all its final stages, some of these elements will still be subject to a future timescale. Perhaps she might address that point in her closing remarks.”
“The intent of the amendment, which is supported by Members from a wide range of parties across the House, was to ensure that we here in Parliament, who are elected by the people, would, through the Intelligence and Security Committee of the House, have had oversight of any decision by the head of an intelligence service to hide information from public scrutiny under the cover of national security. I have concerns not about the Bill’s use today but about the possibility that a future right-wing Government of this country—perhaps even a far-right Government—might use this legislation as it currently stands to escape the scrutiny that we all seek and support. It is not scaremongering to say that. We should learn the lessons of history.”
“That said, I cannot let today pass without making some reference to the fact that, considering the long journey that we have been on—considering the meetings; considering the way in which the Bill Committee was forced to truncate its work into a very limited period; considering the negotiations that followed; considering the pulling of the Bill, the series of amendments and the counter-proposals—the indecent haste of the Government these past 24 hours to push this legislation through is actively working against proper parliamentary scrutiny. That is my view. Amendment 20 has not been selected for a vote tonight.”
“Before turning to my amendment, I must acknowledge the work of the Hillsborough families and their supporters for their courage, tenacity and determination over the past 37 years, which has brought us to this point today. We in the SNP and the Scottish Government fully support the aims and objectives of this legislation so that never again will people face lies, injustice and wilful cover-ups by public bodies without accountability under the law. That is why tonight, with the exception of new clause 3, which we will support, we will vote with the Government in support of this legislation.”
“I rise to speak as a member of the Bill Committee and principally in support of amendment 20 in my name, which seeks to provide a necessary layer of democratic parliamentary scrutiny of the actions of the intelligence services. I listened very carefully to what the members of the ISC present—the hon. Member for Widnes and Halewood (Derek Twigg) and the right hon. and learned Member for Kenilworth and Southam (Sir Jeremy Wright)—had to say. Ultimately, behind my amendment was the fact that democratic accountability does not lie with a High Court or with the head of an intelligence service, but here, with us. We are where the buck of democratic accountability stops. That is why I gave prominence to the ISC in my amendment.”
“The hon. Member speaks about the value of research. Some 50 years ago this year, my cousin was diagnosed with breast cancer. She had three years. She left five children under the age of 10. Yesterday I met Lesley, who was diagnosed 20 years ago. Lesley is well. She is still receiving treatment, but that demonstrates the value of the advances that research can make. Does the hon. Member agree that it is absolutely vital that we invest in this area?”
“This is not a party-political issue; it is something the shadow Minister and the whole House can agree on. In 2022, the Scottish Government began the process of improving their imaging kits with the introduction of 3D mammography, which is a major step forward. Two months ago, the Scottish Parliament lodged a motion supporting the lobular breast cancer Moon Shot Project and called for the £20 million to be allocated. Does he agree that the breadth of support for this campaign—440 MPs now support it, including myself—is now irresistible, and that the Minister should award the funding?”
“T8. The Minister has heard from both sides of the House this morning about the deepening crisis for independent pig producers and farmers. There are concerns that a quasi-cartel might be operating, to the detriment of small independent producers. Will the Minister consider using his powers to make a referral to the Agricultural Supply Chain Adjudicator or the Competition and Markets Authority, so that those producers can be protected?”
“Hospitality Together recently reported that 84% of small independent hospitality businesses across the UK said that it was either possible or very likely they would face closure in the next 12 months. A range of punishing policies has been inflicted on small, locally owned outlets, but the Government could address the situation by reducing VAT from 20% to 10%. That is exactly what my presentation Bill, the Hospitality (Value Added Tax) Bill, which is due for Second Reading next year, would do. Will the Leader of the House provide time for a debate on the issue, so that Members from all parties can make the case for reducing VAT on hospitality and so protecting jobs, encouraging growth and supporting the renewal of our high streets?”
“One of the Department’s key planks in tackling climate change is carbon capture. Given the Government’s difficulties around the defence investment plan and the need to find allegedly an extra £5 billion, can the Minister confirm her Department’s continuing support for the Acorn Project at St Fergus in my constituency?”
“My constituents Scott and Pamela McBride from Peterhead are victims of this shambolic bùrach. They retired in April 2020 and are still waiting on a resolution. They came to me in February. I will keep it simple: if I write to the Minister with the details, can his surge team help me with a surgery appointment to sort this out?”
“If the right hon. Member for Makerfield (Andy Burnham), otherwise known as the presumptive Prime Minister, is really serious about the devolution of power and decision making, seeing growth in every postcode and putting hope in every heart, let him look at this issue. Let him listen to Councillor Ann Bell, chair of the North East Scotland Fisheries Development Partnership, when she says: “A fair allocation would, at minimum, be consistent with the 46% share Scotland previously received” from European Union funds. Why is there still so much anger about all this in Scotland and in my constituency? Because this Westminster Government tried to blame the Scottish Government for the Barnettisation of the fund. So we submitted a freedom of information request asking the Scotland Office to show us where in its discussions that had been asked for.”
“Member for Wallasey (Dame Angela Eagle)—to Scotland and to extend that invitation to my constituency. I hope that you, too, can accept that invitation when your diary allows, so you can then see this historic industry with your own eyes and meet the experts who nurture and maintain it against myriad challenges during these volatile geopolitical and economic times. I hope, too, that such a visit will be valuable in understanding why there is such disappointment and anger at how the fishing and coastal growth fund has been allocated in Scotland, which has less than 8% of it—£28 million out of a £360 million pot. Let us put things into perspective. The Scottish fishing sector represents over 60% of the UK’s total fishing capacity, contributes over 60% of the UK’s seafood exports and lands more than 75% of all UK quota species.”
“I beg to move, That this House has considered Government support for the fishing industry. It is always a pleasure to serve under you, Sir Alec. The rich fishing and coastal heritage of my constituency of Aberdeenshire North and Moray East is second to none. My constituency is home to Europe’s largest whitefish port at Peterhead and Europe’s largest shellfish port at Fraserburgh—the largest is not Bridlington, as some people claim. My constituency’s corner of the north-east of Scotland is a key part of our nation’s fishing industry, and a significant part of the industry in these islands. That is why I was so keen to invite the Minister’s colleague—the former Minister of State at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the hon.”
“Secondly, does the Minister understand that the current Home Office approach to immigration is creating unintended consequences for our fishing industry, and will he lobby for a bespoke visa scheme that provides solutions, not problems? Thirdly, can the Minister reassure the Scottish industry that the European Union will not use the forthcoming sanitary and phytosanitary agreement to place further burdens on our fishers, but will in fact reduce the burden, making it easier to export?”
“There is much more to be done, not least in terms of harbour renewal and expansion at Fraserburgh and Peterhead. Those are the kinds of capital projects that need co-operation between our two Governments in the interests of both Scotland and the UK. I should be grateful if the Minister could address the following four questions, either in his closing remarks or in correspondence at a later date. First, can our fish processing industry colleagues be included in the energy-intensive industry scheme? The former Minister, the hon. Member for Wallasey (Dame Angela Eagle), was pressing hard on that point; I lobbied her strongly on it, and she understood.”
“It is just not good enough to bypass the sector, override the Scottish Government and play funding games with invaluable investment. The time for a more positive reset is well past due. The Scottish Government’s support for our fishing industry is extensive. Since the launch of marine fund Scotland, £70 million has been awarded to almost 400 projects across Scotland, enabling total investment of £154 million—everything from supporting new entrants, the onboard observers programme, the promotion of Scottish seafood, safety training, covid-19 recovery funding for 855 vessels, emergency harbour repairs and much more. Targeted economic link measures have, for example, led to an additional £58 million-worth of mackerel and herring being landed in Scotland, helping to drive record landed values at Peterhead port.”
“On another front, Ian Gatt, the chief executive of the Scottish Pelagic Fishermen’s Association points out that the ongoing situation with quota shares of mackerel between coastal states is yet to be resolved, despite efforts by UK and Scottish Governments to secure an agreement with the four coastal states. That is crucial, because mackerel is the most valuable to Scottish fisheries in terms of tonnage. The autumn negotiations are therefore crucial for Scotland. All those issues point to the need for the UK Government to play a far more supportive role with the Scottish fishing industry. To do that, they need to listen to industry concerns, rebuild trust and boost economic growth, and they need to do so with policies that rise to the challenges outlined and that reflect solutions to the realities that they face.”
“I am currently in an unsatisfactory game of email ping-pong with the Department for Work and Pensions about its insistence that skilling up domestic labour is the answer to these shortages. Let me share some reality with the DWP and the Home Office. The north-east fishing industry cannot get local people to apply for these posts or, when they do, to stay in post for more than one shift, despite strong financial and career incentives. The flip side is that international workers are commonly keener to stay the distance once they are trained up—a costly endeavour for already stretched businesses. This is not just a Scottish issue; just ask my colleagues from other parties. The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) knows exactly what I am speaking about in relation to Northern Ireland.”
“I would like to add my own recommendation that the ideal way to ensure better engagement in Scotland would be to support reinstating the Scottish Seafood Industry Action Group, as suggested by former Scottish Government Fishing Minister Mairi Gougeon, something which the Scotland Office endorsed. Collaboration with those in this sector will be invaluable in resetting relationships and an opportunity to understand a further pressing problem on how one size most definitely does not fit all when it comes to fishing’s labour shortages. That brings me to the UK Government’s reluctance to have a Scottish bespoke visa for our catching and processing sector. Fishing in the north-east is affected by major labour shortages. The knock-on impact to growth and building a successful and prosperous future is very negative.”
“I was pleased to note the excellent Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee’s report, “Resetting the relationship with fishing communities”, which was critical of how the fund had been allocated and recommended that the UK Government should work collaboratively with the devolved Governments on the design and allocation of the fund to ensure consistency and fairness across the sector for the allocations in year 2. In common with my colleagues on the all-party parliamentary group on fisheries, I look forward to the forthcoming sectoral action plan being co-ordinated by the former Minister of State at DEFRA, the hon. Member for Cambridge (Daniel Zeichner).”
“He adds: “Scottish waters are bearing the brunt of the 12-year EU fisheries access extension”, which was negotiated by the UK Government, and that “the use of the population-based Barnett formula fails to reflect this reality…with communities left carrying the burden with only a fraction of the support they deserve.” This is not about tribal politics; nor it is about scoring points in this Chamber. This is about fairness and the lack of it in terms of support for our fishing industry in Scotland.”
“Adding insult to injury, allocating this paltry pocket money to Scotland over 12 years means that Scotland will receive only around £2.3 million per year in additional investment. To say that that falls short of what is needed is to put it mildly. If the UK Government had engaged fully with the industry in Scotland, as well as with the Scottish Government, they might have been made more aware of that. The Minister here today now has the opportunity to put this right. Another expert in the industry, Mike Park, chief executive of the Scottish White Fish Producers Association, has also called the allocation unfair and indefensible.”
“Thank you for that clarification, Chair. I have six pages of almost entirely redacted correspondence, so it is clear that somebody does not want us to see these things. In subsequent correspondence between the Scotland Office and the chair of the Scottish White Fish Producers Association, it is admitted that this was a Treasury decision in 2024, not a Scottish Government decision. It is admitted that the allocation in no way reflects the size and strength of the industry in the north-east of Scotland, but the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland says she is too busy to meet the chair of the SWFPA, Jimmy Buchan—too busy. Perhaps in the forthcoming reshuffle she might find herself less busy.”
“I have no brief to speak on behalf of the Scottish Government. Of course, our policy is very clear: we want to rejoin the European Union, because Brexit has been a disaster for the Scottish economy. However, I do not believe that we want any of the worst effects of the common fisheries policy. Finally, can the Minister support the re-establishment of the Scottish seafood industry action group and actively investigate doing so?”
“Many Members in Westminster Hall and the main Chamber will have laid claim to that title, but I assure her that there are many fish and chip shops in my constituency that believe they have that title, not least Findlay’s in Fraserburgh. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered Government support for the fishing industry.”
“Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) in relation to immigration, and it sounds very much as if there might be some productive dialogue in the future—let us hope so. I was also very heartened to hear that the hon. Gentleman takes great pride in this industry and that he has a heritage there to draw on; that is wonderful. I endorse the remarks that were made about the impact of fuel costs on the industry and about the dangers that our fishermen and women face when they go to sea—it is a very dangerous occupation. Finally, I want to take issue with one part of the excellent contribution from my hon. Friend the Member for Arbroath and Broughty Ferry (Lara Bird): she claimed to have the best fish and chip shop in the world in her constituency.”
“It was remiss of me not to welcome the Minister to his place earlier, and I formally do so now. I thank everyone who has contributed to the debate. We have had a small number of speakers, but it is not about volume; it is about quality. There were lots of references to broken promises; there have been too many broken promises, I am afraid, but let us hope that the future will result in promises kept, and I wish the Minister well in his endeavours in that regard. The shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Bridgwater (Sir Ashley Fox), asked some very searching questions; I agree with him that we need to know what outcomes will flow from the fishing and coastal growth fund. I was particularly interested in the Minister’s reply to the hon.”
“The hon. Member is making an excellent speech, and is trying to draw out the details of this deal; I am glad that one of her constituents drew her attention to it. I was lobbied by Karl Claxton at the University of York, who described this deal as an existential threat to the NHS because of the potential costs. Interestingly, the Department has not yet published its impact assessment on the deal. Does she agree that it is high time that the Department published the impact assessment and let us know the true cost of the deal?”
“The House of Commons Library, quoting the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, reports that child poverty rates in Scotland are much lower than in England, at 23% compared with 31%, due at least in part to the Scottish child payment. In the light of this Government’s mission to tackle the scourge of child poverty, can the Minister describe what measures the Government are planning, in addition to the abolition of the two-child cap—for example, scrapping the infamous bedroom tax?”
“Given that benefit fraud is estimated at around £9 billion, and that the WASPI women are apparently willing to have the cost of their just compensation claim capped at around a third of that figure, can someone from the ministerial team confirm that the Government are willing to change course and negotiate with the WASPI women?”
“The hon. Member says that the oil and gas belong to the Union, but it is Scotland’s oil and Scotland’s gas. Can he explain why Scottish bill payers are paying the highest bills in the UK when the oil and gas is being extracted from the North sea?”
“Many Members in this place will be all too familiar with the trauma of a miscarriage; for some, the tragedy occurs more than once. Scotland is the first nation in the UK to implement a miscarriage patient charter, based on the so-called Tommy’s graded model of miscarriage care. Will the new Secretary of State—I welcome him to his place—outline whether the Westminster Government are considering replicating that system in the rest of the UK?”
“There remain serious concerns about the ability of children to use livestreaming on social media and the risks and harms that may arise. That issue has been raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Aberdeen North (Kirsty Blackman) in the past. In addition, Members will be well aware of the risks posed to children by strangers, who are in some cases adults with malevolent and illegal intent. Will the Minister confirm that livestreaming and the protection of children from these predators will fall under the scope of the forthcoming Government response?”
“Can the Minister confirm that the Foreign Office will inform President Trump that the UK will vigorously oppose any and all attempts by the United States to use military force against Cuba, and can he reconfirm that he is seeking to persuade the US Administration to ease the measures currently contributing to this impending disaster for the Cuban people?”
“I thank the Speaker’s Office for granting this long-overdue urgent question, and I congratulate the right hon. Member for Islington North (Jeremy Corbyn) on securing it. This is indeed an urgent matter for the Cuban people as they continue to endure a deepening man-made humanitarian crisis, with shortages of food, electricity, fuel and even vital lifesaving medical supplies, as has been said. It has been caused by the Trump Administration, who have unjustifiably described Cuba as a threat to US national security.”
“The Scottish White Fish Producers Association is concerned that the worst elements of the common fisheries policy could reappear in these negotiations. For exporters, time is everything. Even small delays at the border can mean lost value for highly perishable goods. The SPS agreement must deliver faster, more streamlined export processes, because without that, the benefits will not be felt by fishermen, processors or coastal communities who rely on trade with the EU. Can the Minister guarantee that as the negotiations continue, Scottish fishing communities and their representatives will be listened to during the process, and may I repeat my very warm invitation to her to visit the north-east of Scotland?”
“Farming, fishing, the NHS, social care, hospitality and tourism are all suffering in my constituency because of this Government’s policies. We need an immediate and lasting reduction in VAT until we have passed the current cost of living crisis. I hope that the Minister will have something to say about that.”
“In Scotland, we got less than 8%, despite the industry there representing more than 50% of the entire industry of the UK—another insult. I could go on about the Scottish Government, but in the interests of time I will touch on two other issues. My party has been clear for quite some time about the need to create a bespoke Scottish visa for Scottish businesses, but we have been met by deaf ears from this Government and particularly the Home Secretary. Labour’s Muscatelli report recommended that the Scottish Government push for a bespoke immigration system that tackles the unique issues faced across the Scottish economy, including in my constituency. In her response, can the Minister undertake to make representations to the Home Secretary on this point?”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stuart. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Isle of Wight East (Joe Robertson) for securing this important debate. Report after report has complained about the impact of the Labour Government’s national insurance hikes, which are felt in my constituency no less than in others. Aberdeenshire North and Moray East is the very definition of a coastal community, from Cruden bay to the Spey. Businesses are coping with the hikes by cutting back on hiring or cancelling increases in their workforces, by adding the extra cost to prices and by reducing employee benefits and compensation packages. That is not how to grow an economy; it is the opposite. We were promised that the coastal growth fund would be the antidote to the effect of the Labour Government’s deal with the European Union.”
“The Secretary of State can say the rest of the project will come in 2043, but will she explain when the project will extend to Scotland, as was suggested yesterday? How much more will we in Scotland be expected to pay? How many years after 2043 will it be delivered?”
“I can sense the Secretary of State’s anger at the scale, width and depth of the failures in this project, but it was initiated in 2009, when Labour was in power. I am looking at the collective failure on both sides of the House. Labour Members are so quick to point out the ferries problem in Scotland, but it pales into insignificance before the scale of this incompetence. The Chair of the Transport Committee, the hon. Member for Brentford and Isleworth (Ruth Cadbury), said on BBC Radio 4’s “Today” programme yesterday that the most important thing is that HS2 will create a high-speed link between London and the north-west, and eventually to Scotland. Scottish taxpayers are paying for this folly.”
“I thank the hon. Member for giving way. At last, I have finally got to my feet. I am surprised that I was not allowed to intervene earlier, because I agree with much of what has been said, and especially with what the Secretary of State said about renewables and Acorn. Would the hon. Member agree that granting a licence for Jackdaw would be much more environmentally friendly than importing liquefied petroleum gas from Qatar or the USA?”
“I commend the Minister on his statement, particularly his peroration about how standing up to hatred and intolerance is the shared responsibility of every person in these islands. The Scottish Government have been working closely with Police Scotland and relevant partners to ensure that safety for Jewish communities and their places of worships is protected, and they will continue to do so throughout the new Scottish parliamentary Session. The additional funding of £25 million to protect Jewish communities and deal with the other threats that the Minister described is welcome. Can he confirm that full Barnett consequentials will be made available to help Police Scotland with its work in that area?”
“We will continue to enjoy that stability for another five years following our landslide victory in the Scottish parliamentary election on 8 June —a landslide victory bigger than Labour’s in July 2024, with 58 of our successful applicants being sworn in today in Edinburgh. Prior to the election and over the last six months in particular, so many Labour MPs from Scotland used their valuable question time in this Chamber to attack the SNP. So many of them told us that the people of Scotland would reject the SNP, but last Thursday, the people of Scotland rejected the Labour party, rejected the Reform party and, indeed, rejected the notion that this is a United Kingdom.”
“I rise to address the issue of getting Britain working again, but also to make some observations on this Government’s chaotic performance since July 2024. The focus of today’s debate is on employment, and I will come to that, but so many Labour Members seem utterly preoccupied with the employment of one person: the Prime Minister. No vacancy exists, apparently, but at least one, maybe two, possibly three candidates may apply for said position. I am happy to provide a reference, but it will not be a good one. This shambolic and unstable Government are in stark contrast to the political stability that we have enjoyed in Scotland since 2007.”