Debate
← Back
Hansard · Commons · 15 April 2026

Scotland

Commons Chamber
What this debate is about

What steps he is taking with Cabinet colleagues to help tackle child poverty in Scotland.

The Secretary of State was asked—

1. What steps he is taking with Cabinet colleagues to help tackle child poverty in Scotland.

Tackling child poverty is fundamental to the work of this Labour Government. In December, we published our ambitious and comprehensive UK wide child poverty strategy. It sets out the steps we are taking to reduce child poverty in the short term, as well as putting in place the building blocks we need to create long term change across the United Kingdom. On its own, our decision to lift the two child cap, which came into effect just last week, will benefit 95,000 children in Scotland.

Does the Secretary of State agree that the Scottish National party has failed Scotland’s children over the past two decades, leaving thousands in poverty, including one in four in my constituency, and that it is only Labour that will prioritise our children, as we have shown by lifting the two child cap, which is now benefiting over 13,000 children in Lanarkshire?

First, on the conduct of the Government: the Conservatives in government pushed kids into poverty; Labour in government lifts kids out of poverty. We would have hoped for a better approach from the Scottish Government, but the fact is that there are 10,000 kids in Scotland without a home to call their own. At the same time, the challenge that was set by the previous First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, was to close the educational attainment gap in Scotland—of course, education, along with employment, is the best route out of poverty—but that gap has got wider rather than narrower. What a damning indictment of the Scottish Government.

Obviously I do not agree with the Secretary of State’s analysis, but I think we can agree that child poverty and the other challenges that face real people in Scotland should be the focus of this Scottish Parliament election campaign, and not independence, for which, incredibly, the Reform UK candidate in Dumfriesshire voted. Does the Secretary of State agree that anybody in Scotland who does not want to see Scotland spend five more years in a constitutional cul de sac should use their vote wisely to stop an SNP majority?

It is always important for the electorate to use their votes wisely, but the fact is that there are two parties that are deeply threatened by Scottish Labour’s emergence as the credible alternative to the SNP. They are, on the one hand, the Scottish National party and, on the other hand, Reform. If we think about it, their interests are completely aligned, in talking Reform up and talking Scottish Labour down. I certainly hope that people act wisely and make sure that this Scottish election is about Scotland.

2. What steps he is taking with Cabinet colleagues through the Pride in Place programme to support regeneration in Scotland.

5. What steps he is taking with Cabinet colleagues through the Pride in Place programme to support regeneration in Scotland.

Through our ambitious Pride in Place programme, we are empowering local people to shape the future of their neighbourhoods. The Pride in Place impact fund is investing £12 million across Scotland over two years, including £1.5 million in North Ayrshire. We will invest up to £480 million in 24 Scottish communities over the next decade, including £20 million each for the Irvine and Three Towns neighbourhoods in North Ayrshire, and for the Fauldhouse, Whitburn and Blackburn neighbourhood in West Lothian. This locally led funding can be used to directly support regeneration, high streets and heritage. Best of all, decisions will be made by local people—those who know and love the places the most.

I am pleased to say that after a huge amount of hard work was put into a Pride in Place application, investment has been successfully allocated to the three towns of Ardrossan, Saltcoats and Stevenston in my constituency. Does the Minister agree that the £20 million of UK Government Pride in Place funding will provide great opportunities for community projects that can improve our town centres and regenerate our shorefront areas?

Huge congratulations to my hon. Friend and her constituents. These three towns have tremendous untapped potential that has been long neglected and underutilised. Our coastal towns are a huge part of our identity on these islands, and I look forward to working with her to champion the pride that people rightly feel about living in this beautiful part of Ayrshire.

Years of under investment and the loss of major employers have left Whitburn and Blackburn facing deep economic and health inequalities, weakened high streets and people generally feeling left behind, yet the strength of local organisations and businesses shows great ambition for renewal. With £20 million of Pride in Place funding from this Labour Government, local people are finally at the heart of decisions on local regeneration. How does the Minister see this programme rebuilding community cohesion and inclusion so that people feel valued and that their contribution matters?

The communities of Fauldhouse, Blackburn and Whitburn all face long standing economic challenges, but as my hon. Friend rightly says, there is also so much pride and passion locally, and she is a great champion of that. Our Pride in Place programme is there to ensure that all local people have a stake and a say, and that they can work together for a future that is truly worthy of their ambitions for the places they love.

Does the Minister share my disappointment that my constituency of Edinburgh West was the only one in Edinburgh that was not considered for a Pride in Place programme, including areas like Drylaw and Stenhouse which have particular problems that could have been helped by this programme?

The hon. Member and I have had a chance to discuss this matter previously and, as I have indicated, these are Labour priorities guided by Labour values. We have committed to targeting funding at the places that need it most, based on a double deprivation index, and I am afraid her constituency simply did not qualify.

Does the Minister accept that if Pride in Place in Scotland is to mean anything, as with elsewhere in the UK, it must include targeted funding for high streets and town centres to bring long term vacant premises back into productive use?

That is precisely one of the focuses of the Pride in Place programme. Our high streets have been neglected for far too long and are at the real heart of community pride. I am delighted that so many of the Pride in Place bids are focused on exactly that.

3. What steps he is taking with Cabinet colleagues to help reduce energy prices for people in Scotland.

The UK Government stand ready to provide the support needed by families in response to recent events in the middle east. The Prime Minister has set out our plan to deal with the immediate impact of the conflict on the cost of living, which includes cutting energy bills by an average of £117 per household, extending the fuel duty cut until September while closely monitoring prices at the pumps, providing £4.6 million for low income families in Scotland who heat their homes with oil to tackle surging prices and, of course, continuing to push for de escalation of the conflict itself.

I welcome what the Minister has said, but the challenge is that the Government have yet to correct the challenges from the ECO4 scheme, which in North East Fife has blighted houses with not only a lack of insulation but poor installation of inappropriate heat pumps and so on. Can the Secretary of State advise me when the Government will start inspecting these properties and consider a compensation scheme for constituents such as mine?

I see that the Under Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, my hon. Friend the Member for Inverclyde and Renfrewshire West (Martin McCluskey), is on the Front Bench with me. I will write to the hon. Lady on exactly that matter.

My constituents welcomed the fall in energy prices at the beginning of this month. Does my right hon. Friend agree that the best way to reduce energy prices in Scotland is not to pursue more constitutional divides but to secure our energy independence by progressing the Government’s clean power mission as quickly as possible?

My hon. Friend makes a powerful point. Global instability, including the recent events in Iran, has exposed the risks of relying on fossil fuel markets that the United Kingdom inevitably does not control. We are delivering on work to ensure our energy independence and thereby bring down bills for the British people for good. What we absolutely do not need right now is the added distraction of political point scoring at the expense of our national security in what is a dangerous and troubled world.

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

The Conservatives are clear that we need to get Britain drilling and unlock the potential of the North sea, cutting bills, saving Scottish jobs and making us more energy secure. Apparently, the Secretary of State for Scotland is running the election campaign for the leader of the Scottish Labour party, so he presumably agrees with the leader, who said, “The balanced approach that we need to take is supporting our oil and gas sector.”

That also presumably means that the Secretary of State disagrees with the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero and the Prime Minister. Who is right: the Prime Minister or the leader of the Scottish Labour party? It cannot be both.

The difficulty with the point that the Scottish Conservatives are making is that they are in denial of their record. We lost 70,000 jobs in the North sea when the hon. Gentleman was in office. The fact is that the challenge for the North sea did not emerge in July 2024; in fact, it reflects the complete absence of a plan from the previous Government. The reality is that oil and gas will be central part of our energy mix for many years to come, and this Government recognise and understand that.

The Secretary of State will be aware that Scotland is an energy rich exporter of electricity, hydrocarbons and renewables, so why are so many Scots struggling to pay what are among the highest bills in Europe?

Economic illiteracy is not limited to the Benches of the House of Commons; it extends to the First Minister. Let us take the example of Berwick Bank, the largest offshore wind farm in Europe, which was paid for in no small measure thanks to the actions of a UK Government. The fact is that when the First Minister and the hon. Gentleman make their claim that the affordability of renewables is somehow determined by the Scottish taxpayer, they ignore the contribution paid by UK bill payers. The level of investment in renewables in Scotland is a direct consequence of its being part of the UK energy market.

Right there, we see the alignment of Labour and Reform. Labour’s Brexit isolationism has taken us away from Europe and away from our key markets. Independent Ireland—European Ireland—has announced a €700 million support package, yet Scotland, which has given £350 billion to the Treasury, got £35 per household in heating oil support. As the fuel crisis spirals, we see little or no action from the Labour Government. Will they turn their back on that alignment and turn towards the taxpayer?

There goes the SNP talking up Reform again. When will SNP Members learn that it is possible to be anti nationalist without being anti Scottish? That party promised a publicly owned energy company almost a decade ago. Maybe when the hon. Gentleman next gets to his feet, he can tell us where that energy company went.

4. What steps the Government are taking with the National Institute for Health and Care Research to support cancer research in Scotland.

Tragically, cancer remains one of the leading causes of death in Scotland. I want Scots to benefit from the very best research. The National Institute for Health and Care Research works in partnership with the Scottish Government to support and enhance health and social care research across the UK, even though healthcare is devolved. Researchers in Scotland can now apply for funding, which has, for example, allowed the outstanding researchers at the University of Dundee to identify a newer, simpler type of mammogram that can reliably show how breast cancer responds to chemotherapy before surgery.

Cancer Research UK’s manifesto for cancer research and care in Scotland recommends that the Government should increase “strategic institutional research and innovation funding…investing in and supporting the delivery of a new Scottish Health and Biomedicine Institute (SHBI) to deliver new innovations that will benefit people and the economy in Scotland.”

What is the Minister doing to support that manifesto?

I commend my hon. Friend for his ongoing and dogged advocacy for this cause. As he will know, the UK Government are committed to ensuring a partnership approach between the health services of Scotland and the rest of the UK, and we are focused on ensuring that higher education, and other forms of innovation, are part of our work on cancer.

6. What steps he is taking with Cabinet colleagues to support economic growth in Scotland.

9. What steps he is taking with Cabinet colleagues to support economic growth in Scotland.

The UK Government’s industrial strategy set out how we will grow our economy by doubling down on our national strengths, despite the global uncertainty we are living through. That includes investing in Scotland’s huge contribution to the UK economy. Our free trade agreements with India and the EU will have huge benefits for Scottish businesses, and of course Scotland will benefit hugely from the defence dividend created by our increased investment in our national security. This is a Government backing growth and jobs in Scotland.

Given the state of our economy, taxpayer money must be used far more strategically. Phase 3 of the SNP’s Scottish zero emission bus challenge fund granted the majority of a taxpayer funded subsidy to Chinese bus manufacturers, which directly contributed six days later to 115 jobs being put at risk in Falkirk. With demand for ZEBs rising but domestic market share reducing, Scottish manufacturing jobs are being lost with the assistance of taxpayer money, and something must change. What discussions has the Secretary of State had with Cabinet colleagues to ensure that future taxpayer funded orders are met by manufacturers and workers in Scotland and across the UK?

This is an incredibly difficult time for the Alexander Dennis workers and their families, many of whom face an uncertain future through no fault of their own. It is, alas, yet another example of failure on the part of the Scottish Government, who sent the majority of a £45 million funding pot for zero emission buses to China, blocking comparative bids to build and invest in Falkirk. While Labour mayors have shown what is possible across the rest of the UK, stepping forward with bus orders and backing British manufacturing when it mattered, that is an example not so much of being “stronger for Scotland”, as of being stronger for China.

Good transport is essential for economic growth, be it ferries to our wonderful islands, or their links from the west coast of Scotland to our airport, but after almost 20 years of the SNP, Glasgow is in gridlock. Workers worry about getting to work on time, which holds back business. Does my right hon. Friend agree that Glasgow needs change, and that only Anas Sarwar can get Glasgow moving?

Unsurprisingly, I find myself wholeheartedly in agreement with my hon. Friend. Glasgow is the city of my birth, and it has been badly neglected on any objective measure by the Scottish Government in recent years. Scottish local authorities have been starved of cash over decades by the SNP led Scottish Government, who have hoarded powers and resources at the centre in Edinburgh, to the detriment of Scotland’s local authorities and cities. People make Glasgow, and Glasgow and its people deserve a whole lot better.

A strong job and business market is key for economic growth, but Labour’s huge rise in national insurance is a direct jobs tax, and the SNP’s huge increase in business rates is a direct tax on our businesses. Scottish Conservatives have a plan to revitalise our high streets, support jobs and get businesses investing. Does the Secretary of State agree that his Government’s decisions since coming to power have cost jobs, businesses and investment in Scotland?

Before we get to the Conservatives’ plan, perhaps we could start with their apology. What about the £22 billion black hole that was left in the public finances by the Conservatives? We are still waiting for the apology.

In a Westminster Hall debate on heating oil support this morning, the hon. Member for Na h Eileanan an Iar (Torcuil Crichton) suggested that the Scottish Government should be supporting businesses with energy costs. I agree that powers over energy should be totally devolved to the Scottish Government—does the Secretary of State agree with that?

If SNP Members want guidance on how to deal with energy costs, they could look at the £100 million emergency package that was announced by Scottish Labour only a few days ago. I must express concern, however, because if they are serious about energy, perhaps they could tell the House what happened to the publicly owned energy company that was promised so long ago by Nicola Sturgeon, because the Scottish public are still waiting.

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

In a long litany of failures, surely the most egregious of all that the Scottish National party has inflicted on Scotland is the lack of any discernible growth whatsoever. Indeed, had Scotland’s economy grown at the same rate as the rest of the UK’s from 2010, Scotland could be up to £10 billion a year richer. At the same time, its benefits bill is set to soar to £9 billion by 2030. Does the Secretary of State agree with me that Scotland needs change?

I certainly agree that Scotland needs change. There has been an industrial level of waste by the Scottish Government in relation to money. Half a billion pounds has been spent on ferries; the First Minister went to Stornoway last week, but this week the boat that he travelled on broke down. A third of the CalMac fleet was out of commission over Easter. Whether it is the Scottish Government’s waste of resources, their failure on public services or their abject failure on economic growth, Scotland needs and deserves change.

I could not agree more, but change will not come from a weak and feeble Labour party that over the last five years has nodded through and supported every single one of the SNP’s mad cap schemes, including, though Labour Members will not admit it now, the dangerous gender recognition reforms stopped by us. The SNP has failed Scotland and Scotland now has the worst of both worlds: two economically illiterate socialist Governments engaged in a staggeringly depressing game of Top Trumps in a desperate race to the bottom. National insurance, the family farm tax, the North sea, business rates—Labour and the SNP are strangling economic growth in Scotland.

The last time I checked, it was actually Scottish Conservative votes in Holyrood that sustained Alex Salmond’s Government in power, so we are not going to take any lectures from the Conservatives about somehow being the SNP’s little helpers. The reality is that Reform is the SNP’s little helper in this election, and after the comments made last night, it is pretty clear that the SNP is Reform’s little helper too.

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

The SNP is willing to support the Chinese economy by buying buses from China that raise serious security concerns, but when it comes to supporting defence jobs at the British owned Rolls Royce site in Glasgow, it pulled the funding. Does the Secretary of State agree with me that the SNP is failing Scotland both on jobs and on security?

The hon. Lady’s question tells us everything we need to know about the base politics of the SNP, which suggest that those who are pro national security are somehow anti Scottish. That helps to explain why the SNP Government were not willing to fund the welding centre on the Clyde, which would have delivered hundreds of apprenticeships and secure jobs for decades to come. It explains why they were are weak on our own defence, supporting unilateral nuclear disarmament notwithstanding the arrival of Vladimir Putin’s ambitions on the international stage. If Scotland wants to benefit from being part of a strong and secure United Kingdom, I hope that we will decisively reject the SNP on 7 May.

7. What discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on the potential impact of the energy profits levy on the oil and gas sector in Scotland.

Last month, alongside the Chancellor, I met oil and gas industry leaders to discuss the impact of geopolitical volatility on energy prices. The Chancellor reaffirmed her commitment to backing Britain’s oil and gas industry, recognising its pivotal role in supporting growth and jobs, especially in Scotland. The Chancellor has been clear that she wants the energy profits levy to come to an end, but the crisis in the middle east has had real time consequences on oil and gas prices, as we can all see, and it is right that we respond to that robustly.

The oil and gas sector is a vital industry, not just in Scotland but for the whole UK. Does the Secretary of State share the disappointment of the Conservatives that the Chancellor deterred a reported £17.5 billion of private investment into the oil and gas sector by choosing to retain the energy profits levy last month? That money would have supported thousands of Scottish jobs, and delivered growth and energy security for the UK.

I respectfully point out that it was the Conservative Government who introduced the EPL. Why did they do so? They did it in order to deal with excess profits generated by a geopolitical crisis. The conflict in the middle east that we are living through at the moment makes the case for dealing with excess profits from some of the largest energy companies in the world.

The ExxonMobil plant at Mossmorran in my constituency has now ceased production, after the company said last year that it had not made a profit for five years. News that our UK Labour Government have made £9 million available to support the affected workforce and find a future for the site has been warmly welcomed by my constituents, especially in Cowdenbeath. Does the Secretary of State agree that it is in the interests of the people of Fife for the Scottish and UK Governments to work together to utilise all available funding and find a viable future that brings jobs back to the site?

May I pay generous tribute to my hon. Friend for her tireless efforts on behalf of her constituents in relation to the challenge faced by the Mossmorran workforce? She has been a powerful and consistent advocate for the workforce and for the changes that we needed to see. That is why I am proud that the UK Government have been actively marketing the site to potential investors and stand ready, as she says, to invest up to £9 million to secure a successful future for the site and support the local economy.

I am sorry that we did not get to John Lamont’s question. He is 50 today, and I believe that his parents are watching him!