Euan Stainbank MP: speeches

Speeches

• 27 Jan 2026 · UK Bus Manufacturing · Hansard source

  More

  For Members of Parliament, accessibility on our public transport network is always a key factor. At the “meet the fleet” exhibition, I was glad to see some of the new models coming out from Alexander Dennis—hopefully to be built at the Larbert and Camelon sites—which will provide greater accessibility for customers. It is important for all bus manufacturers to make that feature a key selling point when they are going out to the country. Other countries have been able to do this and follow WTO or even EU free trade obligations. The German Government have recently started enforcing a 50% rule for contract value in procurement from the EU or countries with a free trade agreement, putting a cap on market growth of foreign competitors and, in practice, protecting jobs in the German automotive industry. The US’s Build America, Buy America scheme, introduced by the Biden Administration, mandates 70% local content for all rolling stock, and final assembly in the USA. Canada, while engaged in several free trade agreements, has introduced a Buy Canadian procurement policy framework that prioritises domestic industries. If other countries can do it, so can we. When I have put to the Government the case for greater policy support for UK manufacturers, the very welcome forum of the UK Bus Manufacturing Expert Panel and the 10-year bus pipeline are often cited as the answer. The panel and the imminent 10-year pipeline will offer welcome certainty about the volume and source of upcoming demand, but we need alignment of policy to support our industry or we are in danger of providing just as much certainty to foreign competitors as to our own manufacturers. The Government’s recent consultation on procurement reform is very welcome. I hope it did not escape the notice of my hon. Friends on the Front Bench and in the Cabinet Office that substantial submissions were made by Alexander Dennis, Wrightbus and supply chain businesses that rely on the primary UK manufacturing sector. The UK manufacturing sector is clear on a way forward that supports it without significant structural legislative change. We need a stronger emphasis on social value, and I believe Ministers must now consider a 30% social value weighting and clearer local economic benefit expectations. Social value criteria should be directly linked to key performance indicators that provide evidence of growing industry; job creation and retention; skills and metrics, including economic impact; taxes paid in the UK; supply chain spend; and UK gross value added to UK plc. Simply setting social value at 10% would continue to risk it being immaterial to scheme outcomes, as we saw in Scotland, and would be an inadequate tool to deal with rapidly diminishing British market share. Will the Minister confirm in his summing-up what further action is being considered to encourage contracting authorities to maximise their portion of the 10-year bus pipeline through domestic content when it is published? In addition, what conversations has he sought with Cabinet Office colleagues on procurement reform to amplify the views of the manufacturing sector and supply chain businesses when the time comes to legislate? The necessity to retain and grow our domestic capacity is increasingly essential when serious concerns are being raised across Europe about the security of some Chinese-built buses. Following concerns raised by myself and the hon. and learned Member for North Antrim, there is currently a National Cyber Security Centre and Department for Transport investigation into the risk of remote deactivation in some Chinese-built buses. I understand, through subsequent reports in the media, that the possibility of remote deactivation exists for 700-plus buses currently active on British roads. Although the risk may appear abstract to some, this issue raises important long-term security, autonomy and dependability concerns for my constituents, operators and passengers. Our manufacturers currently comply with security regulations 155 and 156, verified by the Vehicle Certification Agency, which ensures that vehicle manufacturers implement comprehensive cyber-security measures throughout a vehicle’s life cycle and ensures that software updates happen safely and securely. Approval certificates, however, can be sought from other countries’ approval authorities through mutual recognition arrangements for non-UK verification. I raised written questions prior to the interim reports of the investigation being reported in the media. I will repeat them here, considering the new information. Have the Government considered requiring UK VCA verification for any non-domestic manufacturers in the UK following those concerns? Following that, will the Government accept that national industrial security could and should be factored into any subsequent taxpayer-funded procurement exercises? If there is any degree of fallibility in security that cannot be adequately mitigated, the Procurement Act 2023 surely provides the powers for contracting authorities to disregard bids from non-treaty state suppliers. Is that a power the Government would consider encouraging or mandating contracting authorities to use, if they are not satisfied with the security of buses coming from abroad? Although that would certainly be significant action, buses are the most used form of public transport in the country and are essential national infrastructure. We know that there are sufficiently credible risks to warrant Chinese-built buses being investigated. Without prejudicing the outcome of the investigation, which I understand is still on track, will the Minister provide us with as much of an update as possible on when we should expect the investigation to be concluded? This concern reinforces the need to move urgently to tilt the market away from increased reliance on Chinese manufacturers and towards self-sufficiency. With 400 jobs and the very existence of a century-old bus manufacturing sector put in jeopardy in my community in Falkirk last year, the state of the UK bus manufacturing sector is a real and present issue, not only for my community but for our national industrial security and how we effectively execute a just transition, as we move towards the zero emission bus mandate for 2030 at the earliest. The transition towards clean transport has been, and will be, backed by billions in additional funding from this Government, who have shown the ability to be bold on industrial policy. We have a valued, well-paid and skilled workforce. At the same time, we have an existential challenge from foreign competitors. Too much taxpayers’ money goes abroad, and too many self-imposed targets were missed by previous Governments. If we do not adopt creative policies from elsewhere to support our British industry, we risk losing those jobs permanently to Chinese manufacturing, and if that is done, it cannot be undone. If UK bus manufacturing fails, for as long as this country is subsidising buses we will be sending taxpayers’ money abroad, so we cannot afford the cost of doing nothing. Deindustrialisation is not an inevitable process—a reaction to the UK sector losing market share. We have policy levers. We can increase social value weighting expectations nationally and locally to 30%; we can give clear guidance to contracting authorities on how the muscle in the Procurement Act can best be strategically deployed; we can clearly state the risks that kill switches could present; and we can back British buses. My constituents and I hope to see buses being built in Falkirk for a long time to come. I want the same for communities in Ballymena, Scarborough, Aldershot and beyond. I believe this Government can make that hope a concrete reality, but to do that we need to make the right choices. We need to make bolder choices, and we need to make them now.

• 27 Jan 2026 · UK Bus Manufacturing · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you, Dr Murrison. I may take the full time; I may not. I thank all hon. Members from all four corners of the United Kingdom for coming to support our British bus manufacturing sector, which shows how important this industry is to many of us here today, especially those from Scotland. It was very apt, considering where the political focus has been, that two Scots kicked off today’s debate. The hon. Member for Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey (Graham Leadbitter) used his experience as a worker at Albion, and then as a council leader, to demonstrate the value of bus services to our community. His point on the Subsidy Control Act was fairly made, as the Minister said. I appreciate his tacit admission, which I have not heard in many corners of Scotland, that social value is a way to correct these problems. I will be looking very attentively at the ScotZEB3 scheme to see how that is addressed compared with the ScotZEB2 scheme, which, from our constituents’ perspective, was substantially inadequate. The hon. and learned Member for North Antrim (Jim Allister) has an extensive history as a champion for Wrightbus. It was good to hear support for both Alexander Dennis and Wrightbus in relative parity throughout the debate from two corners of our great United Kingdom. I share his frustration about the conduct of some franchisees. However, I was rather glad to hear in the Minister’s response that social value is being doubled to 10%. My hon. Friend the Member for Alloa and Grangemouth (Brian Leishman) brought his characteristic fire and worker-led perspective to the debate. He championed our community over the summer through some of the darkest times it has experienced up to the very welcome resolution in September, with the delivery of furlough. He has been a strong champion for the workers’ perspective. The hon. Member for Romford (Andrew Rosindell) powerfully made the point about the value of jobs. He reminded us that for every four jobs directly within the bus manufacturing sector, 13 are created further out in the supply chain. I welcome that perspective. My hon. Friend the Member for Airdrie and Shotts (Kenneth Stevenson), who always brings to bear his wealth of experience in engineering, rightly raised the point that contracts and skills are incredibly valuable. I know that there are workers from Alexander Dennis and supply chain businesses in his constituency, and I hope for growth further down the line for him. I welcome the contribution from the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon). There is a strong presence from our friends in Northern Ireland today, which reflects the importance of Wrightbus to his constituents. My hon. Friend the Member for Paisley and Renfrewshire North (Alison Taylor) made a strong environmental case for buying British. As a regular attendee at Murrayfield on match day, I am very well-acquainted with Lothian Buses. I recognise the orders they have made from Alexander Dennis, but, as for all franchisees, my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh North and Leith (Tracy Gilbert) will be unsurprised to hear me say that when they come to buying new parts for their fleet, they should look closer to home. In conclusion, I still wish to raise the point about social value and recognise the urgency of where we are at. A lot of comments were made about the market share, but the point I made at the top of the debate is that we are buying electric and zero emission buses to a greater extent—which is quite right; they are cleaner, quieter transport—but less of those orders are going to every corner of the United Kingdom and less of them are being built in this country, despite a rising demand. It is important to recognise our constituents’ unhappiness with that. One of the most common complaints that I receive from constituents in Falkirk is that despite the effort, labour and history of bus manufacturing within our community, it is not British-built or Scottish-built buses that are picking them up and taking them from our communities into the centre of Falkirk. That is an important matter to address for our industry. Today’s debate has been a call for ideas, and I will reiterate a few that I put forward. I restate my ask for a 30% social value metric, on the basis that it would be a material intervention both from national and local funding to procurement. I am aware that the Minister has managed to secure substantial progress, which I recognise and welcome, but I will not stop asking. On the Procurement Act, I recognise the concerns and comments made about remote deactivation by the Minister. I recognise there is a limit to what will be publicised on that, but I will look diligently at the outcome. There is a sense of frustration that what we have at this stage is interim rather than confirmed. Although remote deactivation has utility, there are clearly grounds for investigation, which could perhaps be shared within proportionate boundaries. We have the muscle in the Procurement Act, which was introduced by the Labour party to address non-treaty state suppliers. If a credible risk of remote deactivation is established, I would like to see an official Government response. I look forward to the publication of the 10-year bus pipeline. Both that and the UK Bus Manufacturing Expert Panel are signs of tangible progress from the Government, in recognising and listening to the perspectives of the UK manufacturing sector. It is important to have a sustained pipeline and a clear road map that can be met by British industry. I am aware that Alexander Dennis and Wrightbus are prepared to meet the demand of the British sector. Sadly in the last few years, too many of our constituents have seen market share going in the wrong direction, especially in the ZEB market, because of medium-term and long-term decisions taken by the previous Government. They did not stand up for the sector, creating a problem that we have inherited. I think that is a good round of the doors in the 10 minutes I had, and I have nothing further to add. I thank all hon. Members. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered UK bus manufacturing.

• 27 Jan 2026 · UK Bus Manufacturing · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend goes to the heart of the issue we are debating today. This is an opportunity for our country to enable our manufacturers to compete within the market. What British industry needs is not to see its renowned prowess for making diesel buses become a sentimental memory in communities such as Falkirk, but policy certainty and support to scale up and properly compete in the zero emissions market as we move towards the implementation of the ZEB mandate. International competitors have been able to scale up to meet the global market through state subsidy and clear procurement ambition. It is up to us to gather the political will to do the same, which I am sure we will hear articulated today. Through both the mandate and voluntary targets for new registrations, operators are moving to prepare for new additions to their fleet to be fully zero emission by 2030, at the earliest. As that date approaches and diesel buses concurrently become a diminishing part of manufacturers’ order books, we must acknowledge that there is a short window before every new bus in the UK market will be zero emission. The year 2027, proposed by some during the passage of the Bus Services Act 2025 as the date for the ZEB mandate to come into operation, would, without thought, drastically narrow that window, and I was glad to see those amendments defeated. However, the message we are hearing from our manufacturers is clear. If we now fail to get this right, we will not be talking about a British-led transition and we will not be talking just about a 35%, and rising, Chinese market share. We will be talking about transitioning to reliance on other places in the world to build the vehicles we need on our roads. We will be facing the reality of the long-term consequences of the price and security of supply being increasingly elsewhere and not here. We will have lost control. That is why this debate is urgent. The Government, in my view, have the political temperament to deliver a new generation of British-built buses, and they have the proven ability to be bold on industrial policy, but too many missed chances by previous Governments and increasingly imminent deadlines for our industry mean that we need to be bolder. Sadly, taxpayer-funded schemes have contributed, rather than aiding a solution, to the problem of diminishing market share for UK manufacturers. The initial ZEBRA—zero emission bus regional areas—scheme, touted proudly by Prime Minister Johnson’s Government, committed to 4,000 British-built buses by the end of the last Parliament. The scheme delivered just 2,270 buses, of which about 46% were built abroad. There was a material and harmful chasm between political rhetoric and delivery for UK manufacturers. Scottish manufacturing fared worse recently in phase 2 of the Scottish Government’s zero emission bus challenge fund, the outcome of which was sending two thirds of ScotZEB2 orders to Yutong in China, while less than 20% went to Scottish manufacturers. That created an existential threat to 400 jobs and the Scottish bus manufacturing sector last year, with the First Minister being informed by the company in August 2024 that the outcome of the scheme appeared to show little regard for Scottish manufacturing, with unprecedented action being required in September to prevent the two factories from closing for good. In addition, 130 jobs were lost in 2024, in part because of the aggravated issue of conditions being placed on Scottish Government funding, compelling adherence to advanced Fair Work First standards for employee remuneration, welfare and safety, while no such requirement was made of foreign manufacturers. I am all in favour of fair work standards being applied. The problem here is that they were not weighted in the procurement exercises, despite their being required only of British manufacturers. That created an unlevel playing field, tilted in the wrong direction. We have heard testimonials to the origin of London’s public transport system in the labour of Scottish, English and Northern Irish workers, who now contend with, and are contradicted by, the rapidly increasing portions of Transport for London infrastructure coming from elsewhere in the world. It does not have to be this way. For example, as my hon. Friend the Member for Rochdale (Paul Waugh) alluded to, the Greater Manchester and Liverpool City Region combined authorities, when franchising their bus networks, bought nationally. They chose to weight properly when buying buses, with procurement teams looking at what could be achieved when social value is appropriately weighted. These successes and failures are largely down to how the schemes are set up. It seems entirely right to me that, because many are funded wholly with our constituents’ tax money, we should maximise the muscle of the state to make sure that as much of it as possible ends up benefiting our constituents, within the limits of our World Trade Organisation obligations.

• 27 Jan 2026 · UK Bus Manufacturing · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered UK bus manufacturing. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Murrison. I draw attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests and my role as co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group for British buses, alongside the hon. and learned Member for North Antrim (Jim Allister). There were 694 more zero emission buses registered in Britain in 2025 compared with 2024, a 38% rise in the number on the road in one year. There were 167 fewer built in the United Kingdom in 2025 compared with 2024. When we need more zero emission buses, when operators and local authorities are buying more buses but there are fewer orders going to factories in Falkirk, Ballymena, Scarborough, Aldershot and across the country, we know there is a problem, and it did not start yesterday. I applied for this debate, first and foremost, having been born and raised in a community that has seen immense benefit from the UK bus manufacturing industry. The goliath industrial site, which stretches across a large section of Glasgow Road in Camelon, has been the origin of Scottish-built buses for decades. A stone’s throw away is the sleek, relatively new modern site at Larbert, which hosts the global headquarters of Alexander Dennis. I had a welcome visit to Alexander Dennis’s “meet the fleet” exhibition last week for prospective bidders to Transport Scotland’s ScotZEB3 scheme. I tentatively await the outcome of that exercise and welcome Fiona Hyslop MSP, Cabinet Secretary for Transport, writing to me earlier this month to confirm when the announcement of successful bids is to be made. I hope for an objective outcome that supports Scottish manufacturing. Members of Parliament will recognise the inherent pride when they spot something built in their community when out and about elsewhere in the country. When the Mayor of Greater Manchester’s fantastic Bee Network was launched, I was proud to note that there were more buses built by workers in Falkirk than from any other place in the world.

• 27 Jan 2026 · UK Bus Manufacturing · Hansard source

  More

  Franchising is certainly an opportunity for our British bus manufacturing sector. I will speak later about procurement and the opportunities it presents for us to go even further, and potentially correct some of the examples that are not as great as the fantastic work done by the Mayor of Greater Manchester in that regard. This debate is unlike the last one held in Westminster Hall prior to the election in 2024. This is not a debate about the virtues of the current push to decarbonise transport. It is an immutable fact that the shift in demand from both operators and public subsidy is towards cleaner and quieter transport. For the UK manufacturing sector, we need to recognise that the transition to zero emission buses and away from diesel is happening. A business selling horses and carts at the beginning of the 20th century could have continued to sell the carts and might have done well in the short term, but eventually, if it did not transition to automobiles, it would have gone out of business.

• 22 Jan 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  My constituent Mary plans to retire next week. Despite applying to resolve her civil service pension in early summer last year, it has still not been resolved. I wrote to Capita about this immediately, but currently there is little prospect of Mary’s pension being resolved before she plans to retire. We are seeing too many of these prolonged delays cropping up. Will the Leader of the House support me in calling on Capita to spell out clearly an urgent resolution to this and all other cases at serious risk of being prolonged?

• 22 Jan 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  The 10-year bus pipeline is yet to be published, and a media report about the investigation by the National Cyber Security Centre and the Department for Transport into kill switches suggests that 700-plus Chinese buses on British roads have remote disabling technology. Can the Minister confirm whether the Government are delaying the publication of the 10-year bus pipeline until the report on Chinese kill switches is concluded?

• 15 Jan 2026 · Covid-19: Financial Support · Hansard source

  More

  In the early days of the pandemic, the country came together in the worst of times, making unprecedented sacrifices in all of their lives so that they could collectively fight the pandemic and save lives. The pandemic also put the structure of governance and our public finances under extreme strain; there were undoubtedly difficult—sometimes impossible—choices that had to be made. Such is the responsibility of government, but as the covid inquiry and many of our constituents have told us, there were people who were failed. Financially, individuals and small businesses in my constituency and—as we have heard powerfully—across the country found themselves excluded from support, as their lives did not map cleanly on to the fantasy of seamless transition from workplace to workplace and from business to business. They were told that their circumstances meant they did not qualify. They included new businesses, the newly self-employed, freelancers, those on parental leave, and company directors of small businesses who received their income from dividends and a salary, to name just a few. That point has been made powerfully by several Members, especially my hon. Friend the Member for Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr (Steve Witherden). Those who were in the most precarious employment were also hit hardest, with job opportunities limited. We saw youth unemployment spike during the pandemic, from 12.4% immediately before the lockdown to 15.2% only four months later. Many of those young people were made unemployed because of the high turnover and insecure nature of their workplaces—they were not on the payroll when 19 March 2020 came around. Just before the first lockdown, I and many other students were working seasonally in the hospitality sector, on zero-hours contracts, taking time off during February and March to complete the honours levels of our degrees. We expected to return to work that summer alongside pursuing our careers, but we were not given any support during the pandemic and found that our employment opportunities were limited, with no furlough available. There was no restitution for the loss of income and opportunity many young people faced during the pandemic. The impact was that the generation most likely to be employed in those casualised or ad hoc employments were set back. Plans to move out of home, pay off their student loans and begin a career—the proof points of a successful journey through our economy—were delayed. For many, survival became the predominant need; the desperate need to pay their bills, feed their kids, and survive through any means possible. Although the pandemic was hopefully a once-in-a-lifetime event, this Government must be prepared for any such eventuality. What I have described is a good reminder of the harm of balancing the labour market in one direction. One constituent who got in touch with me about this issue was a company director who was paid in dividends and a small salary, and who received no support because of that gap. They pointed out that not only was the lack of support hugely challenging, but colleagues and competitors in the same industry with a clearer definition of self-employment did receive support and were provided with a significant competitive advantage, which continues to this day. That is harmful to the economy, and is an injustice to my constituent and limited company directors like them. Years later, people feel like they are still trying to tread water with a weight chained to their ankle as they maintain businesses while paying back extensive loans that they took out to bridge the pandemic’s severe impact on their business. I commend the Government on the very good work they have done to identify the clear waste and instances of fraud that occurred during covid. The covid corruption commissioner identified £10.9 billion in losses due to weak accountability, bad quality data and poor contracting under the previous Government. We can go further, and I would welcome an acknowledgement from the Minister that better design in the previous Government’s schemes could have averted those losses. That money should and could have been spent on deploying support that would have unchained many people, including my constituents, from the extensive consequential impacts they went through at the time. Those impacts should be recognised through a clear and unambiguous statement of support for those people by delivering an apology on behalf of the British state. I commend the campaigners at ExcludedUK and its supporters, who have been relentless in advocating almost six years on from the start of the pandemic. They are fighting every day, chained financially to the circumstances caused by the pandemic—

• 14 Jan 2026 · Economic Growth · Hansard source

  More

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

• 14 Jan 2026 · Economic Growth · Hansard source

  More

  In November, I called for urgent intervention to support the Forth valley’s industrial economy. Since then, we have a £150 million deal to protect 500 jobs at Grangemouth’s ethylene plant, £14.5 million in the Budget to unlock hundreds of new jobs quicker at Grangemouth, such as those announced at MiAlgae, and £9.8 million of local growth funding announced at Forth Valley college last week, despite some nationalists moaning that the money should have been sent to St Andrew’s House rather than to Falkirk, Clackmannanshire and Stirling. What further steps will the Secretary of State be taking to support the vast economic potential of the Forth valley?

• 18 Dec 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Merry Christmas, Mr Speaker. The Christmas spirit is alive and well in Falkirk, whether it be the Denny Boys getting everybody into the mood last month with their Ring doorbell edition of “Last Christmas”, the school Christmas fairs—which I know many of my family and friends who are teachers are still enjoying—or the very successful inaugural Falkirk festival of trees, which took place last weekend and the weekend before, thanks in no small part to the Falkirk Delivers team. Will the Leader of the House join me in thanking the workers, emergency services and volunteers in Falkirk and across the country who will be working so hard this Christmas so that we can all enjoy a restful Christmas and a peaceful new year?

• 17 Dec 2025 · INEOS Chemicals: Grangemouth · Hansard source

  More

  People in Falkirk, Grangemouth and across Forth valley are delighted to see the decisive action taken by this Government to preserve 500 jobs in our community. The £120 million investment and £150 million deal are Labour’s industrial strategy in action. It protects our industrial community and keeps essential national infrastructure viable. I hope that there is a consensus in this House that that is a welcome, positive step. It is worth noting that, earlier this year, the head of external affairs for INEOS told the Scottish Affairs Committee that prior to the November 2023 announcement of the refinery’s closure, “Both Governments were given the opportunity, the data and access to the data to make an investment decision, and neither Government chose to do that.” Both the Tories and the SNP had the opportunity in government to support workers at Grangemouth, but they did not lift a finger. Contrast that with this Government’s approach to the ethylene plant, acting decisively before it was too late. Our action today and further action support new industry, with the welcome announcement last week of MiAlgae bringing 400 jobs across Scotland. Grangemouth’s industrial future must move forward and the Labour Government are providing substantial further resources towards that. Will the Minister provide us with greater detail on what guarantees the Government have received from INEOS for the long-term viability of the ethylene site at Grangemouth and when Grangemouth can expect further funding announcements from the National Wealth Fund’s £200 million commitment, as well as the additional £14 million secured by Scottish Labour MPs in the Budget last month, to get announcements made soon?

• 16 Dec 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  The Hillsborough law will deliver a generational strengthening of legal aid, but does the Minister share my constituents’ concern about the fact that the Scottish Government have yet to confirm that similar non-means-tested legal aid will be available to bereaved families in Scotland?

• 15 Dec 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  On Armed Forces Day, it is crucial to mark the bravery of our armed forces personnel and bring our communities together. Will the Minister meet me to discuss how we can better support Armed Forces Day 2026 events in places such as Falkirk?

• 11 Dec 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the 340 jobs at Grangemouth announced this morning as a direct consequence of the investment made by this Labour Government and MiAlgae. [ Official Report , 15 December 2025; Vol. 777, c. 10WC.] (Correction) In less good news, the National Timber Group went into administration last month, making 500 workers across the country redundant. After five years at NTG, my constituent had her system access cut off, while working, with no warning, no process and no verbal communication. What dialogue have Ministers had with the administrators to ensure that a fair process is followed for NTG employees?

• 11 Dec 2025 · Oil Refining Sector · Hansard source

  More

  I hear the hon. Member on the strategic importance of oil refineries; we have seen it in Grangemouth for over 100 years. Back in February 2024, in response to a question from the former Member for East Lothian, the right hon. Member for Richmond and Northallerton (Rishi Sunak), the then Prime Minister, described the closure of Grangemouth refinery as “obviously a commercial decision”. Does the hon. Member for Brigg and Immingham (Martin Vickers) agree with that characterisation by the former Prime Minister, who was at the time his party’s leader, given that he is describing—and I agree with him—the strategic role that oil refineries play in his community?

• 11 Dec 2025 · Oil Refining Sector · Hansard source

  More

  Project Willow also recommended the delay or lifting of the cap on hydrotreated esters and fatty acids. Would the hon. Member agree with that approach being taken? This is the project and report on the future industrial options at Grangemouth.

• 11 Dec 2025 · Oil Refining Sector · Hansard source

  More

  I note the attendance, and I welcome the hon. Gentleman’s presence in this debate. However, when we were talking about the Grangemouth refinery at the time that it mattered, in the previous Parliament, I note there was an active lack of interest from SNP politicians, with the exception of the former Member for East Lothian, who is no longer a member of the Scottish National party. I have raised the concern, and I have asked for direct intervention from my Government about skills funding for the college during Treasury questions. I very much welcome the enhancement of the local growth deal, which enabled the skills centre to be built. I will talk about the future of the refining sector. Since being elected I have repeatedly made the case that the best opportunity for Grangemouth is in refining biofuels, especially sustainable aviation fuel, due to its industrial role as a fuel supplier for Glasgow and Edinburgh throughout history, its equal proximity to Scotland’s two largest and busiest airports, its operational capacity and its proximity to a town that has the infrastructure necessary to host the required contractors. The £200 million national wealth fund commitment to Grangemouth first proposed by Scottish Labour MPs late last year, fought for by Scottish Labour Ministers and announced by the Prime Minister in February, should be spent primarily on developing a new anchor industry for our community that complements the existing skills profile of refinery workers. Ideally, we would not give private international capital a full stake in the project. Many businesses are interested in investing in refining biofuels at Grangemouth, and they are calling for policy certainty during the transitional phase into sustainable aviation fuel. Legislative measures such as the SAF mandate and the revenue certainty mechanism go a long way towards that, after the Government picked up the work that was delayed for far too long under the previous Administration. However, I would like the Minister to address the following points. Clarity on the revenue certainty mechanism and the pre-contractual work that can be carried out is crucial. Will the Government enable pre-contractual work to be carried out, as we did through contracts for difference, so that there are no delays once the RCM comes into effect later next year? Project Willow mentioned a proposal to delay the hydroprocessed esters and fatty acids cap. Despite substantial questioning from me, that has not been addressed yet by Ministers at either the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero or the Department for Transport. Will the Government consider altering, delaying or lifting the cap following that recommendation? Finally, it would be useful to have an update on how the £200 million is being deployed, following the welcome announcement on MiAlgae this year.

• 11 Dec 2025 · Oil Refining Sector · Hansard source

  More

  It is a privilege to serve under your chairship, Mr Western. I congratulate the hon. Member for Brigg and Immingham (Martin Vickers) on securing this important debate, and I agree with his comments regarding the strategic importance of oil refineries for their communities—if only colleagues who were previously in government had grasped that before the decision by Petroineos to close Grangemouth in November 2023 was announced. As has been remarked by colleagues, 2026 will mark the first year since, I believe, 1850 that Scotland does not have an oil refinery. This year marked 101 years since the start of oil refining in Grangemouth, and the date that refining ceased in April 2025 was a devastating time for the community I represent, the community of my hon. Friend the Member for Alloa and Grangemouth (Brian Leishman), the whole of Scotland and the United Kingdom. I remember sitting in the Falkirk council chamber when the announcement was made. The implications were obvious immediately: the loss of many of the highest-paying jobs in the Falkirk area, and the loss of a substantial tax base for Falkirk council and the Scottish and UK Governments. The announcement was completely unexpected for those of us in opposition parties, who were not in the know. The failure of Government, as my hon. Friend the Member for West Dunbartonshire (Douglas McAllister) has articulated on behalf of the Scottish Affairs Committee, to prepare our community or have a plan in place for a no job loss transition at Grangemouth refinery has become symbolic of a similar story happening across industrial communities for decades. It was infuriating to find out from the Scottish Affairs Committee report that, through late 2023 and 2024, when it would have mattered, many of the decision makers failed to act to prevent the unjust transition at Grangemouth. Petroineos confirmed to the Committee in April 2025 that, in the years prior to the announcement in November 2023, the then UK and Scottish Governments had requested information from the company, and subsequently chosen not to make an investment decision that would have saved the refinery. It was engaged for years with Government and no one lifted a finger to stop the path to the closure of refinery operations. Although I wish we had grasped the reality of the situation far more clearly in the transition from opposition to entering government, I welcome the determination of Ministers to get investment into Grangemouth quickly so that we can deliver that new industry to the community. Today—two weeks after the Chancellor allocated further Government funding to Grangemouth to speed up investment decisions—marks an exceptionally positive announcement for the area. Up to 310 jobs are coming to Grangemouth to support the construction and operation of MiAlgae, a Scottish biotech success story. That does not, however, diminish the fact that many high-paid, high-skilled jobs have been lost, and the constant worry that they and the industry will never come back is justifiably the primary emotion that still grips my community. We have an obligation not to repeat the mistakes of the past. We do not want the workers at Grangemouth, many of whom have not found employment since the closure in April, to be lost to the middle east, America or Norway. There is still a future for high-skilled refining workers at Grangemouth. That is why I welcome the Skills Transition Centre, announced back in February, funded out of the Falkirk and Grangemouth growth deal, which this Labour Government enhanced by £10 million when we came to power. However, the college that contains the skills centre is facing an existential financial crisis. One of the three campuses that constitutes Forth Valley college—the Alloa campus, in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Alloa and Grangemouth —is directly jeopardised by the 20% real-terms cut inflicted on colleges since 2021 by the SNP Government. The pathways for local kids to grasp the new industrial opportunities coming to our community will be actively barred if Government settlements for our further education sector are insufficient. Any consolidation that followed the closure of the Alloa campus would affect the courses available for thousands of young people in Falkirk, Stirling and especially Clackmannanshire. Kenny MacInnes, the principal of Forth Valley college, rightly reminded a conference recently that the college will be an instrumental part of whatever comes next at Grangemouth. The Scottish Government must bear that and Colleges Scotland’s recently published report in mind when they set their budget next year if they ever want to speak credibly about rebuilding opportunities in my community.

• 11 Dec 2025 · Oil Refining Sector · Hansard source

  More

  When the hon. Lady’s party was in power, in February 2024, in response to a question from the former Member for East Lothian, her then party leader said that the future of the Grangemouth refinery was “obviously a commercial decision”, essentially excluding themselves from taking any action. Does she agree or disagree with the former Prime Minister’s characterisation, considering what we have heard from the Conservative Benches—and I agree—about how oil refineries are strategically important? It was not a commercial decision, and something could have been done when her party was in office.

• 10 Dec 2025 · Seasonal Work · Hansard source

  More

  I will give way, given the hon. Gentleman’s insistence. Maybe he will mention some experience of hospitality workers as well.

• 10 Dec 2025 · Seasonal Work · Hansard source

  More

  It is important that we back our hospitality sector, and I said earlier that I think there should be more to come. Small businesses in the hospitality sector have talked to me about their energy prices.

• 10 Dec 2025 · Seasonal Work · Hansard source

  More

  I am going to confine my remarks to the criticisms of the Employment Rights Bill, because it is where my experience sits and because I tried—in no small part thanks to the efforts of yourself, Madam Deputy Speaker—to get into Monday’s debate on the Bill, but sadly I was not able to speak. Having said that, I do also want to make the point that it is imperative that all hon. Members listen to small businesses, as I did this Saturday as I helped out Falkirk Delivers and the Falkirk business improvement district team, disentangling the Christmas lights and carrying ladders about Falkirk High Street as they set up the inaugural Falkirk festival of trees. I encourage any hon. Member to visit the vastly brilliant hospitality venues in Falkirk. With that out of the way, I will now focus my contribution on the impact of the Employment Rights Bill. We have heard from the Opposition that small businesses are looking for more solutions, although I would point out that very few of them say that we should either cut welfare substantially in a way that would push children into poverty or rejoin the European Union as the immediate solution. It is imperative, though, that we talk about seasonal workers and not just the businesses that hire them; that is, of course, an important perspective, but it can often be a parochial view that involves talking to one side of the labour market—the employer—and failing to grasp the incentive system that we need to change in order to get people into work, as I believe the Employment Rights Bill will do. After years of hearing the Conservative Government using the stick—tough language about benefit sanctions, often kicking down at a workless generation that they directly caused and also directly failed to address when in government—the Conservatives now repeatedly slam the carrot: the Employment Rights Bill and this Government’s broader agenda to make work pay again. So in lieu, I will provide my own relatively recent experience to the House. With the exception of the pandemic—when I lost my insecure hospitality job as one of the workers who was not provided with furlough assistance because of the nature of my contract, and I had to move back in with my parents for the first time since I was 17—I have not gone one week unemployed since I was a teenager. After long days at school and, later, long days of studying law, I spent my weekends working behind the bar at weddings and various functions in the hospitality industry and the retail industry. I did this because of the ethos my family instilled in me as a 16-year-old, when I got my first seasonal job at Argos, that nothing is better for your self-esteem, your progression, your social skills, your life, your independence and, ultimately, your wallet than to get yourself in, and keep yourself in, work. I still remember hitting 1,000 orders on Christmas eve 2016 in that first job, only to be told on Boxing day, alongside many of my generation who worked hard in that seasonal job and made sure that the business was running, that I was not going to be kept on. We have to remind ourselves that the workers who work over Christmas in hospitality, in retail and in gift shops are the economy that we are talking about here. They are the ones who consistently keep the lights on in our high streets. In my experience, working on the minimum wage, insecure and low pay, high turnover and insecure hours are major characteristics of the sectors I have worked in. Until I moved out of the hospitality sector in June 2022, my income was sometimes enough to pay the rent on my digs and for my bills, food and the occasional trip to the pub or a Falkirk match—but, sadly, sometimes it was not. This is still the reality for far too many who work in hospitality, retail, social care and many other sectors, and it is ultimately the reason I got into politics: to improve the lot of those who, despite grafting and seeing little result for themselves or their families and sometimes working in quite deep poverty, still went in each day and got on with it. That same spirit lives on today in the young hospitality workers who are currently in dispute with their employer at the Village Hotel and at Vue in Glasgow. The hard-working generation that I am a part of are down there once again, organising and demanding better, because they are contributing and keeping our economy going, and they deserve fair pay and conditions over Christmas. More than anything, this was the reason I ran for election: I saw in my generation the corrosive social sickness that the previous Government neglectfully allowed this country, and especially my generation, to be infected with. After 14 long years, many in my generation looked at the workplace with no prospect of being able to build a better life than the one their parents had. I believe that the last Parliament was the first in history in which living standards went down. Off the back of that, too many in my generation saw that they could either work hard and see little reward or sit about and see little reward as well. Something had to radically change. This country had to make work pay again. That was the message in the manifesto that Labour stood on and promised the country that we would deliver if we had the privilege of winning office. This is what the Employment Rights Bill is designed to do, with day one rights to statutory sick pay, allowing workers who fall ill to bounce back into the workplace quicker and healthier, and day one rights to paternity leave—those were secured this week; I am grateful to the Minister—meaning that fathers can spend those precious first few days at home with their newly-born bairns, which I imagine will be crucial for many families this Christmas. Having said that, as Ministers are aware, I was desperately disappointed earlier this week when the concession was made to the Tories and Lib Dems in the other place on day one rights against unfair dismissal. Those same peers have, throughout the passage of the Employment Rights Bill, fought to bargain on behalf of the bad bosses to weaken the sick pay and paternity leave of millions of ordinary people. The obstructions of the other place to delivering that core manifesto commitment, which will benefit so many in my generation—those who are seasonal workers, to boot—must be addressed by the Government at another time and, from my perspective, with far more radical intent in regard to the other place. I cannot and I will not forget the workers I have pulled pints alongside.

• 10 Dec 2025 · Seasonal Work · Hansard source

  More

  An extensive amount of hospitality jobs were lost over the previous five years as well. I speak to small businesses in my constituency every week, and I do not deny that they have been hard pressed for a number of years. I know, because I was there—I was working in the industry.

• 10 Dec 2025 · Seasonal Work · Hansard source

  More

  Yes, absolutely. I also find it disgraceful that the Leader of the Opposition suggested this week that we should freeze the minimum wage. That would mean that, in later years, the workers who are going to keep the lights on this Christmas in the gift shops, the pubs and the restaurants would be entitled to less as inflation went up— [ Interruption. ] Well, they are part of the economy. If we did not have the workforce keeping the lights on in the first place, there would be no restaurants, no pubs and, sadly, no Christmas custom. That is the experience of far too many people in hospitality. This is the fourth Christmas in my working life that I am going to be able to spend with my family instead of working in the hospitality industry. If any of those on the Opposition Benches can share their experiences, I would be very interested to hear them, considering how much experience in business they utilised earlier in the debate. Throughout the progress of my career in this place and the votes that we make, I am not going to forget the workers I pulled pints beside and served tables with. I have heard too many stories about kids being bullied, belittled and booted out of the workplace by bad bosses during the first two years of their working lives. I do worry—and I have shared my concern with Ministers—that, especially in the seasonal work sector, this will now simply happen before the six-month mark. We should return to and address that later in the Parliament. I expect nothing from Opposition Members but an apology to the 1.5 million people who were put into in-work poverty during the shambolic 14-year tenure of the Conservatives. They built a low-wage, insecure, low-productivity economy, all while practising austerity, and now they have come back to this House with essentially the same ideas but with 200 less MPs.