Seamus Logan
MP for Aberdeenshire North and Moray East · Scottish National Party · United Kingdom
“The Chancellor calls it capital reprioritisation, but his fancy phraseology hides the truth. Existing capital remains prioritised in Teesside and Merseyside. Why not Acorn in Scotland and the Scottish cluster? The UK’s net zero future, and thousands of jobs in Scotland, rely on the ability to cut industrial emissions.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“No, I am not taking interventions. A lot of people want to speak. The Labour Government are prioritising £9.4 billion in England and Wales, but are not even managing £200 million for the Acorn project and the Scottish cluster. The rhetoric once again fails to match reality and instead reveals treachery in cold blood.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I have already said no interventions, thank you. Where is the help for the Scottish whisky industry? Why is there nothing on fiscal drag and tax thresholds? Why is there nothing on VAT reduction for small hospitality businesses? Of course, the extent of the Barnett consequentials remains to be seen.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I begin by asking the House a question. When I heard the Chancellor’s speech yesterday, I thought, “Is that it? Is this the Government’s best shot?” If the Prime Minister is planning to go to the country on the back of this Budget, I say, “Bring it on.” Yesterday the Chancellor delivered the gravest betrayal of the just transition in my c…”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“When energy bills will soon be more than £1,000 higher than promised, the Labour party’s gas price hike will disproportionately increase costs for people in Scotland. What about the many people who rely on home heating oil in my constituency and across Scotland? They will not benefit from the changes on standing charges.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“While the Labour Government’s so-called “mature” carbon capture, usage, and storage projects in England and Wales get the go-ahead, their paltry offer to Scotland amounts to merely seeing how loans or equity investments can support the continued development of future CCUS, with specific mention of the Acorn site.”
House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
613 held · 612 searchable for Seamus Logan. The searchable lines are below in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 10.
This is not an official version of UK Parliament proceedings. It reproduces the published record and links to it; the official version is the one UK Parliament publishes.
“I have remarked on the breadth of the parties speaking out against this. My party does not support it. We do not think that it will address the issues; indeed, we think that it will cause more problems than it solves. And we do not think that that amount of money will do it. That will double in size. I therefore oppose this proposal and so do my colleagues.”
House of Commons8 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I recognise, as do so many Members across the House, the injustice and maladministration suffered by the so-called WASPI women born in the 1950s. I welcome the recent development announced by the Secretary of State, but will he give an undertaking that if compensation is agreed, it will take into account the poverty suffered by so many of these women and include recompense for their significant legal costs?”
House of Commons8 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Leveson 2 was, as I recall, designed to provide stronger regulation for journalism and the media in general. I think we should be concerned about this very sweeping exclusion for journalism, and I will be interested to hear what the Minister has to say on that.”
House of Commons4 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under you, Sir Roger. I rise to support the hon. Member for Wells and Mendip Hills and to draw attention to some examples of why the amendment is important. Members will be familiar with the hacking problem that we had some years ago. In fact, I think one journalist actually served a prison sentence in relation to that. There were many others who may or may not have been involved in that affair. Members will recall how the programme on the Post Office brought huge attention to that scandal and, in fact, led to a major review of the situation. A similar programme called “The Hack”, which may not have gathered as much attention, highlighted the vast extent of the problem of collusion between journalists and the police. Members will also recall that Leveson 2 was cancelled.”
House of Commons4 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Before the Minister moves on, one needs to cast one’s mind back to events that took place many months ago, when newspaper and other media reports led to a hotel housing asylum seekers being attacked. One of the rioters sought to burn the hotel down, which could have led to great loss of life. That initially stemmed from media coverage. That is why it is important to try to articulate this provision in a more sensible way.”
House of Commons4 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I may be misreading the evidence—if I am, I accept that—but I want to draw the Minister’s attention to the evidence given to us by Chris Minnoch and Richard Miller during the Committee’s second sitting, last Thursday afternoon. I came away from that sitting with a very distinct impression that those two witnesses were of the view that the legal aid system might need to be expanded. We find that view from Mr Minnoch, the chief executive of the Legal Aid Practitioners Group, at columns 60 and 61. He seemed to suggest that his expectation was that legal aid would be expanded in this context.”
House of Commons4 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If I interpret the Minister correctly, what she is saying is that, through the application of the Bill, there may be a need to review the position in due course.”
House of Commons4 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I rise to support the new clause, the right hon. Member for Liverpool Garston and the hon. Member for Liverpool West Derby. I believe this to be an important proposal. If the new clause is adopted, would it actually result in a saving to the public purse?”
House of Commons4 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to move amendment 18, in clause 2, page 2, line 39, at end insert— “(4A) Where a public authority or public official is under an obligation to respond to or assist an inquiry or investigation under subsection (4) they should do so within 30 working days.””
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Member for Liverpool Garston for bailing me out by providing me with a copy of the amendments. The current language of the Bill is imprecise. Whenever a duty is placed upon a public authority to perform a certain duty, the legislation should specify a timescale. Notwithstanding the Minister’s advice as to how things might progress with these amendments, we have suggested a timescale of 30 days. That may not be operationally possible—I am happy to consider extending it if that is what the Minister decides—but we believe that this amendment would significantly strengthen the duty on public authorities to operationalise this Bill.”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am very conscious of the evidence that we heard last week and the strength of feeling about the Bill among those affected by not only the Hillsborough tragedy, but the many different tragedies and inquiries that have occurred over the years. That is why we tabled our amendments in a collegiate way to try to strengthen the Bill. That includes these amendments, which, as I understand them—though I am flying blind—seek to replace rather loose wording with a more specific timescale. I have no prior experience of other Bills to go on, but as a mental health officer in a previous life, I know how vital it is to understand the timescales that apply to the duties that fall upon public bodies. The Bill at present— [ Interruption. ] I thank the right hon.”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Roger. I have a number of confessions to make. First of all, this is my first Bill Committee in my 18 months as a Member, so I am a complete novice in terms of how these procedures work—I will be guided by the Chair at all times, of course. Secondly, I am afraid that my office has been decimated by illness, so I am flying blind this morning on some of the details of these amendments. I would be grateful if one of the Clerks could provide me with a hard copy of the amendments under consideration, if possible—actually, I am sure I can get one from the table. I welcome the Minister’s statement about working together in a collegiate way to try to ensure that the Bill is as strong as it possibly can be.”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Some backstop needs to be applied in relation to these responsibilities. I am happy to continue the conversation with the Minister and beg to ask leave withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Clause 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Schedule 1 Application of duty of candour and assistance”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I welcome the Minister’s response. Having heard what she said about working with me about how we might operationalise the issue, I am prepared to withdraw the amendments. However, it is important to remember, in that conversation, that justice delayed is justice denied. We have seen so many examples of inquiries and investigations that take years, when months would be much more appropriate. In the circumstances we are speaking about—in this case and the many others that this law will apply to—we must give chairs and leaders of inquiries and investigations some sense of what is reasonable when it comes to public authority responses. We heard from the hon. Member for Morecambe and Lunesdale about the health service; I worked in it for 33 years. There is no good reason why it should not be able to respond in if not 30 then 90 days.”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The hon. Member is making an important point, but am I right in thinking that his motivation—and the motivation of many people in this area—is about getting to the truth, rather than punishing people?”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“To build on my point to the hon. Member for Liverpool West Derby, the issue here is that the criminal responsibility focuses the mind of the person with command responsibility. It requires that person—the chief executive or otherwise—to ensure full compliance. That is the point.”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The point that has been made to me by folk like those at the Hillsborough Law Now group is that that will allow someone—a chief executive, chief inspector or whoever—simply to say, “I didn’t have the knowledge because X or Y didn’t tell me about it.” The proposed amendment would very clearly put the command responsibility on the chief executive or the leading officer.”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Earlier, I asked the Minister for an example and she pointed to the national health service. I think that was a fair point, but not every issue here relates to a complicated organisation like an NHS trust, where the chief executive has senior clinicians who have clinical responsibilities that perhaps outweigh the managerial responsibilities of the chief executive. The Minister rightly pointed to paragraph 3 of schedule 3, backing up the point that she was making, and I accept that, but the difficulty with that paragraph, and the way the Bill is currently written, is that it puts the responsibility initially on the body.”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to move amendment 21, in clause 6, page 6, line 3, at end insert— “(2A) Where an obligation to give notification would have arisen under section 2(3), save for the exemptions in subsection (2), the head of the relevant intelligence service must provide a written notification to the Intelligence and Security Committee of the UK Parliament summarising the acts that may be relevant to an inquiry or investigation.” This amendment aims to provide accountability for intelligence services and their operations in relation to the duty of candour and its exemptions from them.”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I hope the Minister can take on board the thrust of what I am saying in the amendment, and perhaps she can even see fit to endorse it.”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My amendment would give a role to the Intelligence and Security Committee, which is a Committee of the House, by requiring the head of an intelligence service, in these specific circumstances, to make a report to the ISC on what the exception is. In even more exceptional circumstances, I understand that the ISC can also communicate with the Prime Minister alone—it has no obligation to do anything else. I believe that that sensible mechanism would give us confidence, in drafting the Bill, that there is no get-out clause. Critically, it would also restore trust even within our intelligence community on how it operates. We do not need to go back over all the evidence that we heard from an employee of the BBC, for example.”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Nevertheless, my problem with clause 6(2)(a) is that it is basically a get-out clause; it allows the head of an intelligence service to opt out of the overall duty of candour where that would, according to the Bill, contravene the Official Secrets Act 1989. I understand that there are special circumstances regarding the intelligence services, as was ably described to us by Sir Ken McCallum, when he said, “I don’t know who all my agents are, and I am not sure that I know all of their activities.” That is fair enough; one can readily understand why that might be the case. Nevertheless, there should be no overall escape clause for the intelligence services. Having said that, I understand that there will be circumstances in which it is necessary to maintain secrecy about certain aspects of what the intelligence services do.”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Dowd. We have had an excellent debate on command responsibility, and I am heartened to see a very positive outcome from that discussion. Clause 6 is separate and distinct because it applies to the intelligence services. We heard evidence about the provisions in clause 6 in the evidence session, as well as at a useful special meeting that some Committee members attended with two heads and a deputy head of the three intelligence services. As the shadow Minister pointed out, the evidence from that special meeting and the evidence session has highlighted that there are potentially some contradictory views.”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the Minister for that. Given she has said that we will see an amendment on Report, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I believe this is important given my experience in the health service, where there is a responsibility on individuals to report child abuse, or where a colleague might clearly be able to see that a surgeon carrying out procedures is repeatedly doing something injurious or harmful. By replacing the word “may” with “must”, we place a responsibility on anyone to blow the whistle on those particular issues. In my working life I have experience, as might others present, of consultants who suppressed information relating to child abuse. We certainly heard similar evidence about surgeons during our evidence session. Colleagues will be able to think of many such examples, which is why it is important that the amendment replaces “may” with “must”.”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to move amendment 24, in clause 9, page 8, line 12, leave out “may” insert “must”. I am aware that we have debated amendment 48, although perhaps not as fully as I would have liked. In the interests of getting our business done within the time available, I decided not to intervene in that debate. However, I believe that the particular change in amendment 24 is necessary. Where amendment 48 spoke to the duty of candour, amendment 24 speaks to the code of ethics. There are legal minds in the room that are much better informed and trained on legal definitions than my own, but amendment 24 addresses the need to replace “may” with “must” in the code of ethics, as opposed to the duty of candour.”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the Minister for that response, but I am at a loss to know how the responsibility suggested by the amendment would cut across any existing code of ethical conduct. If the legislation simply stated that the person who works for the authority must take steps if they believe that another person who works for the authority has failed to act in accordance with the code, I fail to see how that would cut across any existing procedures. It would simply make the provision more robust by saying “You must take that step” rather than “You may take that step”. That is what the amendment calls for; perhaps the Minister might like to expand on why she wishes me to withdraw it.”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the hon. Member for his intervention, which is helpful. Perhaps when the Minister and I, and others, meet to discuss other matters, we might explore this in more detail. If the Minister is willing to accept that, I am happy to withdraw the amendment.”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Thank you, Mr Dowd. Pursuant to the issues already outlined by the hon. Member for Wells and Mendip Hills, amendment 22 is about affording enhanced protections. The main point I make to the Minister is this. If the existing protections actually worked, then why—as we heard in the evidence sessions—are so many people falling foul of whistleblowing provisions? Their careers can be blighted, and in some cases they lose their jobs. If the existing protections are sufficient, why is it necessary to consider making these amendments?”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Amendment 23 seeks to ask the Minister to reconsider that in the light of what I have said about training needs. One only has to think of things such sexual harassment, equality training, and so on, and the massive training requirement that fell upon the public bodies many years ago. I was one of those who underwent that training. It was a significant training requirement, and I expect that the duty of candour and the code of ethics, and so on, will also have a major training requirement. With amendment 23, I am asking the Government to reconsider whether adequate funding is available to organisations to undertake the training that will follow from passing this Bill.”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I rise to speak to amendment 23. The Minister will be aware that if the Bill is enacted, as we are all confident that it will be in due course, a large number of public authorities will face significant new training requirements. When we met with the intelligence services chair, Sir Ken McCallum, he readily acknowledged that there will be significant training implications for his organisation, and MI5 is quite small in the broader context, particularly if one thinks of the national health service, the civil service, the police, and so on. The Minister has told me that the money resolution has already been passed, and there are no new additional resources attached to this Bill, other than in relation to legal aid—I think that is in the schedules.”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Amendment 25 has already been covered in our discussions about “may” or “must”, and I am happy to take that discussion into further meetings with the Minister.”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In light of the Minister’s clarification, I am happy to withdraw amendment 25. However, with regard to amendment 23, I am still unclear as to what exactly the Minister is saying. Is she indicating that beyond the passage of the Bill there will be further clarifications to public bodies as to what training requirements there might be, and that resources will flow from that?”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Given the proceedings today are a matter of record, I am happy to withdraw amendment 23. Question proposed , That the clause stand part of the Bill.”
House of Commons2 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“There is no mention of the Government’s plan to review their decision on compensating those 1950s-born women. The truth is that Scotland cannot afford to be dragged back into Labour’s black hole, or whatever fiscal fiction they care to conjure up to justify their economic choices. We are expected to believe that the same people who told us that removing the two-child cap was deeply unwise now say that it is the centrepiece of the Government’s achievements. This begs the question, “What does Labour stand for?” It certainly does not stand for working people, families or businesses. We have, instead, a chaotic “cost of Labour” Budget, caught in a perpetual doom loop, while the north-east of Scotland pays a high price for the Government’s economic mismanagement.”
House of Commons1 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Forget investment in a just transition; this is industrial damage on a grand scale. Talking of industrial damage, why have the Government got it in for Scotland’s world-class Scotch whisky sector? Once more it has been treated as a Treasury cash cow, with duty rising again in line with inflation, although I—as well as many others, including numerous industry sources—warned the Treasury that an increase in duty would reduce the income to the Treasury. Who does not understand the maths? Furthermore, with the family farm tax still in place, generational family farms across my constituency face ruin by Treasury spreadsheet, with the Chancellor balancing the books on the back of our domestic food security. Finally, where are the WASPIs in this Budget?”
House of Commons1 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It will risk our energy security, incur eye-wateringly expensive carbon-heavy imports, scupper supply chain growth, and severely hamper our future renewables potential. Just today, there have been a further 100 job losses at Harbour Energy in Aberdeen. People I know in my constituency are going abroad to get contracts because they lost their jobs in Scotland. Ninety thousand oil and gas workers in the north-east are bitterly disappointed. Why? This Budget was a chance to secure their jobs and to secure £50 billion of potential investment supported by the renewables sector, which needs the skills base of our workers. The hon. Member for Salford (Rebecca Long Bailey) talked about banking. The four big banks made a £44 billion profit last year, and there is not a word about a windfall tax on them. This is the politics of madness.”
House of Commons1 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“When I recently led an Adjournment debate in this place on the Nolan principles, I voiced my fears that people are losing faith in politics. It now seems that that is not only because of Johnson or Truss, although they did not help; it is largely due to this Government. Households in the north-east are facing harsher and colder winters than other parts of the country, and will continue to struggle as energy costs rise. That is even more unfair given the north-east’s contribution to energy production as the UK’s renewables powerhouse and, crucially, via our oil and gas sector, which is being hammered like a tent peg by this Labour Government. They are apparently hellbent on taxing our energy sector out of existence. Keeping the EPL in place until 2030 will mean haemorrhaging job losses in the tens of thousands.”
House of Commons1 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will confine my remarks to the north-east of Scotland. Whether it is farmers, oil and gas workers, the fishing industry, local pubs and hotels, businesses, or families who are just about managing this festive season, no one—not one person—has approached me to say what a great Budget this was. People are angry and worried, and they are right to be. We are still in a cost of living crisis, and there was no change to the energy profits levy in the Budget, nor to the family farm tax. There was more punishment for Scotch whisky and no mention of the WASPI women. There was no review of the coastal growth fund to boost the local fishing industry and, worst of all, there was sleight of hand on the cost of living for so many families.”
House of Commons1 December 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The ultimate safeguard for that is the fact that the judge is in control of their own court; if they do not believe that justice is being done, they can make that very clear. Over the years, those closed material procedures have been refined and slimmed down in such a way that they are quite widely accepted to be part of a proper justice system while protecting the sensitive information at hand.”
House of Commons27 November 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Lord Evans of Weardale: I would want to see the exact mechanism, but I do not think it is inconceivable that there could be a way of doing something of that sort, which in broad terms is similar to what is done with closed material proceedings in the civil courts. In order for a court to make a just decision, it needs to have access to the relevant information, even if that is sometimes highly sensitive. The closed material procedures ensure that such information can be brought forward and considered by the judge without its being visible to terrorist sympathisers, for instance, or Russian intelligence officers. Closed proceedings can work. In some ways, they are sub-optimal because you have to work quite hard to give people confidence that they are really getting at the truth for the public.”
House of Commons27 November 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Q Lord Evans, in the fullness of time, the Committee will consider amendments, so the final Bill might be slightly different in its shape. One can readily understand the very persuasive points that you have made, in particular with regard to MI6 and the need for good relationships with other countries on the sharing of information. However, we might consider command responsibility in a different way in the final Bill—the provision of safe mechanisms, for example closed sessions of inquiries or investigations, or possibly reporting mechanisms to the Intelligence and Security Committee of the UK Parliament. Were such arrangements in place, would that enable the head of a particular intelligence service to provide information to a safe place and, in turn, to the chair of an investigation or inquiry?”
House of Commons27 November 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Trauma should not be measured by numbers, so I think that is a fundamental gap, which is not necessarily in this Bill, although I would not mind if it were addressed through the Bill. You only have to look at what Stephen Lawrence’s family went through or, indeed, more recently with Harry Dunn and the complexity that that poor family had to deal with, largely on their own.”
House of Commons27 November 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Q And you know all about cultural change, following the Stephen Lawrence inquiry— Cindy Butts: I do, and it is part of the reason why, in my submission, I spoke to the issue of exceptional circumstances, because, of course, my role comes into play following a major tragedy, such as Hillsborough, or the Manchester Arena bombing, or indeed the Manchester synagogue attack, which I am currently deployed to assist with. On the other hand, I also know that there are cases when only one single death might have occurred, but despite the impact of that single death on a family, and indeed the public interest involved with that, such families are left without the kind of support that I provide after major incidents.”
House of Commons27 November 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“12. What discussions he has had with the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the potential impact of her policies on the cost of living in Scotland.”
House of Commons26 November 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is just over 500 days since this Government came to power, and the policies of the Chancellor and the Government have been a disaster for the north-east of Scotland with cost of living problems, whether that is the impact of national insurance hikes on jobs and investment, the family farm tax on the agricultural sector, the energy profits levy, which is killing jobs in the offshore sector, or the raw deal offered to our fishing industry with the coastal growth fund. Can the Secretary of State tell me and the House whether we should expect the Chancellor to fix the mess that she has made, or will the Budget be another failure for the people of the north-east—”
House of Commons26 November 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In 2024-25, the NHS trust in the Secretary of State’s constituency collected £2.4 million from patient and visitor parking and a further £1 million from staff parking. Given that those costs fall hardest on the poor and the most seriously ill, will the Secretary of State consider abolishing this inequitable burden on the sick, their relatives and those who care for them?”
House of Commons25 November 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“First, I apologise to the Home Secretary for missing part of her statement, but I have read it. Will she confirm whether any assessment has been carried out on the economic impact on Scotland of extending the ILR wait time to 10 years and beyond? If not, why not? Whatever the needs of Wales and Northern Ireland, Scotland’s economic and workforce needs once again appear to have been ignored. Does the Home Secretary understand that such a blanket policy risks exacerbating skills shortages, threatening vital sectors and making it harder for communities to thrive? Incredibly, for a so-called Labour Government, this lurch to the right now appears to favour the wealthy over the less wealthy.”
House of Commons20 November 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Further to that point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I seek your advice. Responses to a number of my written questions from Ministers in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs are currently overdue. In total there are 15 written questions—14 to which responses were due by the end of October, and one to which a response was due on 5 November. Six of the 15 were tabled as named day questions. Given that written questions are one of the ways in which Members can hold the Government to account, and with perhaps as many as 100,000 civil servants based in London, may I ask whether you have any advice on what Members can do when replies from Departments are not forthcoming?”
House of Commons18 November 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank the hon. Member for giving way, particularly because I had a magnificent speech I was not able to make. She is speaking about health-related issues, but I want to draw attention to the personal independence payment assessment process for people with Parkinson’s, and to reference the adult disability payment in Scotland. Does the shadow Minister agree that there is a much better system for assessing people’s needs, and would she recommend it to the Minister?”
House of Commons17 November 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗