Chris Law MP: speeches 2025

96 published records · newest first.

Speeches

  • 15 Sept 2025 · Employment Rights Bill · Hansard source
    More

    I thank the hon. Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen) for her brave and personal testimony, and for sharing the testimonies of many others on the importance of bereavement leave. Let me begin by welcoming the news that the bus manufacturer Alexander Dennis will keep its sites in Scotland open after the announcement by the First Minister, John Swinney, that the Scottish Government have committed £4 million to a furlough scheme while the company obtains new orders over the next six months. I am sure the whole House will welcome the action taken by the SNP Government in giving domestic manufacturing businesses the opportunity to succeed and protecting skilled manufacturing jobs. From the outset of this Bill, we in the SNP have been clear in our support for legislation that will strengthen the rights of workers, having long campaigned for many of its provisions. There are progressive attempts to guarantee working hours and protections against unfair dismissal, and the Bill begins to reverse some of the most damaging and insulting anti-union legislation of the previous Government. None the less, throughout its passage in the House of Commons we have called on the Government to be bolder and to use this opportunity to deliver transformational change for workers. We proposed amendments to be more robust on fire and rehire, to improve statutory sick pay and to strengthen protections for migrant workers in accessing their rights, all of which were sadly rejected by the Government. Disappointingly, none of those issues has returned to this House in the amendments agreed to by the House of Lords. Instead, we see a series of amendments that seek to weaken the Bill and weaken the rights of employees by watering down provisions on protections against unfair dismissal, the right to guaranteed hours, and the capabilities of trade unions. Let me be crystal clear: the SNP will not accept proposals that seek to diminish workers’ rights. One of the most important elements of the Bill is the provision ensuring that workers have rights from day one, a significant change from the current two years. Workers should not have to wait to be protected from unfair dismissal. Unfair dismissal is unfair no matter what time limit is imposed, so there should be none. The Lords amendments would still allow for employees to be dismissed without the right to claim unfair dismissal for the first six months of their employment. Failing to reject this amendment today would fundamentally undermine the principles and objects of the Bill. The provisions on sexual harassment are also significant, particularly those that void agreements preventing workers from making allegations of harassment or discrimination, and void provisions preventing workers from speaking out about their employer’s response to the relevant harassment or discrimination. We have heard some eloquent speeches today about the very reasons why that can never continue. Astonishingly, the Lords are attempting to except parliamentary staff from the protection from non-disclosure agreements. I have not heard that mentioned today, but it is a disgusting attempt by the House of Lords to protect itself from allegations of sexual harassment and to silence those who are victims of sexual harassment in Parliament. What is it about that unelected Chamber, which brazenly seeks to use its power to protect and entrench its own privileges time and time again? This is just another ludicrous example of why the House of Lords needs to be abolished: it is utterly shameless. It has long been recognised that insecure work is one of the biggest problems facing our society. I have been listening carefully to what has been said about zero-hours contracts, and I want to register a few facts. Contrary to what was said earlier, in the past decade there has been an increase in the number of zero-hours contract workers—not a small increase, but a 65% increase. More than a million workers are on zero-hours contracts, including over 100,000 in Scotland, and many more are on very short-hours contracts. Rather than providing flexibility, zero-hours contracts offer little or no control or ability to forward-plan. Let me give an example. A recent report from the Work Foundation noted that when Wetherspoons introduced an option for guaranteed hours—guess what?—99% of its workers opted for guaranteed-hours contracts, with only 1% choosing zero-hours contracts. The Bill seeks to require employers to make an offer of guaranteed hours to a qualifying worker after the end of every reference period, but once again the Lords have attempted to weaken that by taking the onus away from employers and putting it on employees, requiring them to request guaranteed hours. It is important for the Government, as well as rejecting this amendment, to provide clarity on the duration of the reference period and to define what constitutes a “low” number of guaranteed hours. Similarly, the Government seek to reject Lords amendment 8, which defines “short notice” for the purpose of an employer cancelling a shift as 48 hours, with Ministers in the Lords suggesting that when the regulations are made, “short notice” will be defined as a period greater than 48 hours. That is fine, but, as I have pointed out a number of times today, it is cold comfort for those who are currently on zero-hours contracts, who will have to wait until 2027 at the earliest to find out what comes back from the Government’s consultation. One of the biggest problems with the Bill is that so much of it will not be clarified until further down the line, through secondary legislation and regulations, which means that much of it is still uncertain, much of it will avoid scrutiny, and much of it will be easy for future Governments to reverse. Indeed, the Opposition are on the record as having made that last point today. Of course, voters in Scotland know that devolution of employment law is a far better way to protect workers’ rights in Scotland from a future UK Government who might remove those protections. Fair work practices are already being delivered by the SNP Scottish Government, such as supporting collective bargaining, achieving real living wage employer status, and closing the gender pay gap faster than other parts of the UK. Workers in Scotland should never again have to see their employment rights eroded by any Tory-led Government, and we in the SNP will continue to campaign—as Scottish Labour was previously committed to doing—to ensure that employment law is devolved to Scotland or, better still, that Scotland gains independence from consecutive Westminster Governments who seek to erode Scottish workers’ rights.

  • 3 Sept 2025 · Hospitality Sector · Hansard source
    More

    Apart from my hon. Friend the Member for Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey (Graham Leadbitter). I thank the Minister for highlighting the V&A museums, one of which is in my city of Dundee, which has numerous hospitality businesses. Scotland makes a £9 billion contribution to the UK Exchequer through hospitality, and 200,000 jobs depend on it. There are consequences from the national insurance contribution rises; for example, just this year, one third of venues in Scotland have reduced their staff numbers and almost one fifth have shortened their opening hours, which means fewer jobs, less income tax and less tax from profits.

  • 3 Sept 2025 · Hospitality Sector · Hansard source
    More

    rose —

  • 2 Sept 2025 · Recognition of a Palestinian State · Hansard source
    More

    12. What discussions he has had with his international counterparts on the recognition of a Palestinian state.

  • 2 Sept 2025 · Recognition of a Palestinian State · Hansard source
    More

    The United Kingdom Government should never have placed conditions on the recognition of the state of Palestine—there is no place for it in international law. However, given that it is clear that Israel has failed to comply with these conditions, can the Secretary of State confirm that the UK will unconditionally and immediately recognise the state of Palestine at the UN General Assembly next week?

  • 2 Sept 2025 · Speciality Steel UK: Insolvency · Hansard source
    More

    The Minister was right to come here today to make a statement on such an important part of the national infrastructure. It is just a shame that no Minister has ever made a statement in this House on Grangemouth. We have now learned that the Chancellor met INEOS chair Jim Ratcliffe just three weeks ago—just three weeks before Petroineos Grangemouth closed—but she did not do so much as raise the refinery with him. In her statement, the Minister said: “the Government stand with the affected steelworkers in Rotherham, in Sheffield and in Wednesbury. We stand with their families”. That is quite right; so do we in the SNP. But why have this Labour Government never stood with the workers of Grangemouth?

  • 1 Sept 2025 · Middle East · Hansard source
    More

    This morning, the Scottish Labour leader told a press conference in Glasgow: “there is a genocide happening in Gaza. I believe Benjamin Netanyahu is a war criminal and he will have to face further sanctions.” Does the Foreign Secretary agree?

  • 22 Jul 2025 · Prax Lindsey Oil Refinery · Hansard source
    More

    With the Grangemouth refinery in Scotland having closed, and Prax Lindsey facing the same fate, there is clearly a missing element in the UK Government’s just transition policy. There can be no just transition if skilled jobs are lost when that transition is made. What assurance can the Minister give that the Government have taken a wider view, in order to stem these closures and address what is clearly a deeper issue with policy?

  • 21 Jul 2025 · Middle East · Hansard source
    More

    Twenty-nine arms export licences were suspended in September due to the possible breaking of international law, yet between September and December we saw a further 34 licences. Will the Foreign Secretary explain that decision? How many licences have been granted this year? What is the UK Government’s red line for a total arms trade embargo?

  • 17 Jul 2025 · Trade Agreements: Implementation · Hansard source
    More

    The United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 is a restrictive piece of legislation that centralises power to the UK Government and allows them to override the Scottish Parliament. Yesterday, the Labour Government confirmed they would not repeal or amend that Tory Act. Indeed, the Secretary of State for Scotland previously said that the Act was “bad and damaging” and undermined devolution, and the Business and Trade Secretary voted against it when in opposition. Will the Business and Trade Secretary confirm whether he would vote against it again now? Does he agree with the Secretary of State for Scotland that this Tory Act is an attack on the integrity of the Scottish Parliament?

  • 17 Jul 2025 · Strategy for Elections · Hansard source
    More

    The SNP welcomes that the UK Government are catching up to Scotland, where we have had votes for 16-year-olds for the last nine years. However, it is clear that real change also requires looking at this Parliament’s electoral system. Recent polls have shown that the leading party currently would win a majority of seats in the next election on less than 30% of the vote. Is it not long overdue that this Government reformed the UK Parliament’s broken electoral system and introduced proportional representation, as Welsh Labour is doing in the Senedd?

  • 8 Jul 2025 · Post Office Horizon Inquiry: Volume 1 · Hansard source
    More

    The Government have been told routinely by organisations such as Scottish Postmasters for Justice and Redress that compensation for victims of the Horizon scandal is taking too long and that the application process is akin to the trauma of a second trial for victims. We have also heard today that Sir Wyn Williams’ report illustrates that victims continue to face an “unnecessarily adversarial attitude” from the Post Office and that the UK Government continue to drag their feet in offering full and swift redress. Given that the Minister previously stood at the Dispatch Box and said that “justice delayed is justice denied”, —[ Official Report , 18 December 2024; Vol. 759, c. 373.] and given the human toll of the scandal revealed today, will this Government finally and immediately end these obstructive processes so that redress can be tackled straight on without waiting for the second volume?

  • 2 Jul 2025 · West Bank: Forced Displacement · Hansard source
    More

    I appreciate—as I am sure everybody in this room does—the update the Minister is giving. I asked a very specific question, and I think it would be helpful to get an answer to it. Goods from illegal settlements regularly flow into this country. The UK Government previously banned goods coming from another illegally occupied area—Crimea in Ukraine. Is there any impediment to the UK Government doing the same and banning goods that come from illegal settlements in the west bank entering the UK, and to start to put some serious action beyond the words the Minister has just said?

  • 2 Jul 2025 · West Bank: Forced Displacement · Hansard source
    More

    I thank the hon. Member for Glasgow North (Martin Rhodes) for outlining the key issues of the situation in the west bank. While the genocide continues in Gaza, the west bank is in an ongoing campaign of ethnic cleansing. In the last 18 months, at least 1,000 Palestinians in the west bank have been murdered or killed by Israeli forces or illegal settlers. In Jenin, Nur Shams and Tulkarm refugee camps, 40,000 residents have been displaced due to Israeli military actions. Nearly 6,500 Palestinians have been forcibly displaced following the demolition of their homes, and 2,200 have been forced from their homes due to settler violence. Let us make no mistake: that is all with the direct involvement, assistance and encouragement of the Israeli Government. The Israeli military has taken part in those attacks, protecting illegal settlers and not protecting Palestinians. In recent months, the Israeli Government, as we heard, have announced the approval of 22 new illegal settlements—the biggest expansion in decades—and provided illegal settlers with weapons. Illegal settlers have in turn sent leaflets and threats on social media to Palestinians in the west bank with warnings to flee to Jordan or be “exterminated”. If the UK Government are in any doubt, Defence Minister Israel Katz stated that settlement expansion was a “strategic move that prevents the establishment of a Palestinian state”. In short, Israel is systematically dominating and oppressing Palestinians and undermining the territorial integrity of Palestine. It is, therefore, preventing a viable Palestinian state and a two-state solution to the conflict. That is at odds with the UK’s international responsibilities and its belief in a two-state solution. Although successive Ministers have spoken disapprovingly in debates such as this about Israel’s behaviour, they have failed to take serious action. They have failed to recognise Palestine as a state and that is why Israel continues to act with impunity. The ICJ’s advisory opinion declared that Israel’s occupation is unlawful and made clear demands of third states, so I have some questions for the Minister. When will the UK follow the directions of that competent court? When will the UK respond and set out how it will fully comply? Will the UK stop all trade with illegal settlements to ensure that it is not facilitating an illegal occupation? For example, if the UK Government can ban the import of goods from illegally occupied Crimea, why not settlements in illegally occupied Palestinian territory?

  • 2 Jul 2025 · West Bank: Forced Displacement · Hansard source
    More

    I thank the hon. Member for raising an important point about tariffs. I was going to come on to that, but thankfully it has now been covered, which I appreciate. The bottom line is that, surely the rights and lives of Palestinians—as I have just stated—are of equal value to those of Ukrainians. The Minister has recognised that what the Israeli Government are doing is “a deliberate obstacle to Palestinian statehood.” I agree, yet the UK Government continue to refuse to recognise a Palestinian state while Israel continues to breach international law. Talk is cheap; it is deeds that matter. Human rights and the application of international law are equal—they are not transactional. They cannot be bargained with or traded away. The UK’s policy of condemnation has completely failed, so it must now act. Failure to do so is complicity and cowardice.

  • 24 Jun 2025 · China Audit · Hansard source
    More

    As the chair of the all-party parliamentary group for Tibet, I welcome the fact that the Government have responded to human rights situations in Xinjiang and Tibet. I would like to have seen more about religious freedoms, which includes next week’s birthday of the Dalai Lama—probably the most well-known Tibetan in the world. His future reincarnation should be for the people of Tibet, both inside and the diaspora. Given the Tibetan diaspora, the Uyghur diaspora and Hong Kong nationals are under constant surveillance here by the Chinese Communist party, how do the Government plan to take the recently agreed G7 definition of transnational repression and translate it into domestic law?

  • 12 Jun 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source
    More

    Authoritarian regimes are increasing their attempts to silence those who stand up against them, wherever they are in the world. That includes the Hong Kong Government, who have issued arrest warrants and million-dollar bounties for 19 activists in exile, including 10 who are resident here in the UK. Tomorrow, the father of one of those activists, Anna Kwok, will attend a hearing in Hong Kong, charged with helping with her finances using funds from a life insurance policy. It is the first time that an activist’s family have been arrested and charged, so may we have a statement from the Government on how they will legislate to specifically recognise and criminalise acts of transnational repression?

  • 12 Jun 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source
    More

    The Prime Minister routinely states his unwavering support for Ukraine, yet as a result of UK Government inaction, British businesses continue to bankroll Putin’s brutal war on a colossal scale. Since the beginning of Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022, a whopping £205 billion of Russian fossil fuel exports have been shipped by our own UK-based maritime companies or by ships with our own UK-issued insurance. Astonishingly, one company, Seapeak, has carried almost a quarter of Russia’s liquefied natural gas exports. Can the Secretary of State give us an update on what the Government are doing, and deal with this immediately?

  • 10 Jun 2025 · Topical Questions · Hansard source
    More

    T4. I wish you a happy birthday, Mr Speaker. In its manifesto last year, the Scottish Labour party promised to create 69,000 Scottish jobs in the clean energy industries of the future, but on “The Sunday Show” the Scottish Labour leader was unable to answer any questions about that. May I ask how many jobs have been created so far, how this is progressing, and when the target will be met?

  • 20 May 2025 · UK-EU Summit · Hansard source
    More

    The people of Scotland voted overwhelmingly to remain in the European Union in 2016, and overwhelmingly support rejoining it today— [ Interruption. ] Perhaps hon. Members might want to listen. That fact has been continuously ignored by successive UK Governments. The limited measures this Government have announced do not come anywhere near to repairing the hammer blow that Brexit will continue to inflict on our public finances. Indeed, the UK Government’s own figures show that the cost of Brexit is 20 times greater, or 4% of GDP, compared with this deal. Does the Prime Minister recognise that by continuing to pursue this disastrous Brexit policy, he is demonstrating that Westminster Governments will never work in the interests of Scotland?

  • 8 May 2025 · Trade Negotiations · Hansard source
    More

    Although a reduction in tariffs is welcome, the past four months have shown the UK Government that President Trump is an unreliable partner, not just in trade but in defence and security, climate and the international rule of law. In contrast, closer relations with our trusted allies in the EU have never been more important. Given that Trump has previously described the EU as “a foe”, “very nasty” and “an atrocity”, will the Minister provide an unequivocal assurance that there are no conditions whatsoever attached to the deal that will constrain the UK’s relationship with the EU, which is the UK’s largest trading partner?

  • 8 May 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source
    More

    In March the complaints commissioner concluded that the Financial Conduct Authority failed to identify risks relating to the owner of the funeral firm Safe Hands Plans, despite receiving information about breaches and other serious risks connected to the company. As a result, Safe Hands went into administration in 2022, with those who had invested in funeral plans losing thousands of pounds. Can we therefore have a statement on the role of the Financial Conduct Authority in the collapse of Safe Hands and the need for redress for constituents who have been impacted by this situation?

  • 6 May 2025 · Trade Negotiations · Hansard source
    More

    Today’s trade deal announcement will be welcomed by many in Scotland, not least those in the whisky industry. In the face of volatile US tariffs, this is undoubtedly good news. However, there has been increasing pressure in the UK—even from the former Prime Minister Tony Blair—for the Government to abandon their net zero ambitions. I understand that carbon mechanisms were crucial in these trade negotiations with India. Given that the SNP Government have today reaffirmed their fullest commitment to net zero and sustainable industries, can the Minister give his reassurance that the UK Government’s climate ambitions have not been sacrificed to secure this deal?

  • 6 May 2025 · Middle East Update · Hansard source
    More

    Madam Deputy Speaker, “Gaza will be entirely destroyed”. That is a direct quote from Israel’s Minister of Finance, Bezalel Smotrich, earlier today. That is the language of ethnic cleansing and genocide from a pariah Government who are using starvation as a weapon of war. Warnings that the Israeli Government will seek to displace the entire Palestinian population and flatten all of Gaza have been repeatedly ignored by this Government over many months, yet that is now the reality that Gazans face. Given that the UK have continued to give support to Israel throughout the conflict—there are reports that an RAF jet flew to Israel with F-35 parts and military personnel only last week—have British intelligence services and the Foreign Office been blindsided by Israel’s approved plan?

  • 1 May 2025 · UK-Europe Trade · Hansard source
    More

    Food and drink is one of Scotland’s most successful industries, and it is worth £15 billion to the economy. Over the coming months, the UK Government face a choice in their trade talks with the EU and US: do we align our food and farming standards with those in the EU, or reduce our quality standards at the behest of the United States? Will the Secretary of State guarantee that Scotland’s food and drink industry will not be jeopardised through desperation to satisfy the demands of, and secure a deal with, Donald Trump?

Published records only — not a full account of an MP’s work. How we work →