Debate on the Address

Alison Taylor Excerpts

Wednesday 13th May 2026 Commons Chamber

[Dave Doogan (Angus and Perthshire Glens) (SNP)]

If I was not cheered by the landslide victory of the SNP in Scotland last week, I certainly am after this King’s Speech. It is just as well that the people of Scotland have John Swinney as First Minister and the SNP as the Scottish Government to stand as the buttress of fairness and justice between them and the remote and unaccountable UK Government in Westminster. They are not just remote and unaccountable but dysfunctional to an alarming degree, and that dysfunction is what has precipitated this most vapid of King’s Speeches.

If somebody who was unaware of the UK malaise, and the multiple economic crises affecting it, saw the Government’s solution in the form of this King’s Speech, they would be unable to identify the problem. That speaks to an obscurity of purpose. Government should have a clarity of purpose—see also the SNP Scottish Government in Edinburgh—but this Government have not got a clue. They are so busy bickering with one another, arguing with each faction about who gets the next shot at being the Prime Minister, that they cannot focus on the problems ailing the people up and down these islands—and the problems are profound. People are unable to pay their energy bills, and they do not know whether they will have a job this month, next month or the month after that. There is a crushing concern about everything, not just this or that. People are now terrified about their washing machine breaking down or their car getting a puncture, because they are so hard up.

Under this Labour Government, the margin of economic resilience in people’s homes has been eroded to a translucent wafer. There is nothing between the wolf and the bank account, after less than two years of a Labour Government. I do not understand why that could be. I am a political bore and I understand these things—or I thought I did. They have a majority that would choke a horse. They have been preparing for government for 14 years, yet they come in and it is like they just landed. They even said as much: “Well, we didn’t know the state of the books.” If they never knew the state of the books, they were the only people who did not, yet they had the temerity to come in, take power and make it even worse.

Labour Members kid themselves about the reason Labour was elected, but really they know it. They tell themselves, “It was our manifesto. We have a mandate.” There was no mandate for this guddle. Nothing that has happened over the last 22 months was backed up by a mandate. Labour was elected, and ushered in with a colossal majority, for one reason alone: Labour was not the Tories, and it is a two-party system in this place—or rather, it was. That is why Labour Members are here.

[Alison Taylor (Paisley and Renfrewshire North) (Lab)]

Will the hon. Gentleman explain to the House what the Government in Scotland have done over the last 20 years to generate the economic growth that he talks about?

[Dave Doogan]

What the hon. Lady, as a Scottish Unionist—I am sure a proud Scottish Unionist, for reasons best known to herself—needs to understand is that the UK is not contingent on Scotland, but Scotland is contingent on the UK. The decisions made here affect Scotland, but the decisions made in Scotland do not affect down here. Against that backdrop, Scotland is regularly in the upper quartile for GDP per capita in the United Kingdom. This myth that we are subsidised by the rest of the UK is risible. We economically outperform more than three quarters of the UK in any given quarter, roughly. We are the top destination for foreign direct investment. Foreign companies are not confused: they know where they get a return on their investment in the United Kingdom, and it is in Scotland. Our unemployment is lower and our employment is higher. I could go on, but I do not want to get in trouble, Madam Deputy Speaker.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dave Doogan]

I am not sure the hon. Lady has that in her gift, but to her point about youth unemployment, as I said to the hon. Member for Paisley and Renfrewshire North (Alison Taylor), the Scottish Government are subject to the same economic malaise as anywhere else in the United Kingdom. It is to the betterment of the fortunes of their constituents and mine that they are under an SNP Government—on that point, I can assure the hon. Member for Edinburgh West (Christine Jardine) that she is welcome.

Do not just take my word for it, Madam Deputy Speaker: the markets give their verdict on what is happening in the United Kingdom, and the markets are incredibly concerned. That is why 10-year gilt interest rates touched 5.13%, a rate not seen in the UK since the financial crash of 2008—a very dangerous report card.

[Alison Taylor]

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

[Dave Doogan]

No. I am going to make progress and close my speech.

Defence is the first duty of government, but under this Labour Government, if we had a significant investment for every blunderbuss piece of hyperbole and rhetoric on defence, we would be in a far better position than we are. The Prime Minister said in his speech earlier that we are negotiating a de-escalation of the war in Iran. He did not tell us which of the three protagonists was listening to the pontifications of the UK Prime Minister—because not one of the three participants in that conflict could care less what the Prime Minister thinks about the war in Iran.

The defence investment plan—the road map for what defence will look like in the United Kingdom for the next decade—is now a year late. I do not know what the Government think they can get away with, but if their signal, apex piece of defence legislation is more than a year late, that tells this Parliament and everyone up and down these islands that they do not have a clue about defence any more than they have a clue about anything else.

--- Later in debate ---

[Alison Taylor (Paisley and Renfrewshire North) (Lab)]

I congratulate my hon. Friends the Members for Bradford West (Naz Shah) and for Harlow (Chris Vince) on their excellent speeches in proposing the Loyal Address and seconding it. It is an absolute pleasure to support the Government’s programme for this Session of Parliament. They have set out a challenging programme to build the security and growth that our country so badly needs. After many years of stagnation, this Government, under the guidance of the Prime Minister, the Chancellor and the Cabinet, are laying the foundations for sustained growth and the economic prosperity that my constituents in Paisley and Renfrewshire North so badly need. That long-term thinking has been missing from politics for a long time.

My constituents need to see the life chances of their children correspond with their talent and effort. Too many young people have started to think that a life in another country would be a better alternative. We need to appreciate our young people’s efforts more when they join the workforce. In my career and my experience, I am yet to work with a young person from whom I have not learned enormously in so many ways, making me a better leader, a better manager, a better person and a better business owner.

This Government’s transformative actions around employment law—abolishing zero-hours contracts, increasing the minimum wage and legislating for more job security—are all things that this House should celebrate. We will lose our young people if they do not feel rewarded and appreciated. They will literally vote with their feet and move away. We need to do better at explaining that an apprenticeship is every bit as worthwhile as a degree. In Canada and Australia, centre-left Governments are working well for their people, and that in part explains why many young people want to leave the UK and travel there. We are losing to other countries skilled young people who have been nurtured, educated and cared for from birth here.

One industry where we need to create and nurture more apprenticeships is my former industry: the property sector. It is a key economic driver and delivery body for the homes and businesses of the future. No other sector has the ability to transition our economy to a greener, less energy-hungry society while providing hope and new environments that will inspire and attract our young people to stay.

It is true that places like Paisley are changing. It is a new world, with historic buildings being brought back to life, new cafés opening, public and civic buildings being restored, and a programme of cultural events too. But even for a great town like Paisley, it is not enough. Change is not quick enough or slick enough. The truth is that we need real investment in our towns in Scotland, and that requires UK Government money. The local authorities are doing their best, but they are undercapitalised and under pressure. They are under-resourced, particularly when it comes to staff such as town planners, environmentalists and building surveyors. We need more initiatives like the city deals, Pride in Place and the UK town of culture, and we need them to be supercharged. To do that, hon. Friends, we need courage, hard work, political and economic stability, and gritty determination from each and every one of us.

[Iqbal Mohamed]

The hon. Member is making an extremely eloquent speech. Does she agree that people are sick and tired of living in towns that just look dirty? They are not cleaned or maintained, and sports clubs do not even get the grass on their fields cut. The basic requirement for having pride in our towns and cities is for a council to be funded so that it can do the basics of keeping the streets clean and cutting the grass so that people can play sport.

[Alison Taylor]

I could not agree more. The Scottish Government have cut the budgets of local authorities in Scotland for the past 20 years. I like to go out and do litter picks, and we have some good litter-picking initiatives in Renfrewshire. I encourage everyone in the community to do that, because it at least makes people feel like they are making a difference.

We build on strong foundations—strong Labour foundations—unlike the local cowboy who builds on quicksand. The Government’s programme will take time, but it will have positive effects for communities up and down the country, providing greater immediate support to help young people find the education and training opportunities that they need to fulfil their potential. The programme will also continue the promise of long-term economic growth based on strategic investment in housing and infrastructure.

There is still a great deal to be done. Great British businesses, large and small, should be able to thrive under this Government, and helping them to overcome the obstacles and barriers that they face should always be part of our strategy for growth. Do not think for a minute, Madam Deputy Speaker, that that simply means agreeing with whatever business asks for. It means a realistic engagement with businesses, and an awareness of the pressures that they face. From my own experience of running a small business, I understand the choices that people make in starting and building their businesses. I know something of the struggles that they face to get money that is owed to them and to meet myriad costs, not least those of paying staff and suppliers.

I welcome the changes proposed in respect of late payment and procurement to assist small business owners. I empathise with entrepreneurs who are working hard to build something and to employ people, and who are willing to take the risk to build a business. In my constituency, as in many others, small businesses are an important part of the local community, but building a successful business is predicated on much of the social fabric and infrastructure that we in the UK take for granted. We need transport infrastructure, and public transport for workers and customers. We need economic growth, and customers with the disposable income that enables them to buy our goods and services.

Those things do not just happen by accident. The Gracious Speech makes clear this Government’s commitment to building a thriving economy, because people need that to do business, and so does society at large. The choice is not between “good for business” and “good for workers”; it is between “good for society” and long-term decline. On this side of the House, we want to build a future for everyone.