UKPOL.CO.UK

Category: Scotland

  • Neale Hanvey – 2023 Speech on Scottish Self-Determination

    Neale Hanvey – 2023 Speech on Scottish Self-Determination

    The speech made by Neale Hanvey, the SNP MP for Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath, in the House of Commons on 1 February 2023.

    I beg to move,

    That leave be given to bring in a Bill to amend the Scotland Act 1998 to transfer to the power to legislate for a Scottish independence referendum to the Scottish Parliament; to provide that that power may only be exercised where the Scottish public has demonstrated its support for the holding of such a referendum; to provide that no such referendum may be held sooner than seven years after the previous such referendum; and for connected purposes.

    The question of whether the ancient nation of Scotland should be an independent country once more continues to be the subject of much debate, indicating that the matter is far from settled. Of course, it is entirely proper for any country to review such matters. Scotland will only become independent as and when the majority of the people of Scotland choose that path, yet that requires a democratic mechanism that is constitutional and satisfies international legal precedent. The Bill seeks to standardise and codify such a requirement in line with the motion passed by this House that endorsed the principles of the 1989 claim of right, which acknowledged the sovereign right of the Scottish people to determine the form of government best suited to their needs.

    The Bill is explicit on the necessary conditions to bring that mechanism into play: first, that the power to legislate for a referendum requires a democratic mandate from the Scottish public. Since 2014, that criterion has been met in successive general elections to the Scottish Parliament, most recently in 2021, when a majority of MSPs were elected on a manifesto commitment to deliver an independence referendum. In addition, a majority of the votes cast on the d’Hondt regional list were won by parties that support independence—the SNP, the Scottish Green party and the Alba party. Secondly, the Bill states that no such referendum may be held sooner than seven years after any previous such referendum. In terms of established UK precedent, that would bring Scotland into line with the provisions for a border poll in Northern Ireland regarding the constitutional future of the island of Ireland. As Robert McCorquodale, professor of international law and human rights, sets out, that would be in keeping with the UK’s international legal obligations, applicable to all states, including to peoples within states worldwide, to seek to exercise their right to self-determination.

    It is necessary to put the Bill into its political and historical context. In 1707, a majority of Scottish parliamentarians may have been persuaded, but the people were never consulted. The Acts of Union 1707 between England and Scotland created the kingdom of Great Britain, establishing a single political entity yet preserving the territorial, legal and institutional integrity of each partner country. The UK’s constitution is not codified in a single document, so the question of whether the Acts of Union can unilaterally be dissolved by one party is not clear. However, the accepted position hitherto is that the Union is a voluntary association of equal partners and Scotland has an unquestioned right of self-determination. That is a right underpinned by Scots common law which rests not on the Magna Carta, but on the claim of right which continues to assert that it is the people who are sovereign in Scotland.

    The Scotland Act of 1998 established the Scottish Parliament, which has the power to legislate on agreed devolved matters within Scotland, while the UK Parliament retains legislative competency on matters reserved to Westminster. It is generally understood that for a country to gain independence a legal process, such as a vote in a referendum, is required. Such a process was established in 2012 through the Edinburgh agreement which was signed by First Minister Alex Salmond and Prime Minister David Cameron. The Edinburgh agreement established a clear process whereby a Scottish general election that returned a Government with a mandate for an independence referendum would enable that Government to petition for authority under section 30 of the Scotland Act to respect the democratic force of that vote in a referendum. While respect for that established process has since been affirmed by the UK Government, in absence of any legal constitutional consensus the matter of Scottish independence has reached a political impasse to the detriment of Scotland’s democratic process.

    The Bill seeks to remedy that by setting out the process by which the democratic wishes of the people of Scotland can be respected and enacted. This would preserve their inalienable human rights as a distinct people of the ancient nation of Scotland in accordance with the constitutional tradition of Scotland, the UN charter and extant international law.

    Scotland’s distinct constitutional tradition is best expressed by Lord Cooper, in the case of MacCormick v. Lord Advocate:

    “The principle of the unlimited sovereignty of Parliament is a distinctively English principle which has no counterpart in Scottish constitutional law.”

    In the pleadings of the hon. and learned Member for Edinburgh South West (Joanna Cherry) in her prorogation case to the UK Supreme Court, it was noted that the 1707 parliamentary Union between England and Scotland may have created a new state, but it did not create one nation.

    The UK Government enthusiastically claim that they seek to preserve democracy the world over, yet they have moved to block Scotland’s consistently expressed democratic aspirations at each and every turn. Surely it is now time to move to eliminate accusations and counter-accusations of brinkmanship and set out a clear pathway consistent with the precedent across these islands where constitutional friction exists.

    Can Government Members imagine the circumstances where, having entered the common market and ratified every subsequent treaty leading to the European Union, the EU Parliament moved to block or interfere with their Brexit vote, or set a limit on when and if such a vote should be held? The notion is ludicrous, because democracy is not a single event, but an evolving and continuous process. That is how civilised people behave and how fundamental rights of freedom of thought and expression are peacefully demonstrated.

    As a member of the EU, the UK Government possessed and exercised a veto, yet they claimed their sovereignty was impeded by membership. Scotland has no such equivalent mechanism available to our people and remains subject to the wiles of our larger neighbour, as exemplified by Brexit. How does that constitute access to meaningful political process, as claimed in the recent UK Supreme Court judgment?

    Prime Minister Winston Churchill’s signing of the 1941 Atlantic charter brought into being the principle of self-determination of peoples, as now enshrined in the United Nations charter. Margaret Thatcher in her memoirs said of Scotland:

    “As a nation, they have an undoubted right to national self-determination”.

    John Major, when Prime Minister, said of Scotland that

    “no nation could be held irrevocably in a Union against its will”.

    None of these senior Conservative politicians sought to constrain the democratic right to self-determination.

    In the aftermath of the 2014 referendum, the all-party Smith Commission agreement was signed by all of Scotland’s main political parties and it stated:

    “It is agreed that nothing in this report prevents Scotland becoming an independent country in the future should the people of Scotland so choose.”

    The effect of this Bill should be uncontroversial for every Member. It merely establishes in law an equivalent mechanism to the principle, already conceded by the UK Government in relation to a border poll in Northern Ireland, that no such referendum may be held sooner than seven years after any previously mandated referendum.

    In 1889 in this place, the equality of UK partner countries was asserted by one William Ewart Gladstone MP, saying

    “I am to suppose a case in which Scotland unanimously, or by a clearly preponderating voice, were to make the demand on the United Parliament to be treated, not only on the same principle, but in the same manner as Ireland, I could not deny the title of Scotland to urge such a claim.” —[Official Report, 9 April 1889; Vol. 335, c. 101-102.]

    That begs the question: why would the UK Government deny democracy to Scotland but not to Northern Ireland? Could the clue lie in the words of former Prime Minister John Major from 1993’s Downing Street declaration that the UK has

    “no selfish strategic or economic interest in Northern Ireland”?

    In the case of Scotland, the opposite is true. With unconstrained access to our vast resources, energy is transmitted south to millions at no cost.

    The decision on Scotland’s future ultimately and rightly must rest in the hands of the people of Scotland. In the constitutional tradition of popular sovereignty in our great country, it is the people who remain sovereign. This Bill is neutral in its effect. It favours neither one side nor the other, but seeks to codify the Scottish people’s right to choose their own constitutional future. To return to 1889, Dr Gavin Clark, MP for Caithness, said on the matter:

    “Everybody, even old Tories on the other side, must admit that some change is necessary. Then what is the remedy to be?”—[Official Report, 9 April 1889; Vol. 335, c. 71.]

    If democracy matters at all, every Member in this House should support the remedy contained in this Bill regardless of their view on Scottish independence. I commend it to the House.

    Question put and agreed to.

    Ordered,

    That Neale Hanvey, Kenny MacAskill, Joanna Cherry, Angus Brendan MacNeil, Douglas Chapman and Margaret Ferrier present the Bill.

    Neale Hanvey accordingly presented the Bill.

    Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Friday 24 March, and to be printed (Bill 241).

    UK Infrastructure Bank Bill [Lords] (Programme) (No.2)

    Ordered,

    That the Order of 1 November 2022 (UK Infrastructure Bank Bill: Programme) be varied as follows:

    (1) Paragraphs (4) and (5) of the Order shall be omitted.

    (2) Proceedings on Consideration shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion three hours before the moment of interruption on the day on which those proceedings are commenced.

    (3) Proceedings on Third Reading shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion two hours before the moment of interruption on that day.—(Scott Mann.)

  • Stuart McDonald – 2023 Parliamentary Question on Legislative Competence of the Scottish Parliament

    Stuart McDonald – 2023 Parliamentary Question on Legislative Competence of the Scottish Parliament

    The parliamentary question on Stuart McDonald, the SNP MP for Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East, in the House of Commons on 1 February 2023.

    Stuart C. McDonald (Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East) (SNP)

    What discussions she has had with Cabinet colleagues on the potential implications of an order under section 35 of the Scotland Act 1998 for the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament.

    The Attorney General (Victoria Prentis)

    As I said earlier, by convention, information on whether the Law Officers have been asked to provide advice and the content of such advice are not disclosed outside Government. That convention enables candid legal advice to be given.

    Stuart C. McDonald

    Why was the prospect of a section 35 order not raised at any time before the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill was overwhelmingly passed by the Scottish Parliament? What alternatives did the Attorney General look at? When will she set out the changes to the Bill that she wants to see before the Government would revoke the section 35 order? Those are simple questions. If she cannot answer them, all we can conclude is that the Government have lost their last shred of respect for the Scottish Parliament.

    The Attorney General

    That would be absolutely the wrong conclusion to draw. The Attorney General’s convention is clear: the UK Government respect the Scottish Parliament’s ability to legislate within its competence on devolved areas. The Government are committed to working with the devolved Administrations and strengthening the Union of the UK.

  • Alex Chalk – 2023 Speech at the Steel Cutting of HMS Active

    Alex Chalk – 2023 Speech at the Steel Cutting of HMS Active

    The speech made by Alex Chalk, the Minister for Defence Procurement, at Rosyth Dockyard in Scotland on 24 January 2023.

    It is an enormous pleasure to be here in Rosyth today for my first official visit to a shipyard as a Defence Minister.

    And in doing so to meet some of the staff who will be working on this great vessel but also, as has already happened, to welcome our overseas visitors from Poland, Indonesia, Chile, Denmark, Ukraine, New Zealand, Sweden and the United States.

    I’m especially honoured to be asked to cut the steel.

    Although in case any future crews are watching this and are slightly concerned, I’m assured that all I have to do is press a button and the machine will do the real work.

    Now this vessel is the second of five Type-31 – or Inspiration-class –frigates for the Royal Navy.

    And ‘inspiration’ is the right word for three straightforward reasons.

    First, there is the inspiration offered by a cutting edge, highly capable vessel.

    Armed with SeaCeptor missiles and a 4D radar system, HMS Active has flexibility woven into its DNA.

    Not only will it be able today to do everything from intercepting illegal activity, gathering intelligence, providing humanitarian relief, but, as a modular and scalable platform, it will have the ability to adapt tomorrow to the ever-evolving threats of the 21st century.

    And that’s important because the great frigates constructed here in this yard will be part of a formidable fleet for years to come.

    And they are deliberately designed to evolve and modernise to respond to a changing world and a changing mission.

    And they will of course be operating alongside advanced destroyers and autonomous minehunters, supported by our new auxiliary ships and all led by the Queen Elizabeth-class carriers.

    Second, today provides inspiration for our industry.

    Not only does the construction of these ships directly support 16 different Scottish suppliers – including eight SMEs – with contracts totalling more than £65 million.

    Not only does it sustain around 2,500 highly skilled roles.

    But this represents lasting investment in Scotland and Britain’s manufacturing future.

    Take those 150 or so technical and digital apprenticeships that Babcock is supporting to ensure we have the niche skills required for decades to come.

    Or the fact that, come the Spring, this yard will be hosting its second Festival of Engineering – which sees graduates deliver fun, interactive activities for local school children in a bid to get them excited about STEM careers which can be so fulfilling for them.

    Or consider the pivotal role this project is playing in the revival of our nation’s great shipbuilding traditions.

    We all know, don’t we, that Scottish dockyards have a proud history of producing some of the world’s finest ships.

    And that in recent years, we’ve seen a renaissance in Scottish shipbuilding industry with the construction of everything from offshore patrol vessels to our flagship aircraft carriers.

    Now, thanks to a £60 million investment programme here in Rosyth, we’ve got world-class facilities to match, including the Venturer Building which I’m looking forward so much to seeing shortly.

    And with the T-31 frigates, we’re going to ensure the made-in-Scotland stamp is a worldwide mark of quality for years to come.

    Such a powerful tribute to so many of the men and women here today.

    And that brings me onto my third point – these frigates will act as an inspiration for our exports.

    I don’t want to steal too much of Minister Bowie’s thunder, but it’s fair to say these ships are garnering global interest before they’ve even taken to the water.

    And that’s because I know our allies appreciate and understand how the unique Arrowhead-140 flexible design can support so many different configurations.

    And it offers the potential for greater collaboration at an operational and industrial level.

    And that’s why Babcock has already signed an export contract with Indonesia and I’m not giving anything away I hope when I say there are other suitors too.

    And I do want to take this opportunity finally to pay tribute to this vessel’s predecessor and namesake.

    A Type-21 frigate which played a vital role in the Falklands War 40 years ago, from escorting supply convoys to San Carlos Water, to providing naval gun support to British forces in the Battle of Mount Tumbledown.

    And I’m particularly delighted that some of those who served with such distinction on board the last HMS Active are here today as the torch is passed to a new vessel.

    But historians among you will know these aren’t the only ships to have borne the name.

    During the Second World War, Active joined the hunt for the Bismarck.

    During the First World War, Active was with the Grand Fleet in the Battle of Jutland.

    And in 1762, Active captured a prize of £100 million worth of Spanish treasure. Happy to confirm that is no longer British foreign policy.

    Indeed, 11 different HMS Actives have written their own chapter in our nation’s great maritime history.

    But today’s warship will be more advanced than any of its predecessors.

    More adaptable, more flexible, more agile and more powerful.

    So, thank you to everyone involved in this important enterprise.

    Congratulations on what you have achieved so far and what you will achieve and deliver in the future.

    With a thriving Scottish shipbuilding sector behind it, the 12th HMS Active reflects the finest traditions of the Royal Navy and will write a new and exciting chapter in our nation’s maritime history.

    Thank you.

  • Rishi Sunak – 2023 Comments on the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill

    Rishi Sunak – 2023 Comments on the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill

    The comments made by Rishi Sunak, the Prime Minister, in the House of Commons on 18 January 2023.

    Stephen Flynn (Aberdeen South) (SNP)

    To promise is ae thing, to keep it is another. Well, the Scottish Government kept their manifesto promise to the people and, thanks to support from Members of all political parties in Holyrood, the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill was passed. Surely in that context, the Prime Minister must recognise that it is a dangerous moment for devolution when both he and, indeed, the Leader of the Opposition seek to overturn a promise made between Scotland’s politicians and Scotland’s people.

    The Prime Minister

    Let me be crystal clear: the decision in this case is centred on the legislation’s consequences for reserved matters. This is laid out in the Scotland Act 1998, which established the Scottish Parliament—the hon. Gentleman talks about that and, at the time, it was supported by the SNP. This Bill would have a significant adverse effect on UK-wide equalities matters, so the Scottish Secretary, with regret, has rightly acted.

    Stephen Flynn

    Let me be crystal clear—[Hon. Members: “Ooh!”] This is the Conservative party seeking to stoke a culture war against some of the most marginalised people in society, and Scotland’s democracy is simply collateral damage. On that issue of democracy, let us reflect, because on Monday the UK Government introduced legislation to ban the right to strike, against the express wishes of the Scottish Government; on Tuesday, they introduced legislation to overturn the GRR Bill, against the express wishes of the Scottish Government; and this evening they will seek to put in place legislation that rips up thousands of EU protections, against the express wishes of the Scottish Government. Are we not now on a slippery slope from devolution to direct rule?

    The Prime Minister

    No, of course we are not. This is simply about protecting UK-wide legislation and ensuring the safety of women and children; it is not about the devolution settlement. I urge the hon. Gentleman and his party to consider engaging with the UK Government on the Bill, as we did before the legislation passed, so that we can find a constructive way forward in the interests of the people of Scotland and the United Kingdom.

  • Michael Gove – 2023 Statement on Green Freeports in Scotland

    Michael Gove – 2023 Statement on Green Freeports in Scotland

    The statement made by Michael Gove, the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, in the House of Commons on 16 January 2023.

    On 13 January, the UK and Scottish Governments jointly announced that the Firth of Forth, and Inverness and Cromarty Firth have been successful in their bids to establish two new green freeports.

    Green freeport status will support the creation of over 75,000 new, high-skilled jobs, drive growth and level up areas that have been previously overlooked. These areas will be backed by up to £52 million in UK Government funding, and potentially hundreds of millions in locally retained business rates, to upgrade local infrastructure and stimulate regeneration. This is alongside a generous package of trade and innovation support for businesses locating there.

    Inverness and Cromarty Firth, and the Firth of Forth are excellent locations for these new green freeports, ensuring the benefits are felt right across Scotland. I wish to share my congratulations with the successful locations. Their strong bids demonstrated how they will regenerate their local communities, deliver decarbonisation, establish hubs for global trade and pioneer industries of the future.

    Freeports are at the vanguard of levelling up: driving growth, creating jobs and, in turn, transforming the communities that surround them. Green freeports in Scotland will build on the UK Government’s successful freeport programme in England, where all eight freeports are open for business, with sites in Plymouth and South Devon, Solent, Teesside, Liverpool and the east of England recently being granted final Government approval. Green freeports are a tangible example of what can be achieved and delivered when Scotland’s two Governments work together.

    This Government remain committed to ensuring that the whole of the UK can reap the benefits of our freeports programme. We will be making a freeports announcement relating to Wales shortly and we continue discussions with stakeholders in Northern Ireland about how best to deliver the benefits associated with freeports there.

  • Alister Jack – 2023 Statement on the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill

    Alister Jack – 2023 Statement on the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill

    The statement made by Alister Jack, the Secretary of State for Scotland, on 16 January 2023.

    I have decided to make an order under section 35 of the Scotland Act 1998, preventing the Scottish Parliament’s Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill from proceeding to Royal Assent.

    After thorough and careful consideration of all the relevant advice and the policy implications, I am concerned that this legislation would have an adverse impact on the operation of Great Britain-wide equalities legislation.

    Transgender people who are going through the process to change their legal sex deserve our respect, support and understanding. My decision today is about the legislation’s consequences for the operation of GB-wide equalities protections and other reserved matters.

    I have not taken this decision lightly. The Bill would have a significant impact on, amongst other things, GB-wide equalities matters in Scotland, England and Wales. I have concluded, therefore, that this is the necessary and correct course of action.

    If the Scottish Government chooses to bring an amended Bill back for reconsideration in the Scottish Parliament, I hope we can work together to find a constructive way forward that both respects devolution and the operation of UK Parliament legislation.

    I have written today to the First Minister and the Scottish Parliament’s Presiding Officer informing them of my decision.

  • Scottish Government – 2022 Comments on the Australia Trade Bill

    Scottish Government – 2022 Comments on the Australia Trade Bill

    The comments made by Scottish Government on 17 January 2022.

    UK-Australia Trade Agreement

    I am writing in response to the International Trade Committee’s Call for Evidence as part of its scrutiny of the UK-Australia trade agreement, which was signed on 16 December 2021. It is vital that the outcome of the deal reflects the interests and priorities of all four nations so I am keen that the Committee is aware of the Scottish Government’s engagement in this process and our views on how this agreement will affect people and businesses across Scotland.

    Engagement

    1. As with other trade agreement negotiations, the involvement of devolved administrations has been limited. Scottish Government officials have been in contact with officials from the UK Department for International Trade (DIT) throughout the process to represent Scotland’s interests, priorities and concerns, and have articulated these through detailed written comments. However information sharing has been constrained and we have only seen sections of the draft mandate, or draft chapter text prior to agreement, in areas that DIT consider relevant to devolved competence.
    2. Scottish Government officials received regular briefings from DIT on the progress of negotiations, which were useful. However, as I have made clear to the UK Government, information is not the same as involvement, and we had no say in the decisions taken by the UK Government throughout the negotiations and saw no detail on key parts of the agreement, such as tariffs and tariff rate quotas (TRQs), until after they were agreed. Nor were we given the underpinning analysis or rationale behind the decisions.
    3. I have frequently made the case to the UK Government that reserved matters such as tariffs impact on devolved responsibilities, such as agriculture, and the Scottish Government will continue to argue we should have meaningful engagement in these areas to ensure that Scotland’s interests are taken into account.

    Agri-food imports

    1. You ask about the likely impact of the deal on various sectors of the economy. I wrote to the UK Minister for Trade Policy, Rt Hon Penny Mordaunt MP, in December to express our concerns at the agreement and in particular, the implications of this agreement on farming communities in Scotland. The significant level of market access that it provides for beef and sheepmeat imports is a particular concern. The year 1 tariff-rate quota (TRQ) for beef imports is 35,000 metric tonnes, which is seven-times the current level of Australian beef imports to the UK, and this rises to 110,000 metric tonnes by year 10. This significant increase in quota volumes is exacerbated by the fact that quotas will be based on product weight which makes it more advantageous to Australian producers, who can increase imports of premium cuts that will receive a higher price than lower end cuts of a similar weight, with no added effect on TRQ utilisation. High value cuts are where Scottish farmers derive most value, so a potential increase in imports is a concern for Scottish industry. Beyond year 15, Australian agri-food exporters will enjoy unfettered access to the Scottish agriculture market.
    2. We were concerned that the original scoping assessment showed the agriculture and semiprocessed foods sectors as losing out as a result of an FTA with Australia. Now we have seen the final impact assessment, this has been confirmed.

    Animal welfare and antimicrobial resistance (AMR)

    1. We have consistently called for imports of Australian agri-food to be produced to the same animal welfare and environmental standards that Scottish producers are required to meet. Whilst the agreement contains a non-regression clause on animal welfare, we are not reassured that this will protect Scottish and UK farmers as Australian animal welfare standards are already lower. The World Animal Protection Index1 ranks Australia as D for animal welfare, while the UK is ranked B, and the RSPCA2 has highlighted a number of welfare practices in use in Australia, which are illegal in the UK, such as the use of barren battery cages for poultry, sow stalls, hot branding of cattle, and mulesing of sheep (with anaesthetic only required in the state of Victoria). This means Scottish farmers, crofters and food producers will not be competing on a level playing field with their Australian competitors.
    2. While we note that the agreement contains provisions on tackling antimicrobial resistance (AMR), the detailed provisions do not go as far as we would have liked and represent a missed opportunity to have a meaningful impact on this significant threat to global health.

    Goods exports

    1. We recognise that the agreement removes the vast majority of tariffs on UK exports to Australia, and we expect this will benefit exporters, such as the whisky industry. It will be 1 World Animal Protection | Animal Protection Index 2 Protect UK farm animal welfare standards | RSPCA Scottish Ministers, special advisers and the Permanent Secretary are covered by the terms of the Lobbying (Scotland) Act 2016. See www.lobbying.scot St Andrew’s House, Regent Road, Edinburgh EH1 3DG www.gov.scot important to ensure that Scottish companies can take full advantage of new opportunities that arise from this agreement. In addition to tariff reduction, the issue of an enforceable definition for Scotch whisky in Australia is important to the whisky industry in Scotland, so it is unfortunate that the UK Government was not able to secure a commitment within this agreement.

    Services exports

    1. We are keen for Scottish companies to be able to take advantage of the provisions in this agreement on trade in services, business mobility and government procurement. While these are likely to have benefits for companies trading with Australia, it remains the case that the size of the Australian market and geographical distance are likely to be limiting factors. These measures will not compensate for the loss of market access that Scottish companies have faced as a result of leaving the EU.

    Environment

    1. The Scottish Government already has an ambitious target to meet net-zero by 2045 and Scotland’s Vision for Trade makes clear that trade must support this goal. It is concerning that the UK Government’s impact assessment points to a significant increase, of between 31 and 40%, in transport-related greenhouse gas emissions as a result of this deal. While it is welcome that there is a reference to the Paris Agreement in the environment chapter, we would have preferred binding commitments to comply with the Agreement and to take action to keep global warming to 1.5 degrees.

    Impact Assessments

    1. It was helpful to see the final impact assessment, however it would have been useful to see interim analysis before the agreement was finalised. We also believe it is vital that the UK Government undertake more detailed sustainability impact assessments, including more detailed analysis of the impact on the different nations of the UK and on different groups within society. The impact assessment shows a small increase in UK GDP over the long run of 0.08%, but this will not compensate for the 4% decline in UK GDP, which Office for Budget Responsibility analysis suggests will result from leaving the EU.
    2. It is unfortunate that the focus on long run impacts means that we have no analysis of the short and medium term impacts of this deal. The Scottish Government would be keen to know what measures of support the UK Government will make available to Scottish sectors and producers adversely impacted by the deal.
    3. I hope these comments are helpful to the Committee’s consideration of the agreement and I would be happy to answer any further questions the Committee may have arising from these.
  • Alan Brown – 2023 Parliamentary Question on Energy Costs for the Struther Farmhouse Tea Room

    Alan Brown – 2023 Parliamentary Question on Energy Costs for the Struther Farmhouse Tea Room

    The parliamentary question asked by Alan Brown, the SNP MP for Kilmarnock and Loudoun, in the House of Commons on 9 January 2023.

    Alan Brown (Kilmarnock and Loudoun) (SNP)

    The energy profits levy measures are predicted to bring in £56 billion and most of that money is coming from Scotland, yet businesses across Scotland are left struggling, particularly in the hospitality trade. The Struther Farmhouse Tea Room in my constituency is facing a 500% increase in its gas bill, with its gas and electricity up by £25,000 in a year. Despite what the Minister says, these businesses are now reaching a cliff edge because Government support is estimated to be a maximum of £2,000 against these increases. How many small businesses and jobs does he think will be lost under the guise of Government fiscal prudence?

    James Cartlidge

    I know that the Scottish National party struggles to understand the basic concept of fiscal prudence, but let me just explain this to the hon. Gentleman. When he talks about the £56 billion, it is not just for the energy profits levy; it also includes the energy generator levy, and we see that money as coming into the UK Treasury from across the UK to support the United Kingdom. It will support businesses in Northern Ireland, as we said earlier, as well as businesses in England, Scotland and Wales. Scotland has benefited from huge support, not just in the pandemic but through the increase in energy costs that has been seen across the United Kingdom. It has benefited from the fact that we are stronger together as a Union supporting every part of our Union.

  • Joanna Cherry – 2023 Comments on Gorgie City Farm and Energy Bills

    Joanna Cherry – 2023 Comments on Gorgie City Farm and Energy Bills

    The comments made by Joanna Cherry, the SNP MP for Edinburgh South West, in the House of Commons on 9 January 2023.

    Joanna Cherry (Edinburgh South West) (SNP)

    A much-loved institution in my constituency, Gorgie city farm, is facing closure. Its energy bills for 18 months were previously £17,000, but its last bill for just eight months was £27,000—an increase of over 300%. Can the Minister not see that what he is offering is a drop in the ocean for charities like Gorgie city farm? How does he expect fantastic community institutions, such as the city farm in my constituency, to survive crippling costs when what is on offer is such a drastically reduced package?

    James Cartlidge

    I am grateful to the hon. and learned Lady for mentioning the charity in her constituency. As I said, I appreciate that the energy increase has been a challenge for every type of SME, charity and institution up and down the country. I am sorry to hear about the challenges for Gorgie city farm, which I have not had the pleasure of visiting but it sounds fascinating. Charities have shown huge resilience over the past two years and will continue to receive support with their energy bills from the latest iteration of the discount scheme. I emphasise that there is wider support to help them with their costs, including a reduction in VAT from 20% to 5% and an exclusion from the main rates of the climate change levy on some of the energy they use. The key point is that we are announcing a scheme that is still universal in nature and still includes charities. It is not as generous as before, but when we engaged with stakeholders about the £18 billion six-month scheme, what was interesting was the number of them who remarked that they had not expected that scheme to continue at that level of generosity. They could see the issue about sustainability for the taxpayer, which we all have to understand and address. It is in all our interests, and in the interests of every single business and charity, that this country has sustainable public finances.

  • David Linden – 2023 Parliamentary Question on the Strength of the Union

    David Linden – 2023 Parliamentary Question on the Strength of the Union

    The parliamentary question asked by David Linden, the SNP MP for Glasgow East, in the House of Commons on 9 January 2023.

    David Linden (Glasgow East) (SNP)

    What assessment he has made of the strength of the Union.

    Alan Brown (Kilmarnock and Loudoun) (SNP)

    What assessment he has made of the strength of the Union.

    The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (Felicity Buchan)

    When we work together as one United Kingdom, we are safer, stronger and more prosperous. We are better able to tackle the big problems—from supporting families with the cost of living, to leading the international response to Russia’s war in Ukraine and to being a world leader in offering the vaccine to all our citizens. We are taking specific action in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, including putting local voices at the heart of decision making.

    David Linden

    Oh—is it still Monday? Six of the last seven polls in Scotland have shown majority support for Scottish independence. What does the Minister think is driving up that support? Is it the ignoring of the majority of pro-independence MSPs? Is it the assault on workers through the anti-trade union legislation coming forward? Or it just 12 long, brutal years of Tory rule, for which Scotland has not voted since the 1950s?

    Felicity Buchan

    We respect the priorities of the Scottish people, who are focused on improving the NHS, on education, on tackling inflation and on getting a ferry that actually works and takes them to the islands. We will work in co-operation with the Scottish Government. We respect devolution and we want to work with them to implement the people’s priorities.

    Alan Brown

    If the Government and the Minister, as a proud Scot, respect the wishes of Scottish voters, surely they will respect the votes in the last Scottish parliamentary election, which elected a pro-independence majority in Parliament. Also, an opinion poll last year showed that 72% of Scots want to remain in the EU—what has happened to respecting that wish? If this is a voluntary Union, what is the mechanism for the people of Scotland to demonstrate their consent or otherwise to staying in it?

    Felicity Buchan

    I am very proud to be a Scots person. The hon. Gentleman mentioned the 2021 Holyrood elections: less than one third of the Scottish electorate voted for the SNP in that election.

    Mr Speaker

    I call the SNP spokesperson.

    Chris Stephens (Glasgow South West) (SNP)

    A guid new year tae yin and a’, and monie may ye see.

    The Minister talks about Administrations working together, so how is it working together when the Government propose unpopular and extreme legislation, such as the proposed anti-strike legislation that they have trailed in the media, which no devolved Administration support and which has not been consulted on? How is that strengthening the Union?

    Felicity Buchan

    This Government work tirelessly with the devolved Administrations. I have been in post for only a few months, and I have had two conversations specifically on Homes for Ukraine with the Scottish and Welsh Administrations. In the first three quarters of last year, there were more than 200 departmental meetings. The Prime Minister, within three weeks of taking office, met the First Ministers in Blackpool. That is the commitment of this Government.

    Chris Stephens

    If the devolved Administrations say no to the proposed anti-strike legislation, the Government will accept that then, will they not?

    Felicity Buchan

    We have established procedures in place. We are there to discuss.