Tag: Martyn Day

  • Martyn Day – 2024 Speech on Freedom and Democracy in Iran

    Martyn Day – 2024 Speech on Freedom and Democracy in Iran

    The speech made by Martyn Day, the SNP MP for Linlithgow and East Falkirk, in the House of Commons on 1 February 2024.

    I am grateful to the hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman) for securing this debate. The issue of freedom and democracy in Iran is a very important one, and I find myself commending him for his speech and agreeing with every point he made.

    As we have heard, the issue is really about a lack of democracy and a lack of freedom. Elections will of course be held on 1 March to Iran’s Parliament, but they can in no way can be considered free, fair or credible. It is more of a selection than an election, with the unelected, 12-strong Guardian Council having the power to approve candidates. With a track record of banning moderates and reformers from standing, it is no surprise that many candidates have already been disqualified. This body can also veto laws made by the Parliament.

    My litmus test for fair, free and credible democratic elections is: can any individual freely stand for election, can anyone vote in secret for any individual who is standing and can the sovereignty of the people be exercised by their representatives? Clearly, Iran fails on all those counts. The reality is that Iran is ruled as a totalitarian theocracy: it is not a democracy. Ultimate power rests in the hands of the country’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and the unelected institutions under his control.

    Corruption persists across all levels, with powerful actors such as the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps operating beyond scrutiny. Media and civil society face restrictions hindering their role as independent watchdogs for ensuring transparency and accountability. The regime, as we have heard, is ruthlessly held in place by its intelligence and security force the IRGC and is supported by the wider apparatus of the state, including the judiciary, the Ministry of Intelligence, the police and others.

    Iranian authorities have extensively used Iran’s repressive machinery to censor discussion of these issues and persecute women, human rights defenders and anti-death penalty activists. Political activists who support democratic change have been particularly vulnerable to detention and death over many years, despite which the organised resistance, the People’s Mujaheddin Organisation of Iran—or MEK—have remained determined to establish a free democratic and secular republic, and I wish them every success with that struggle.

    The level of oppression and human rights abuses by the current regime in Iran is truly appalling and is getting worse. According to Freedom House, Iran has decreased its total global freedom status from a derisory 14 out of 100 in 2022 to 12 out of 100 last year. Freedom House gave Iran zero scores for most areas of fundamental rights including: the individual right to practice or express religion, faith or non-belief in public and private; free and independent media; the Government operating with openness and transparency; safeguards against corruption; the question of whether the freely elected head of Government and national legislative representatives determine the policies of the Government; and fair and free elections.

    The UN special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran expressed alarm at

    “the disproportionate number of executions of members of minority communities, in particular the Baluch and Kurdish minorities”,

    and I share this concern. Last year, at least 864 people were executed, the highest figure since 2017. Any use of the death penalty is unacceptable to me and I believe this substantial increase reflects the regime’s inability to suppress the protests that have arisen.

    Women lack equality and face discrimination in both law and practice. Examples include a woman’s testimony in court being given half the weight of a man’s and unequal compensation for victims’ families. Women also face disparities in inheritance rights. The regime fails to protect women and children from sex trafficking while Iranians and migrant workers, especially from Afghanistan, are subject to forced labour and debt bondage.

    The reality is that some 88 million Iranians are effectively living in what is a state prison, otherwise known as the Islamic Republic of Iran. But it does not have to be that way and I applaud the courage and determination of those who have stood up to the regime and protested for the rights that we take for granted, and have done so at great risk to themselves.

    The ongoing uprising began in September 2022 with the arrest of a Kurdish Iranian girl in Tehran by the Tehran morality police for not veiling, after which she was brutally beaten, fell into a coma and tragically lost her life while in custody. That brutal killing of Mahsa Amini prompted widespread protests across Iran, with thousands of people demanding regime change for a secular democratic republic. The ongoing uprising has resulted in over 800 unlawful deaths, including of minors and women. Additionally, around 30,000 Iranians face cruel treatment in jails, including torture and sexual violence, highlighting the dire situation in Iran.

    Ultimately, Iran’s future must be decided by its own people, but given that they have virtually no avenues for reform, the people have no option but to resist, to demonstrate, to defend themselves, and to seek alternative forms of opposition. Iran has been witnessing a massive popular uprising—a call for freedom and democracy largely led by women and young people. I have heard it described by some as a revolution, and I hope it is a successful one. It has clearly rattled the Tehran regime and I believe this is partly behind the regime promoting and encouraging conflict outwith its borders as it seeks to dampen the momentum of the protests inside Iran while simultaneously rallying the regime’s own forces behind the Supreme Leader’s fundamentalist agenda.

    As we have heard, Iran is the biggest state sponsor of terrorism. This exporting of international terrorism by Iran cannot and will not be tolerated, nor should be its support for Russia in the war with Ukraine, use of cyber-attacks, or hostage-taking diplomacy, and I condemn the involvement of Iranian officials in the killing of US servicemen. According to reports in The Times on Tuesday this week:

    “Tehran has already been accused by MI5 and police of more than a dozen assassination and kidnap plots in Britain against dissidents and media organisations in the past two years. Officials have previously expressed fears that, emboldened by the situation in the Middle East, Iran could ramp up its activity in the UK and present a wider terror threat.”

    Although I welcome the recent announcement of additional sanctions on senior Iranian officials, I wonder why we are not taking an even stronger approach. At a minimum, we should urgently proscribe the IRGC as a terrorist organisation. I have lost count of the number of times that I and others have called for that action. Proscription would be a tangible step in the UK in the furtherance of freedom and democracy in Iran. We should also support calls for the UN to dispatch international observers to visit Iran’s prisons and to meet those detained by the regime. We should all support the democratic aspirations of the Iranian people. I pay tribute to the work of the resistance units that emerged in late 2017 and have helped inspire Iranians to defy the prevailing tyranny.

    In conclusion, the SNP stands in full solidarity with Iranians journalists, women, men and young people calling for democratic change. The bravery of Iranian citizens standing up against brutality and dictatorship is beyond inspiring. I wish them every success in seeking a new democratic and secular republic in Iran. It will be better for them and the world when they succeed.

  • Martyn Day – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    Martyn Day – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Transport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Martyn Day on 2015-12-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what timetable the Government plans to follow for the proposed sale of its share in NATS.

    Mr Robert Goodwill

    The Government is currently committed to exploring the sale of its 49% shareholding in NATS and maximise returns to the taxpayer.

    We have not yet set a timetable for the sale.

  • Martyn Day – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Martyn Day – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Martyn Day on 2016-01-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, if his Department will make it his policy never to permit the transit of nuclear weapons in urban areas in hazardous weather conditions.

    Penny Mordaunt

    The safety and security of Defence Nuclear Materials and the public is given the highest priority at all times. The relevant local agencies, including Police and the National Traffic Information Services, are consulted as necessary and factors such as road and weather conditions are always taken into account for all convoy movements.

  • Martyn Day – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Scotland Office

    Martyn Day – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Scotland Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Martyn Day on 2016-02-11.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland, if the Prime Minister will make it his policy to devolve responsibilities for the North Sea oil industry to the Scottish Government.

    David Mundell

    The UK Government does not intend to devolve responsibility for the North Sea oil industry.

    The Smith Commission Agreement, agreed by all of Scotland’s main parties, was clear on the powers that would be devolved to the Scottish Parliament and Scottish Ministers, and the Scotland Bill, currently before Parliament, delivers these powers in full.

    The Smith Commission agreed that all aspects of the taxation of oil and gas receipts and the licensing of offshore oil and gas extraction would remain reserved.

  • Martyn Day – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Martyn Day – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Martyn Day on 2016-03-02.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, whether he will make representations to the government of Pakistan on its blasphemy laws and the potential for the death penalty to be imposed for breach of those laws.

    Mr Tobias Ellwood

    UK Ministers regularly raise the blasphemy laws, which have been misused against both Muslims and others, with the authorities in Pakistan. The Prime Minister, my right hon. Friend the Member for Witney (Mr Cameron) and the Foreign Secretary, my Rt Hon. Friend the Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Mr Hammond) have discussed human rights concerns, including blasphemy laws, with Prime Minister Sharif.

    I raised our concerns directly with the Pakistani High Commissioner in London. As a priority, I encourage the Government of Pakistan to reduce the number of offences attracting the death penalty, which currently includes blasphemy, and to abide by its international obligations. The Foreign Secretary reiterated UK opposition to the death penalty during his visit to Pakistan this week.

  • Martyn Day – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Martyn Day – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Martyn Day on 2016-06-09.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, if he will take steps to increase war pensions for veterans to correspond with the state pension triple lock.

    Mark Lancaster

    I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 24 November 2015 to Question 16781 to the hon. Member for Barnsley Central (Mr Jarvis).

    http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-question/Commons/2015-11-18/16781/

  • Martyn Day – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Martyn Day – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Martyn Day on 2016-09-15.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment he has made of the potential benefits to the economy of reducing both fuel duty and VAT on all fuels.

    Jane Ellison

    Fuel duty was frozen for its sixth successive year at Budget 2016, saving the average driver £75 every year compared to the pre-2010 fuel duty escalator plans. Like all taxes, the government keeps fuel duty under review, with all options considered and announcements made at fiscal events. Under the current legal framework there is no scope to apply a reduced rate of VAT to all fuels.

  • Martyn Day – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Martyn Day – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Martyn Day on 2015-12-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether Parliament will be asked to vote on a decision to replace the warheads used for the successor nuclear weapon programme.

    Michael Fallon

    As stated in paragraph 4.72 of the 2015 Strategic Defence and Security Review: "Work continues to determine the optimum life of the UK’s existing nuclear warhead stockpile and the range of replacement options. A replacement warhead is not required until at least the late 2030s, possibly later. Given lead times, however, a decision on replacing the warhead may be required in this Parliament or early in the next." The Government will inform Parliament of its intended approach in due course.

  • Martyn Day – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    Martyn Day – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Martyn Day on 2016-01-26.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, what steps she has taken to protect recipients of Green Deal funding from companies whose work is not of an acceptable standard.

    Andrea Leadsom

    All authorised Green Deal participants must adhere to the Green Deal Code of Practice which clearly stipulates their roles and responsibilities in relation to carrying out energy efficiency measures and dealing with consumers. A Green Deal provider offering Green Deal finance must also hold the appropriate FCA permissions to do so and comply with the relevant elements of that regime. Any measures installed under a Green Deal, the Green Deal Home Improvement Fund, or Green Deal Communities must be installed to the standards required in the Publicly Available Standard 2030 (PAS 2030). Green Deal Certification Bodies exist to certify and audit Green Deal Installers against PAS 2030 and the Green Deal Code of Practice.

    Consumers with Green Deal finance plans who have a complaint can contact the Green Deal Ombudsman if their Green Deal provider is unable or unwilling to help when something goes wrong with a Green Deal Plan.

    My rt. hon. Friends the Secretaries of State for DECC and DCLG, have also commissioned Dr Peter Bonfield to chair an Independent Review of Consumer Advice, Protection, Standards and Enforcement for UK home energy efficiency and renewable energy measures. The Bonfield review will be submitting its recommendation in April 2016.

  • Martyn Day – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Martyn Day – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Martyn Day on 2016-02-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will make an assessment of the comparative effect of changes to civil service pensions on prison officers who joined that scheme under Classic but have been switched to the Alpha scheme and colleagues with the same length of service who have not been switched.

    Andrew Selous

    Alpha is the new Principal Civil Service Pension Scheme, which now applies to the vast majority of Civil Servants (including prison officers). Only those who are close to retirement have been able to remain in previous schemes or to defer entry to the Alpha scheme. This has always been made transparent and is considered fair as this group of staff are likely to have already started to make plans for their retirements which would be unduly impacted by a change in arrangements at this stage. There are therefore no plans to make such an assessment.