Tag: Ronnie Cowan

  • Ronnie Cowan – 2023 Speech on the Budget

    Ronnie Cowan – 2023 Speech on the Budget

    The speech made by Ronnie Cowan, the SNP MP for Inverclyde, in the House of Commons on 16 March 2023.

    In every community throughout the UK that has a high level of employment, people experience better health, both physical and mental, less crime, better school outcomes and longer life. The result is less strain on the health service and criminal justice system. Admittedly, that is a simplified summary and we can, and no doubt will, debate wages and work conditions—at a time when the strength of the trade unions is being attacked by this Conservative and Unionist Government, it is right that we do so—but I want to focus today on the positives.

    I want this Government to help an industry that employs local people and could generate huge profits, pay its tax to the Exchequer and help to offset the environmental damage we are doing to our precious planet. That would be a win-win-win scenario. I was drawn to the Red Book section on green industries, which starts at paragraph 3.83; I wondered whether it was in there, but it was not. To my absolute horror, nuclear energy was. It is almost as if the nuclear industry does not create pollutants. It is almost as if generation after generation will not be left to clear up our mess. No matter what title this Government give it—the latest being “environmentally sustainable”—nuclear is not green.

    I was pleased that carbon capture got a shout-out, but that was at the end of the section on green industries investment, so in eager anticipation I read the part in chapter 3 entitled, “Growing the Economy: Creating a culture of Enterprise”. Here we go at last, I thought, but no. What better way is there to grow the economy and help the local community than by creating jobs so that people have a disposable income to spend locally, thereby benefiting the local community and all associated supply chains? All the usual Budget day suspects got a nod, but nothing new—no enterprise. There is nothing that could employ local people and generate huge profits, which would help them to pay their tax to the Exchequer and to offset the environmental damage that we are doing to our precious planet.

    I will have to lead the UK Government by the nose, which is a pity, because evidence of the benefits of this industry has been available for centuries. Indeed, it was promoted and even enforced by King Henry VIII in the 16th century. Back then, a quarter of all arable land was dedicated to growing hemp. Before the Government recoil in horror, hemp is not cannabis—don’t come over all unnecessary on me. It is estimated that a medium-sized economically viable establishment would employ 120 people, all paying tax. Hemp production was encouraged in the 16th century in order to manufacture rope and canvas for the King’s Navy, but now we can also make clothing, shoes, biodegradable plastics, insulation panels, food, paper and biofuels. Currently, the Government are spending billions of pounds on retrofitting homes through the ECO4 and ECO+ schemes, but they are using products made from petrochemicals, which release harmful volatile organic compounds emissions into the air of buildings.

    Why not encourage local farmers to grow hemp and supply local contractors with carbon-negative natural fibre alternatives at scale? What could be a better use of public money? In fact, there are more than 50,000 known uses for the hemp plant, so finding markets for hemp would not be a problem. It will sell, it will be profitable, and the Government could reap the benefit, but it does not end there. A hectare of hemp absorbs 22 tonnes of atmospheric carbon during its four-month growing cycle. Hemp produces four times the biomass of the same-sized area of forest, making it a far more sustainable source of material. Hemp does not need pesticides, insecticides or even fertiliser to grow in the UK. Hemp has natural antimicrobial properties, so it passively cleans the air in buildings. Hemp has a high capacity for moisture absorption, allowing for a controlled atmosphere within buildings. Hemp construction materials act as a long-term carbon sink.

    A £60 million investment would create a facility that is capable of growing 32,000 acres of hemp per year, which would sequester more than 207,000 tonnes of CO2 per annum. That is just the CO2 photosynthesised by hemp in its four-month growing cycle, and does not include the carbon sequestered into the soil or the net effect of replacing high embodied carbon products from international supply chains and their emissions. As a wee bonus, hemp regenerates the soil it grows in, so it would work well in crop rotation. Winter wheat and spring barley yields increase by 16% to 18% when they follow hemp in rotation, and hemp cleans groundwater because it has a deep root and a root mass that absorbs residual pesticides and insecticides from the soil, preventing run-off into streams and rivers and thereby avoiding costly remediation by the water companies to achieve UK drinking water standards.

    The barrier to this industry’s raising the funds it requires is simple: licensing. To make the industry a success, the Government need only open their mind to the reality of what hemp is and distribute licences appropriately. The industry will take care of the rest. Hemp is not a plant from the past; it is a plant that can pave the way to a cleaner, greener future, and its benefits are clear for all to see if we are prepared to open our eyes and ears to the possibilities. Finally, if raising tax from it is the trigger that is required, so be it. But we should not wait too long, because the world is switching on to this and we in the UK are being left behind in our nuclear bunkers.

  • Ronnie Cowan – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    Ronnie Cowan – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Energy and Climate Change

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ronnie Cowan on 2015-11-17.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, pursuant to the Answer of 3 November 2015 to Question 14118, when she plans to respond to the consultation on the feed-in tariff review.

    Andrea Leadsom

    We are currently analysing feedback submitted during the Feed-in Tariff review consultation and intend to publish a Government response as soon as possible.

  • Ronnie Cowan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    Ronnie Cowan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the HM Treasury

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ronnie Cowan on 2016-02-19.

    To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, how many tax credit investigations carried out by Concentrix under its contract with his Department have resulted in (a) no change in and (b) withdrawal of the tax credit award; and how many decisions to withdraw such awards were appealed successfully.

    Mr David Gauke

    As at 21 February 2016 Concentrix had closed around 440,000 cases. Around 390,000 of these resulted in no amendment to the award. Around 50,000 awards have been amended, though HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) does not hold information on how many of these were cancelled and how many adjusted.

    HMRC does not separate out the number of awards that were amended for error and from the number amended for fraud.

    On appeals, I refer the member to the answer I provided on 15 February 2016 to question 26041.

  • Ronnie Cowan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Ronnie Cowan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ronnie Cowan on 2016-06-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of linking the annual financial contribution of gambling licence holders for research into, prevention of and treatment for gambling addiction linked to their profit margins.

    Tracey Crouch

    I refer the Hon Member to the answer to PQ 40986.

  • Ronnie Cowan – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Prime Minister

    Ronnie Cowan – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Prime Minister

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ronnie Cowan on 2015-12-03.

    To ask the Prime Minister, if the Government will bring forward legislative proposals to ensure any future decisions to deploy the armed forces requires a full debate and vote within the House.

    Mr David Cameron

    I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for North Wiltshire (Mr Gray) on 26 November 2015, Official Report, column 1509.

  • Ronnie Cowan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    Ronnie Cowan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ronnie Cowan on 2016-02-25.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, on how many occasions he or officials of his Department have met representatives of high street bookmakers to discuss gambling since May 2015.

    David Evennett

    Details of my and the Minister for Sport and Tourism’s meetings with representatives of the bookmaking industry are available via the Department’s transparency returns, which can be found at: https://www.gov.uk/search?q=quarterly+ministerial+returns&filter_organisations%5B%5D=department-for-culture-media-sport

    In addition, my officials have met representatives of bookmakers on numerous occasions to discuss issues related to gambling.

  • Ronnie Cowan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Ronnie Cowan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ronnie Cowan on 2016-07-06.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether new arrangements are to be introduced for delivering the Nuclear Warhead Capability Sustainment Programme.

    Michael Fallon

    As announced in the Written Ministerial Statement on 21 April 2016 (HCWS689), the contract between the Ministry of Defence and AWE Management Limited (AWEML) has been reviewed and now falls under the Single Source Procurement Framework which is overseen by the Single Source Regulations Office.

    As a result of the review, the Ministry of Defence (MOD) has greater control over the programme, while ensuring that AWE continues to deliver value for money for the taxpayer. The contract between MOD and AWEML also provides the opportunity for higher performance incentives, as well as reductions if targets are not met.

  • Ronnie Cowan – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    Ronnie Cowan – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Defence

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ronnie Cowan on 2015-12-14.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how many shipbuilding jobs will be supported by the construction of each of the (a) eight Type 26 anti-submarine frigates that are scheduled to be ordered and (b) proposed five new frigates to be developed under the new light frigate programme.

    Mr Philip Dunne

    We have begun the detailed work to take forward the Type 26 Global Combat Ship and the new general purpose frigate programmes outlined in the White Paper ‘National Security Strategy and Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015 (Cmd 9161)’. It is too early to say how many jobs will be sustained by these programmes.

  • Ronnie Cowan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Ronnie Cowan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ronnie Cowan on 2016-03-21.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many personal independence payment claimants there were in Inverclyde in 2015.

    Justin Tomlinson

    Information on the number of claimants in receipt of Personal Independence Payment, by month and a range of geographic breakdowns, including parliamentary constituency, is available from Stat-Xplore. https://stat-xplore.dwp.gov.uk/

  • Ronnie Cowan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Ronnie Cowan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ronnie Cowan on 2016-07-12.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, if he will make it his policy to ensure that his Department undertakes research into the potential merits of a universal basic income.

    Damian Hinds

    We have no current plans to conduct research on this topic.