Scotland
What steps he is taking to strengthen the Union.
The Secretary of State was asked—
I am sure everyone across the House would like to join me in paying tribute to the late, great Denis Law. A hero to many Scots and particularly to football fans, the Lawman scored 30 international goals in 55 appearances for Scotland and is the only Scot to win the Ballon d’Or. We send our sincere condolences to his family, friends and former colleagues.
I also want to wish everyone a very happy Burns Day for Saturday. We celebrated with two fantastic events in the Scotland Office this week and I was pleased that so many Members from across the House were able to join us. I also want to register that it is Holocaust Memorial Day next week. On the 80th anniversary, we all reaffirm in this House that we will never, ever forget.
An economic plan for change will bring growth and economic opportunity to all parts of the country. I am proud that in the last six months we have brought Great British Energy to Scotland, secured the Commonwealth games in Glasgow, launched “Brand Scotland”, delivered a pay rise for hundreds of thousands of Scottish workers and increased the state pension through our commitment to the triple lock. We promised in our manifesto to end austerity, and with £4.9 billion extra for the Scottish Government, that promise is delivered.
I associate myself with my right hon. Friend’s comments. Further to what he has just said, will he assure me that after 14 years of obstruction from the Conservative party, this UK Labour Government will work with our Scottish and Welsh colleagues to deliver the change that the country voted for, as part of a whole UK approach?
Unfortunately, the previous Government left office with living standards at their lowest level since the 1950s. In contrast, we are determined to deliver economic growth and raise living standards in every part of the United Kingdom so working people have more money in their pockets. I meet the Deputy First Minister regularly to go over joint issues for the two Governments to deliver for the people of Scotland.
Surely the best way for them to strengthen the Union is for the UK and Scottish Governments to work together on issues that need pressing attention, such as immigration and demography. Twenty years ago, there was a fresh start initiative. Today, the First Minister will launch his plans to get graduates from all over the world to come to Scotland. Will the Secretary of State encourage the Home Office to work with the Scottish Government to achieve that?
We have reset the relationship with the Scottish Government. I think I spend more time with the Deputy First Minister than the hon. Gentleman does. I suspect he should spend more time with those on his own side discussing issues of interest to the Scottish people. We are determined to deliver, and we will do that in partnership. That is what resetting the relationship is all about.
I call the Chair of the Scottish Affairs Committee.
May I thank my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for helping to secure £14 million of levelling up funds for the area of Drumchapel in my constituency of Glasgow West? Does he agree that given the record settlement that the Scottish Government have received from the UK Government, it is about time that they went ahead and sorted out the problems of under provision and overcrowding in Drumchapel health centre?
My hon. Friend has been a doughty champion for Drumchapel and was key, at the heart of this Labour Government, to getting that funding across the line. The health service in Scotland is in crisis, which is only made clearer by the First Minister taking personal control of it. One in six of our fellow Scots are on NHS waiting lists. The record settlement of £4.9 billion to end austerity in Scotland needs to be spent on the frontline in places such as Drumchapel health centre.
The Secretary of State has spoken eloquently about his efforts to strengthen the Union between our nations. What, then, is he doing to fix the problems that the Windsor framework and the protocol are causing with importing seed and ware potatoes from Scotland into Northern Ireland? That is not strengthening our Union.
This Government are fixing the foundations of our economy and resetting our relationships, not just with the devolved Administrations but with our partners across the European Union. I would hope that all parties would want to come together to make sure that happens.
The Secretary of State meets the Deputy First Minister on a regular basis and the inter ministerial group for environment, food and rural affairs convenes regularly to discuss important issues, including agriculture. I am personally looking forward to speaking at the National Farmers Union Scotland conference in February alongside Scottish Government Ministers.
We have been working hard to positively reset relations with the Scottish Government. The recent Budget saw Scotland receive an above population share for agriculture, and ringfencing of the budget was removed to respect the devolution settlement.
I look forward to hearing the Minister at the NUFS dinner. What conversations has she had with the Scottish Government and the Treasury on the agricultural property relief reforms and their impact on tenant farmers? My understanding from answers to the questions I have asked is that they do not have the same opportunities to ameliorate the APR changes as others do, and it feels like that cohort has been completely forgotten by the Government. Can we urgently review that, if that is indeed the case?
These reforms still provide a very significant level of tax relief, with the first £1 million of combined business and agriculture assets continuing to receive 100% relief in most cases. Additional assets will still receive relief at a rate of 50%. The Budget was designed to protect the payslips of working people while raising record funding for public services in Scotland. The hon. Lady should outline where she thinks that money should come from if she thinks that the wealthiest landowners should not be paying more tax.
Inheritance tax is a necessary tax. That view is tacitly shared by Conservative Members given that they did not lift a finger to abolish it when they were in power. Do Ministers agree that taxing the most valuable farm estates at half the rate that other inheritance tax payers pay is an essential step to enable record spending on sustainable farming and to deliver record high budget settlements for Scotland? If Opposition Members disagree, they should go back to their constituencies this weekend and explain what they would cut, rather than waiting until halfway through the fiscal year, as the Scottish Government are prone to do.
I could not agree more with my hon. Friend. Opposition Members have told us about how they want to see the benefits of the Budget, but they are not prepared to support any of the tax raising measures in it. This Budget secured billions for Scotland, but the SNP voted against that. It delivered a pay rise for 200,000 of the lowest paid Scots, but the SNP voted against that. It ended Tory austerity, and the SNP voted against that.
I call the shadow Secretary of State.
May I associate myself and the Official Opposition with the Secretary of State’s comments regarding Denis Law, a proud son of Aberdeen who never forgot his home town? Indeed, his legacy lives on through the Denis Law Trust, which does such good work with young people in and around the city.
This Saturday, the National Farmers Union of Scotland is planning a national day of action in protest at the pernicious, ill thought through and destructive changes to agricultural property relief and its threat to the future of family farms in Scotland. I will be attending the local rally in Aberdeenshire to show my and my party’s support of our farmers. I notice that the Edinburgh rally is taking place but a few miles from the Secretary of State’s own constituency in Ingliston. Does the Minister know whether he will be attending the rally?
We are in ongoing discussions with the National Farmers Union of Scotland. As I have said, I am proactively attending its conference next month. I am slightly surprised to hear the shadow Secretary of State talking about the changes in the Budget and not welcoming their announcement or, indeed, their implications, such as the International Monetary Fund and the OECD both predicting that Britain will be Europe’s fastest growing economy in the coming years. The UK is the only G7 economy, apart from the US, to have had its growth forecast upgraded by the IMF for this year. It has also gone ahead of Germany, China and India to become the second most attractive company for global investment, trailing only the US, according to PwC’s annual survey. If he wants to talk about—
Minister, please! I call the shadow Secretary of State.
Of course we do not agree with the policy in the Budget; the policy is purely wrong. Farmers were not consulted on it. Indeed, they were misled by the Labour party when they were told that this would not happen. It will lead to the demise of the family farm and undermine our food security, as farmers will simply stop farming. The concern, worry and fear that these changes have wrought on Scotland’s farmers are real and are on these Ministers and their Government. If the Secretary of State will not attend the rally this weekend, will he and the Minister at least use their position as Scotland’s man and woman at the Cabinet table to urge their colleagues to do as the NFU asked, which is to stop, reset, reflect, properly engage and consult on an alternative approach to stop this change?
As the hon. Member is perfectly aware, the majority of estates will not be affected. We are in ongoing conversations with the National Farmers Union of Scotland. We have asked it to come forward with some worked examples of estates that may be impacted. It has not done so yet. Of course, we will continue with our ongoing conversations, but the majority of estates will not be affected.
Promoting Scotland internationally is one of my four priorities. Brand Scotland is the Scotland Office’s programme of international trade and investment. Promotion is about selling Scotland to the world. We have been to Norway, Singapore and Malaysia, and we plan to be in the US in April. This is an initiative for the whole of Government, We work closely with Department for Business and Trade and Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office colleagues in particular. Additionally, I have met many foreign ambassadors and high commissioners in the past few months. This week, I have hosted members of the diplomatic corps at Dover House to discuss Scotland’s offer to the world.
Tech companies such as Calnex in my constituency export around the world, including to the US and south east Asia. On his recent visit to south east Asia in November, what representations did the Secretary of State make to promote Brand Scotland, specifically in the tech sector, and will he join me on a visit to Calnex to hear about the vital work that it does to support digital infrastructure?
I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for consistently raising the interests of her constituents in this House, and for the manner in which she does so. Technology was a key theme of my recent visit to Malaysia and Singapore. I had productive meetings with Ministers from both Governments and major companies in the region to discuss how Scotland can share its world leading technological expertise with both countries. I encourage Calnex to engage with the Scotland Office and the national wealth fund. If my hon. Friend writes to me, we can make the relevant introductions to the company.
When President Trump visited Scotland during his first presidency, I was tasked with officially welcoming him. The details of that will appear in my memoirs, but while we may disagree with President Trump on many specific issues, it is clear that he has a deep affection for Scotland, due to the birth of his mother on the Isle of Lewis, and his huge investment in Scottish golf at Turnberry and in the north east, so what will the Secretary of State do to encourage economic benefit during the second Trump presidency?
The President does have a deep affection for Scotland. I am sure that he also had a deep affection for the right hon. Gentleman, which I hope will appear in his memoirs. I am sure that there will be some rare unsigned copies for people to buy when they are published.
The Prime Minister has been clear, along with the Foreign Secretary, who has met President Trump and has been working very closely with the transition team, that Scotland is a key marketplace for the USA. It is not in anybody’s interest, here in the United Kingdom or indeed in America, for tariffs to be put on Scottish goods. We are working very closely with both the Government here and the Government in America to ensure that does not happen.
Our plan for change will benefit workers in Scotland more than most. More than 100,000 workers in Scotland on zero hours contracts could benefit from the Employment Rights Bill. The Bill will have significant benefits for workers in insecure and low paid jobs, and central Scotland is one area where those workers will stand to benefit the most.
In 2023, the Low Pay Commission estimated that approximately 13,500 employees who lived in Glasgow were paid at or below the relevant minimum wage—4.8% of all employees living in the city. What assessment has the Minister made of the impact of the Government’s “Make Work Pay” initiative for those workers and others in Scotland?
The increase in the national minimum wage is delivering on our commitment from day one in government that work should always pay. Modernising the UK labour market, including through extra pay and secure jobs, is at the heart of rebuilding our economy and will help us to achieve our plan for long term national renewal and growth. In addition to the more than 13,000 workers in Glasgow my hon. Friend mentioned, national minimum wage increases will benefit workers across Scotland, with more than 4,000 in Dundee, 4,400 in the highlands and 2,900 in the Scottish Borders set to benefit, to name just a few.
The Government’s Employment Rights Bill will increase costs on small and medium sized enterprises by £5 billion a year. It will make it easier to strike, and easier for employees to sue their employers. Combined with the tax rises announced in the Budget, is it not inevitable that this Labour Government will increase unemployment?
The hon. Gentleman might not be aware that unemployment actually came down in Scotland this week. We promised that there would be no return to austerity, and workers’ payslips across Scotland were indeed protected in the Budget. More than half of employees will see either a cut or no change in their national insurance bill. The smallest businesses and charities are protected, and our decision to increase employer national insurance will raise more than £25 billion to help to rebuild Britain.
I am in regular contact with ministerial colleagues from the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero on a range of issues relevant to clean energy production in Scotland. Scotland is key to the UK Government’s clean power by 2030 mission, which will deliver cheaper bills, energy security and future jobs, and drive growth in the Scottish economy.
The roll out of offshore renewables in Scotland should happen alongside the growth of supply chains there. That is vital if the energy transition is to deliver jobs and investment in Scotland’s oil and gas communities. It is welcome that the Government have allocated £200 million to a clean industry bonus, but that falls short of the £500 million that Labour pledged in its manifesto. How do the Government plan to strengthen the clean industry bonus to build thriving renewable manufacturing in the UK?
It is a very good question, because our clean power by 2030 mission will ensure that the Government can deliver that. GB Energy has been set up to look at supply chains and all the other issues around how we do so. I hope that GB Energy will be able to look at some of those issues in the round, but the key thing is to ensure that we have the supply chain infrastructure to be able to deliver that mission.
Order. Can Members who are just roaming around the Chamber remember that there are other people here and have a little more courtesy?
If the Grangemouth refinery closes in 2025 and the recommendations of Project Willow will not be ready for years to come, thousands of jobs will be lost—the very definition of an unjust transition. How can the Government possibly claim to have a credible industrial strategy for Scotland if they allow that to happen?
The closure of the Grangemouth refinery is regrettable. My hon. Friend needs to reflect on the fact that the previous Government and the Scottish Government had 32 years combined to do something about Grangemouth and did not lift a finger. Since we came into government in July, we have got the £100 million Falkirk and Grangemouth growth deal over the line and delivered some short term help for the workers at Grangemouth. We continue to work with the company and the trade unions on the Grangemouth refinery. We look forward to Project Willow coming to fruition this month, and the Government are fully committed to ensuring that we see that through.
We come to the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
I associate myself with the Secretary of State’s remarks about Denis Law, whom I had the pleasure of interviewing more than once in my previous career.
I welcome the Government’s commitment to energy security as well as to green energy and net zero. This week, it has been reported that the Scottish Government could fund up to £60 million to both Mingyang, to build a wind turbine factory in the highlands, and Orient Cable to provide the undersea cables and connections for offshore wind. Given that those are both Chinese owned companies, have the UK Government and the Secretary of State had any discussions with the Scottish Government to ensure that there are mitigating steps, such as ensuring local control and not using cellular modules, and have the security services been consulted?
A key question and one of the topic agenda items that we always have with the Scottish Government is how we can deliver clean power by 2030, because obviously it is a joint endeavour. The Chancellor was in China last month, and we will work with China when it is in our national interests to do so. One of the key points is that Great British Energy will be looking in the round at supply chains and at how we can deliver that mission by 2030, but the hon. Member will be as surprised as I am that the SNP voted against GB Energy and, indeed, the record Budget settlement in Scotland.
GB Energy is owned by the public and headquartered in Aberdeen, because Scotland will be at the forefront of the UK becoming the clean energy superpower that it wants to be by 2030. GB Energy’s activities will support and enhance the delivery of priority supply chains and infrastructure development, helping to speed up the existing Scottish offshore wind pipeline and other clean energy projects.
Eight years ago, Nicola Sturgeon promised a publicly owned energy company, but after spending £500,000 on consultants, the Scottish Government have now dropped the plan. Does the Secretary of State agree that while Labour ploughs ahead with delivering GB Energy, owned by the British people and headquartered in Scotland, it is the SNP who are breaking their promises and letting down Scotland, our Union and the protection of our planet?
I congratulate my hon. Friend on being the new mission champion for clean energy. He is absolutely right. While the SNP makes promises it breaks, this Labour Government are determined to deliver for Scotland. Maybe that is why SNP MPs in this House voted against GB Energy. We are delivering for Scotland. We promised GB Energy; that has been delivered. We promised to end austerity; that has been delivered. We promised to make work pay; that has been delivered. While the SNP only delivers managed decline for Scotland, we are getting on with improving the economy.
There are no clear plans for Great British Energy, but there are very clear plans to end new licences for oil and gas in the North sea. Gary Smith of the GMB has said that stopping new licences is “the employment equivalent of a Grangemouth refinery closing nearly every week from 2025 to 2030.” When will the Secretary of State stand up for Scotland, oppose the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, protect jobs and ensure that we do not have more imports with higher emissions?
GB Energy is there, with the national wealth fund, to deliver that just transition in clean power by 2030. Oil and gas in the North sea will be here for decades to come, and I ask the right hon. Gentleman to work with us to deliver that just transition, rather than scaremongering the workers of the north east.
I call the shadow Secretary of State.
Despite mighty work by Conservative Members of the other place, sadly the Great British Energy Bill continues to make progress through the House of Lords. To remind you, Mr Speaker, the chairman of Great British Energy is based in Manchester but leading a company headquartered in Aberdeen. In Committee in October it was claimed that GB Energy would directly employ 1,000 people; by November, that had fallen to 300 people. What is the figure, what are those jobs, where will they be based and what on earth will GB Energy actually do?
I am surprised that the shadow Secretary of State is championing the lines of the SNP. GB Energy is headquartered in Scotland. In fact, it is headquartered in the region that he represents in Scotland, it is capitalised with £125 million and it will bring valuable jobs to his constituency. I suspect he might want to go back to his constituents this weekend and explain why he does not want those new jobs and industries of the future in his constituency.
The Labour Government’s choice to protect the pension triple lock means that millions of women pensioners will see their yearly pensions rise by up to £470 in April, and by up to £1,900 over this Parliament. That stands in stark contrast to the Conservative party, who cut the state pension of over 1 million Scots. The Conservatives are still in chaos, announcing policies on the hoof that would mean a raid on pension pots. Meanwhile, this Labour Government are taking tough decisions and action to clean up the Tories’ economic mess.
Do the Minister and the Secretary of State agree with Labour MSPs that WASPI women deserve compensation?
I appreciate that campaigners are disappointed, but the hon. Lady has got herself in a bit of a fankle and is eliding two separate issues: a decision about the legality of the changes and the question of compensation. The ombudsman’s findings showed that the vast majority of WASPI women knew that the state pension age was changing. It is therefore difficult to justify up to £10 billion for a compensation scheme and conclude that that is a fair, proportionate and good value for money use of public funds.
Will Members please look at where the questions are coming from? Not doing so is disrespectful and not the way we should be carrying on. I am talking about senior Members who should know better. Here is a good example of a new Member—I call Ann Davies.
Thank you, Mr Llefarydd. In 2021, the then Secretary of State called for a vote on redress for 1950s born women, urging the UK Government to get on the front foot and offer serious compensation to those affected, but women in Scotland and Wales have seen the same broken promises from Labour. The now First Minister of Wales pledged in 2018 that a Labour Government would right that injustice. With the Secretary of State, the Welsh First Minister and Labour politicians across these isles turning their backs on 1950s women in Scotland, Wales and elsewhere, why should those women ever again believe a word they say?
I am afraid that another hon. Member is in a bit of a fankle. The question about the legality of the changes has been settled by the courts. The question that the hon. Lady and her allies must answer is why they think that up to £10 billion of public money should be spent on compensation. Is that proportionate, fair, feasible and value for money? The Government’s view is that it is not.
Does the Minister agree that alongside the triple lock, the most important thing for women pensioners in Scotland is fixing our NHS, and that the SNP Government must act urgently to ensure that vulnerable Scots do not face what even the SNP Health Secretary has described as unacceptable waits for treatment?
I could not agree more. Scotland’s NHS is in crisis; one in six Scots are on a waiting list. The UK Government have provided a record investment to fix Scotland’s public services. The Scottish Government led by the SNP should get on with it.
The most common problem raised with me by women pensioners is, as my hon. Friend the Member for Stirling and Strathallan (Chris Kane) says, the enormous waiting lists. Researchers from Oxford University, Strathclyde University and Edinburgh University have predicted that by the time the SNP leaves office, almost a million Scots will be on waiting lists. How can we ensure that the billions provided in the Labour Budget do not go down the same drain as everything else given to the SNP?
One in six Scots is on a waiting list today, and we face a housing emergency and a very stubborn attainment gap. Nobody could look around Scotland and say that it is going in the right direction. That is the choice that people will have to make in 2026: is Scotland going in the right or wrong direction? Canny Scots will, I am sure, make choices in the interest of their families and say that it is time to replace a failing SNP Government.
Hurray!
I welcome that welcome from the Labour Benches.
The Minister campaigned on compensation for WASPI women, as the Secretary of State for Scotland did, so will she tell me, if she will not listen to the women and if she will not listen to the ombudsman, will she listen to Scottish Labour MSPs who called for compensation?
There is a third Member in a dreadful fankle. We said at the election that we would wait for the ombudsman’s report, we would examine it and we would take a view. We have a taken view: we have taken a view that up to £10 billion of public money should not be spent providing compensation on a decision that was legal and of which it has been concluded that the vast majority of 1950s born women were aware.
The Secretary of State recently reacted to Labour’s dip in the polls in Scotland by saying that the voters “don’t like honesty”. I wonder if it was more to do with Labour not keeping its commitment to women pensioners, or saying that it would decrease fuel bills—and they went up—or saying that it would tackle child poverty and then taking on some of the most regressive Tory policies on the two child cap? As we approach Burns night, I wonder if the bard was right when he said: “Dare to be honest and fear no labour.”
Nowadays, would he say, “Dare to be honest and fear the voters”?
Polls come, polls go. The fact remains that this Labour Government have provided record investment for Scottish public services. I suggest the hon. Member invests in a notepad so that he can keep track.