All 3 Debates between Mike Weir and Baroness Primarolo

Scotland’s Constitutional Future

Debate between Mike Weir and Baroness Primarolo
Tuesday 10th January 2012

(12 years, 11 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mike Weir Portrait Mr Mike Weir (Angus) (SNP)
- Hansard - -

In answer to an earlier question, the Secretary of State again went on about the uncertainty caused by the lack of a referendum, but when the Prime Minister’s spokesman was asked about this this morning, the only thing he could refer to was a Citigroup report, the same one that the Secretary of State referred to, which is specifically on renewables. But if he looks at it he will know that Gamesa, SG, Doosan Babcock, Mitsubishi, Aquamarine Power, EDP Renewables and Repsol—

Baroness Primarolo Portrait Madam Deputy Speaker (Dawn Primarolo)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. The statement has been going on a long time already and Members still wish to speak. The hon. Gentleman knows very well that he should be brief.

Public Sector Pensions

Debate between Mike Weir and Baroness Primarolo
Thursday 8th December 2011

(13 years ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mike Weir Portrait Mr Weir
- Hansard - -

I was about to deal with the position of the Scottish Government. They have taken positive action to help to protect household budgets by, for example, freezing council tax for the rest of the parliamentary term, increasing the Scottish living wage to £7.20 an hour for all staff for whom they are responsible, and committing themselves to imposing no compulsory redundancies. In contrast to the Westminster Government, the Scottish Government have sought to focus on protecting Scottish household budgets.

The amendment tabled by the Labour party referred to the devolved Administration. In Scotland—

Baroness Primarolo Portrait Madam Deputy Speaker (Dawn Primarolo)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. The amendment was not selected. As the hon. Gentleman knows, he cannot refer to an amendment that has not been selected, and I am sure that he is not going to do so.

Mike Weir Portrait Mr Weir
- Hansard - -

Much of the debate has concerned public pensions in Scotland, Madam Deputy Speaker. I mentioned the amendment merely in passing, but I apologise for doing so.

There are five public sector schemes in Scotland—for NHS workers, teachers, the police, firefighters and local government—all of which are subject to constraints. Formal approval is required from the Treasury for legislative changes to the NHS and teachers’ schemes. It controls the purse strings. Scottish Ministers can determine the design of the police and firefighters’ schemes, although to date they have been negotiated on a UK-wide basis, a position supported by the Labour party. Scottish Ministers can decide on the funded local government scheme as long as the scheme regulations comply with primary legislation.

The Scottish Government sought to protect public sector workers in Scotland from the measures proposed by the UK Government, but the Chief Secretary to the Treasury made it absolutely clear that he would reduce the Scottish budget if they did so. In a letter to the Finance Secretary, John Swinney, on 5 September, he stated:

“If you decide not to take forward these changes, the Treasury will need to make corresponding adjustments to your budget. I would have to reduce the Scottish Government’s budget by £8.4million for every month's delay.”

The Scottish Public Pensions Agency issued a document putting forward options. Its contents were not Scottish Government policy, nor were they SNP policy, and at no time have the SNP and the Scottish Government made such suggestions. The document simply set out options and factual information. It is ludicrous for the two main parties to have a duopoly of despair and to attack the public sector based on the document—the SNP has done much more for public sector workers in Scotland than either of them has done in this Chamber.

Postal Services Bill

Debate between Mike Weir and Baroness Primarolo
Wednesday 27th October 2010

(14 years, 1 month ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Mike Weir Portrait Mr Weir
- Hansard - -

I shall not give way again; time is getting on.

I pointed out in an intervention that the chief executive officer of Royal Mail is calling for an overhaul of the regulatory regime, including the ability to price products freely, to put limitations on the products covered by the universal service obligation and for the USO fully to cover its costs—the cost of delivering a letter to the islands of Scotland is about £30 not 30p—and for restrictions on access to the Royal Mail network by competitors. If a privately owned Royal Mail goes down that route, the pressure on the Government and regulators could be immense and could mean a substantial rise in postal costs to rural areas. It would be the ultimate irony if the Bill meant that a privatised Royal Mail was given an ability to compete against other privatised companies that it was denied when it was a public body.

I should like to say more about post offices—[Interruption.] I would take another intervention if it gave me two more minutes. The Business Secretary failed to explain how mutualisation would work. He failed to say how a post office that has moved into a branch of WH Smith, as many have, will form part of a mutual. How will individually owned—

Baroness Primarolo Portrait Madam Deputy Speaker (Dawn Primarolo)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. Time is up. [Interruption.] Will the hon. Gentleman resume his seat? I ask Members to stick to six minutes. Interventions with four seconds to go can give more time, as has just happened, and the hon. Gentleman benefited from that.