(5 days, 16 hours ago)
Commons ChamberLike the Secretary of State, I welcome the great news for Ferguson Marine this morning. As he knows, Scottish Liberal Democrats secured funding for key projects across Scotland in last year’s Scottish budget negotiations, including the Eye Pavilion in Edinburgh, which is so important for my constituents and his. We welcome the additional funding as part of the spending review to help projects such as that, but almost two decades of SNP mismanagement have left our health service in dire need of investment and improvement. Does he agree that the SNP should invest this funding wisely in GPs, dentists and care so that our constituents can see the same focus on innovation in health that was announced by the UK Government last week?
The hon. Lady makes a good point about the Eye Pavilion in Edinburgh, which is a symptom of the whole of the Scottish Government’s strategy for our NHS services. The SNP promised a new Eye Pavilion in its manifestos in ’07, ’11, ’16 and ’21, and it is yet to deliver it. I bet we see the same process and the same promises in its manifesto in May next year. One in six Scots is stuck on a waiting list, the NHS app is years behind other parts of the UK, and we have the worst cancer waiting times on record. I am sure the hon. Lady and millions of other Scots know that the SNP has failed their NHS. If the SNP had any idea how to fix it, it would have done it by now.
(1 week, 5 days ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
It is an honour to serve with you in the chair, Sir John. I congratulate the hon. Member for Dunfermline and Dollar (Graeme Downie) on securing this debate. I apologise to you, Sir John, because I appreciate that it is frustrating that every debate about Scotland, and about this or the previous Government’s spending in Scotland, comes back to the Scottish Government. The debate is rarely about the Scottish people—about my constituents in Edinburgh West, or our constituents across Scotland. It always comes back to the Scottish Government. That is not necessarily the fault of the Labour party, the Conservative party or the SNP, but it does not seem to matter how much money the UK Government invest in Scotland, what projects they undertake, what the spending review promises or how much money there is in Barnett consequentials—it gets squandered. As my hon. Friend the Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross (Jamie Stone) said, it never seems to reach the people of Scotland. It never seems to do anything about our crumbling NHS, our schools, which are in trouble, and the housing crisis that we face.
Although the specific subject under discussion is the spending review announced by the Labour Government, for us in Scotland the debate is about the frustration that we may not get the benefit that any UK Government intend for Scotland, with any policy, because it gets blocked in Holyrood. I hate to mention that again, but £9.1 billion, however one might contest it—it might not be quite £9.1 billion—is a lot of money for the SNP Government to squander, because squander it they will. We have only to look at the evidence of the infamous and now even later ferries, which seem to fail at every turn. The money wasted by the SNP on that fiasco could have paid for around 11,000 nurses or 3,000 GPs in our NHS. That is why we are so frustrated, and why we turn again and again to the Scottish Government, and their failure to use the resources given them by Westminster.
The hon. Member for Arbroath and Broughty Ferry (Stephen Gethins) says that this place continues to have a huge impact—so it should, but that impact is undermined at every turn by the Scottish Government.
Given that we sit in the UK Parliament, does the hon. Member concede that the numbers she mentions are absolutely dwarfed by the billions on Brexit, the hundreds of millions on Rwanda, and the billions blown by the Truss Budget, all of which will have had a material impact on the amount of money that the UK Government have to give up to Scotland? Furthermore, does she agree that the Scottish Government offsetting welfare cuts, the bedroom tax, and child poverty, as they have done—and I believe the Liberal Democrats backed that—was a good use of money?
No, I do not, actually. I agree fundamentally that the UK Government, whether Conservative or Labour, have not got everything right. But the Scottish Government have done nothing to mitigate any of the, if you like, failings of Westminster. They have done nothing to mitigate them, and have exacerbated every problem in Scotland. There is not a single area of the Scottish economy, or of Scottish education, health, or public services that one can look at, over the past two decades, and say, “Wow, didn’t the Scottish Government make a good job of that? Didn’t they spend the money well?” Just ask the constituents who I spoke to on Sunday night in Edinburgh West, who told me that they are sick to the back teeth of the SNP wasting their money—two decades they have had of it.
No, sorry. I am running out of time.
It would be churlish of me not to recognise that there have been benefits from the spending review for my constituents. I welcome the £750 million investment in the exascale supercomputer, because a lot of my constituents work at the University of Edinburgh. The investment in defence spending will help my constituents who work in the defence industries in Edinburgh. I hope that the £9.1 billion—or however much—that will be invested in Scotland over the next few years helps by investing in the projects that the Liberal Democrats in Scotland have managed to get into the budget for the coming years. The investment in the Princess Alexandra eye pavilion in Edinburgh is one that is particularly close to my heart, because my constituents have suffered from the SNP’s lack of investment there.
In brief, we welcome a lot of the aspects of the spending review in Scotland. We welcome the extra funding, but we view with frustration and some trepidation how the Scottish Government might waste it.
(1 month, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberI associate myself with the remarks of the hon. Member for West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine (Andrew Bowie) about the success of Aberdeen football club. The strategic defence review makes it clear that housing must be a priority, and that the money from the sale of housing must be reinvested, but veterans continually come to me who have been discharged into homelessness. Can the Minister reassure us that we will ensure that houses that are sold or redeveloped are available to veterans’ families?
I am very pleased to offer the hon. Lady that reassurance.
(2 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberI associate myself with the Secretary of State’s comments about the death of Pope Francis.
In a rare consensus, I agree with much of what has been said by both the Secretary of State and the shadow Secretary of State. Many universities are extremely concerned about the funding situation. Many of my constituents who are employees of universities or who have children at Scottish universities are concerned, particularly following the news of the 600 job cuts at the University of Dundee. I have spoken to the principal of the University of Edinburgh and he is also concerned about the funding model in Scotland, which is failing everyone. Will the Secretary of State discuss with the Scottish Government how they can make changes and put pressure on them to do so? The national insurance changes are not helpful, so it would help Scottish education if we had some changes there as well.
The hon. Lady’s question is slightly contradictory. On the one hand, she does not like the national insurance contribution increase, which has given the Scottish Government a £4.9 billion boost—the highest settlement in the history of devolution. That money should be going to the frontline of higher education, but it is not. On the other hand, she talks about a more generous funding settlement for universities. She cannot have it both ways. The funding model must change, and the Scotland Office is in touch with all our universities’ principals to see how we can work through this issue. This is a problem with the funding of higher education as a result of SNP policies and the Scottish Government.
(4 months, 2 weeks ago)
General CommitteesIt is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Hobhouse. I intend to speak very briefly because, although I do not disagree with some of the comments made by the hon. Member for West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine, it was agreed some time ago that this order should happen. While we may have reservations about how it could develop, we have to recognise the achievement of our two Governments in reaching agreement on introducing this new Scottish benefit. Historically it is something for which Liberal Democrats have advocated, because we believe in policies that promote social equality and support for individuals with disabilities.
This order ensures a smooth transition from DLA to SADLA, maintains the entitlements and legal protections for recipients in Scotland at its heart, and aligns Scottish disability assistance with the social security system, separate from UK-wide benefits like the personal independence payment. If we believe in devolution and that decisions should be made at the point at which they are closest and most relevant to the community, then this is a move forward and it is something we should welcome and support.
(6 months ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
It is a pleasure to speak on your first occasion as Chair, Mrs Lewell-Buck; I hope you have enjoyed it.
I am grateful to the hon. Member for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk (John Lamont) for securing this debate. The variation of complaints we have heard shows how serious the issue is, and I sympathise. It is a pleasure to follow my hon. Friend the Member for Inverness, Skye and West Ross-shire (Mr MacDonald), because I sympathise: I have spent much of my life travelling up and down the A82, and it has not got better in the five decades that I have been doing it. In fact, it has got worse in so many ways.
I will say it quietly: I represent Edinburgh, and we are lucky because the airport in my constituency of Edinburgh West is the busiest in Scotland. Our railway station, Haymarket, is one of Scotland’s busiest, and next door we have Waverley. We have the ability to travel west, north and south in Scotland, and down both coasts—east and west—to London. If only it were so for the rest of Scotland. Elsewhere does not share our easy access, and we desperately need investment.
One of the frustrating things about investment is that the benefits are usually long term and not immediate, but we have only to look at the Borders rail link to see how important and invaluable it can be. Just last month, figures showed that the number of people using the Borders railway increased by more than 30% at some stations between 2023 and 2024. Many of them were coming north, but ultimately they were heading south. It would be much better for them to be able to go directly south to Carlisle, but unfortunately the Government have put on hold the £10 million feasibility study into extending that route because of their capital investment review.
The Borders are not alone. The Government believe that putting a halt on infrastructure projects is part of the answer to dealing with the black hole that they never tire of telling us they inherited, and that they use as an excuse for all manner of things. I think they are being short-sighted. It is clear that our infrastructure needs investment. Our trunk roads are lamentable and our railways are little better. Of all the routes, Avanti’s London-Scotland west coast direct route has the highest percentage of trains arriving at their destination between 30 minutes and two hours late. LNER’s Scottish routes are also its worst performing, and the TransPennine Express routes between Manchester and Glasgow and Edinburgh had the worst punctuality and most cancellations in the most recent performance period.
The Liberal Democrats want to see a new railway agency—a public body that would help to join up the industry from track to train, put commuters first, hold train companies to account and bring in wholesale reform of the broken fare system for all of the United Kingdom. We should invest in research and development to make the UK the world leader in zero-carbon flights, and ensure that more domestic flights use alternative fuels. That is particularly important for communities across the highlands and islands, where, as pointed out by my right hon. Friend the Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael), air travel is a lifeline for people and businesses—although generally only as far as Edinburgh or Glasgow, and that is not good enough.
Edinburgh airport is a major employer in my constituency and supports millions of pounds of investment into Edinburgh and the rest of Scotland through business, tourism and hospitality. It has made substantial progress in reducing its carbon emissions. It is continuing to work on increasing the use of sustainable aviation fuel, which benefits passengers flying across Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom. That is part of the reason I believe that this is a timely debate.
The Union connectivity review showed that there is a desire to travel more within the United Kingdom. Good transport links are a vital part of people’s ability to maintain connections with family and friends and to get to work without being incredibly frustrated. By delivering infrastructure that works, we can deliver for so many the opportunity of a better quality of life. Infrastructure underpins almost everything about our day-to-day lives, but when talking about investing in cross-border infrastructure specifically, we need to remember that while it benefits the economy and contributes to reducing the impact of climate change, it also represents something more for all of us: the development and the cementing of our Union.
Every UK Government, particularly this one, have a responsibility to every corner of the United Kingdom. People’s worlds might be getting smaller, but it is our job in this place to mitigate that. We know that more is achieved when we work together. Would it not help if we had better and more accessible transport links for all of Scotland to all of the rest of the United Kingdom?
(6 months, 1 week ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
It is a pleasure to serve under you as Chair, Ms Vaz. I congratulate the hon. Member for Livingston (Gregor Poynton) on securing this debate on the impact of the UK Budget on Scotland.
I welcome the increase in investment for the NHS and the vital cash boost for Scotland, but with all due respect to the hon. Member for Angus and Perthshire Glens (Dave Doogan), it cannot be underestimated how much we needed it, given the mess and chaos that the SNP Government have created in our public services over the past 17 years. Indeed, they have also created chaos in our ferries, as we heard today that the new Glen Sannox is being removed from service again. I agree with the comments from many Members, particularly my hon. Friend the Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross (Jamie Stone), about the problems that we are facing.
While I welcome the money in the Budget, we have heard repeatedly from the Chancellor and other Ministers —no doubt we will hear it again today—that the Government have had to take tough decisions since coming into office. Many of my constituents in Edinburgh West are beginning to say, “Yes, every Government have to make tough decisions, but did this one have to make these decisions?”
Before Christmas I spoke to a number of businesses in Edinburgh West, and many of them were concerned about the negative impact that increases in employer national insurance contributions will have on them. Some are worried that they will have to make cuts to staff; others are trying to avoid putting up prices and passing the tax hikes on to the public. All of them are trying to find ways of making it work, and all of them are struggling. Some 40% of Scots now believe that more small and medium-sized enterprises will close in their communities as a direct result of this Government’s decisions. More than half of Scots believe that prices will have to go up. After the worst cost of living crisis in a decade, that is not what any of them needed.
GPs and many social care providers are saying that they do not know how they are going to cope with the tax changes. Private contractors or operators, who will not be eligible for employment allowance, will have to take on those extra costs directly. Within days of the Budget, several GP practices contacted me and estimated that the changes will cost them more than £10,000 extra in the next year. After 17 years of mismanagement under the SNP and 14 years of the Conservatives, our GPs need support and investment, but everywhere we look in Scotland, the impact of this Budget is not positive.
Another tax change that will have direct consequences for my city of Edinburgh is the Government’s decision to impose VAT on private school fees. It is not just because I do not support taxing education or reducing the choice of parents that I do not agree with the proposal and see it as negative, but because it will have a real impact on both the state and independent school sectors in Edinburgh. Edinburgh has the highest proportion of independently educated children in Scotland, at between 20% and 30% every year.
According to the local Labour authority, 16 schools are expected to reach capacity before the end of this decade. If the predicted percentage of children dropping out of independent education into the state sector is true, the system will be stretched to breaking point. Sadly, introducing the change halfway through the school year is causing issues for many parents. I have already had representations from parents who cannot find places in local schools for the children they have taken out of the independent sector.
I would have liked to touch on other issues, including the impact on the whisky industry—I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests—and the farming industry, which was touched on by the hon. Member for Gordon and Buchan (Harriet Cross). However, it is sufficient to say that Scotland, which is already under pressure from mismanagement by the SNP, is now facing a far-from-positive impact from the new Westminster Government in which it put its faith.
We have made responsible tax choices entirely in line with our manifesto. That is why the rates of employers’ national insurance will increase by just 1.2 percentage points. The smallest businesses will be protected as the employment allowance will increase from £5,000 to £10,500, allowing Scottish firms to employ four national living wage employees full time without paying any employer national insurance on their wages.
I will make some progress. This Budget asks businesses and the wealthiest to pay their share while making taxes fairer. Those are Labour choices and they are inspired by Labour values. As my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow North (Martin Rhodes) has made clear, this is a progressive Budget that values redistribution.
I will make some progress. And just as our Budget choices reflect our values, the ways in which the Opposition parties choose to oppose them represent their values, whether that is their opposition to our end to the VAT tax break on private schools or opposing, as the hon. Member for Gordon and Buchan (Harriet Cross) does, our attempts to bring agricultural property relief into balance. As she will know, the latest figures from 2021 to 2022 show that 40% of the value of APR went to just 7% of claimants; that is neither sustainable nor fair, which is why I support the Labour Government’s changes.
As the hon. Member will be aware, each year almost three quarters of estates eligible for APR in the UK are expected to be entirely unaffected by these fair and proportionate changes. Ours was a Budget, just as this is a Government, squarely for working people. The hon. Member for Angus and Perthshire Glens (Dave Doogan) complained of the tax burden. Unlike the SNP Scottish Government, which simply want to clobber teachers and nurses with ever higher taxes, we have delivered on our pledge not to increase national insurance or VAT on working people in Scotland. That means that they will not, thanks to this Budget, see higher taxes in their payslips.
Hundreds of thousands of workers in Scotland will benefit from an increase in the national living wage and a record increase to the national minimum wage. The Chancellor made the decision to protect working people in Scotland from being dragged into higher tax brackets by confirming that the freeze on national insurance contribution thresholds will be lifted from 2028-29 onwards, rising in line with inflation, so that people can keep more of their hard-earned wages.
We have begun the difficult work of restitching our fraying safety net. Thousands of Scottish households will be £420 a year better off on average, as a result of our change to the universal credit fair repayment rate. Around 1.7 million families in Scotland will see their working-age benefits uprated in line with inflation, a £150 gain on average, in 2025-26. Maintaining the triple lock means an increase in the state pension of £470 next year, on top of £900 this year, for 1 million Scottish pensioners.
Let me pay special tribute to the campaigners and fellow trade unionists who fought for changes to the mineworkers’ pension scheme. Thanks to their efforts and the decisions of this Labour Government, nearly 7,000 retired mineworkers in Scotland will get an extra £1,500 on average in their pension. Finally, that is justice for those who powered our country.
I will make some progress. The hon. Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross (Jamie Stone) and my hon. Friend the Member for Na h-Eileanan an Iar (Torcuil Crichton) shared moving testimony about the impact of changes by the Scottish Government on rural communities. My hon. Friend the Member for Paisley and Renfrewshire South (Johanna Baxter) talked about the crisis in NHS and social care. The answer to all those challenges is the same: investment in our public services. That is exactly what this Budget is designed to do.
(7 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberI am sure that, like the hon. Member for West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine (Andrew Bowie) and myself, the Secretary of State for Scotland is watching with bated breath for the latest Scottish Budget. After 17 years of incompetence, people are looking for change in Scotland, and the Labour party is promising it. Will the Secretary of State follow the initiative of his Scottish leader, Anas Sarwar, in saying he will reinstate the winter fuel allowance and make representations to the Prime Minister to reconsider other policies, such as the national insurance changes, which are creating instability and uncertainty for the Scottish economy?
I have a lot of respect for the hon. Lady, but this is another instance where the Opposition parties in this Chamber want all the benefits of the Budget, but they do not want to be able to pay for it. We have announced the largest settlement for Scotland in devolution’s history: £47.7 billion, which is £4.9 billion extra. The Chancellor delivered £4.9 billion extra in Barnett consequentials alone from this Dispatch Box during the Budget—the SNP voted against it, but will spend it today.
(8 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberAs the Secretary of State knows, I recently had the opportunity to visit California with the Scottish Affairs Committee to look at how that state has created an environment that encourages new space projects. In Scotland, we have a unique opportunity, not least because of developments in Glasgow, but also because the University of Edinburgh is already well respected and part of the programmes at Stanford, New York University, Columbia and NASA. What will the Government do to encourage the creation of that sort of environment in Scotland, and will the University of Edinburgh, given its reputation, be central to that?
Scotland will be central to the space sector, and I very much welcome the question. We will fully back the space sector, as I said to the Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross (Jamie Stone). The Minister for Science has been to the UK Space Agency’s new office in Edinburgh, and the Minister for Data Protection and Telecoms has met Orbex. I have met Orbex and been to Unst in Shetland to visit the spaceport up there. We will fully back this; of course, its potential reaches to infinity and beyond.
(9 months ago)
General CommitteesI welcome the remarks of the Secretary of State and the shadow Secretary of State, the hon. Member for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk, and I confirm that the Liberal Democrats also welcome the order. The changes should ensure that the pension age disability payment is recognised in UK law, so that no one loses out and no new loopholes are created. It is critical to ensure that the new system is a success, given the long delays that we have seen for many people in Scotland. Although there have been improvements for many in recent years, people have had to wait for months in some cases for adult disability benefit claims to be processed—last year, the figures were depressing.
With today’s order, we hope that we can move forward and that there will be improvements in the system. With the pilots forthcoming, we hope that we can have a successful system in Scotland and the co-operation that the Secretary of State mentioned.