David Mundell MP: speeches 2025

199 published records · newest first.

Speeches

19 Nov 2025 · Myalgic Encephalomyelitis · Hansard source
More
Order. I should say that interventions on the spokespeople will not lead to them having any additional time.
19 Nov 2025 · Myalgic Encephalomyelitis · Hansard source
More
Tessa Munt, you have one minute to wind up the debate.
19 Nov 2025 · Myalgic Encephalomyelitis · Hansard source
More
Order. I remind Members that they should bob if they wish to be called. It is clear that we need a three-minute time limit if we are to get everybody in, but I cannot guarantee that we will.
18 Nov 2025 · Gaza and Sudan · Hansard source
More
I very much welcome the Foreign Secretary’s proactive statement, and I hope that will be the pattern of engagement with Parliament going forward. In addition to the horrendous atrocities that she and others have detailed, the World Food Programme has identified that 700,000 people face catastrophic hunger conditions in the coming months in Sudan, so we really need that step change, but we need some evidence of it. Can she be clear that the exchanges with the UAE have been robust and that there are real efforts to engage the African Union?
13 Nov 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill · Hansard source
More
I will speak to Lords amendment 28, which was introduced in the other place but relates specifically to my constituency. The Eskdalemuir seismic array, which is near the village of Eskdalemuir in my constituency, is a seismological monitoring station established to detect seismic signals from nuclear explosions. To a generation that grew up following the end of the cold war, the facility may seem to be little more than a historical curiosity, but it continues to be a vital asset in global monitoring, in scientific research, and, crucially, in helping to keep the United Kingdom compliant with its international obligations under the comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty. The Eskdalemuir seismic array has been operating since 1962, making it one of the longest-operating steerable seismic arrays in the world. The facility is geographically remote, in a low seismic noise environment, and highly calibrated and sensitive, enabling the detection of even small seismic signals at a vast distance. Over recent years, its seismometers have picked up the sonic boom from Russian jets in UK airspace, and have detected underground nuclear tests in North Korea. On one occasion, it was able to detect signals generated by the detonation of around 100 tonnes of conventional explosives in Kazakhstan. All that is clear evidence of the unique nature of the site and its capabilities. Some might wonder what the site has to do with the Bill. What could the Bill’s impact be on the maintenance of this vital scientific facility, which is crucial to our national defence and our undertakings under international treaties? In many rural constituencies in Scotland, the march of large-scale wind farm developments continues, encouraged by the Scottish Government. The forces acting on wind turbines cause vibration in the turbine—vibrations that can travel underground for many kilometres, with obvious consequences for facilities that require seismological quiet for their effective operation. As some Members may know, the desire of wind farm developers to push the boundaries of where their infrastructure can be located, and the boundaries of the guidance against which their applications are assessed, has led to challenges to the Ministry of Defence. A previous attempt by a developer to site a wind farm at Little Hartfell, which is in the consultation zone of the Eskdalemuir seismological monitoring station, led to judicial review proceedings against the MOD. On that occasion, the challenge did not dispute that the MOD is entitled to devise and enforce a policy to protect the array from interference with its detection capabilities—it concerned the way that proposed developments were prioritised—but the lesson is clear: developers will seek to push the boundaries of where and how their developments may be sited. Ministers must be aware of that, and willing to take measures to protect against that, where issues of national defence are at stake. The key consideration is this: in a dangerous and difficult world, we must not water down our defence systems or let down our allies to squeeze out what, in a national context, is a small amount of extra electricity. The UK Government should robustly refuse to entertain novel technologies within the 15 km exclusion zone proposed by the Eskdalemuir working group, which would replace the existing 10 km zone. That should also apply to those applications already in the planning system that were submitted by developers who continued to pursue their projects aggressively, with full knowledge that work was ongoing to review the exclusion zone. Our national defence must come first. I am sure that most people would agree that this is an area where an abundance of caution is well justified. It would be concerning if Ministers and the MOD were pressured into going too far in the name of net zero. I am not necessarily objective, because I am the Member of Parliament with the largest number of wind turbines in their constituency, either consented or built. I believe that industrial-scale wind farms are bad generally for the locality, but there need to be specific rules around them when national security is in question, and we have to protect our credibility with our international partners. Any loosening of the rules on infrastructure developments around facilities like the Eskdalemuir seismic array, or passing up the opportunity to reinforce existing rules, would send entirely the wrong message, both to potential developers eager to exploit new opportunities to construct even more wind farms, and to our international partners, who rely on our ability to contribute to our own defence and our collective defence. Lords amendment 28 is an opportunity to underscore the protection needed for facilities like the Eskdalemuir seismic array, and I want this Government take those protections forward.
11 Nov 2025 · BBC Leadership · Hansard source
More
I have long been a champion of the BBC as a UK national institution, but at the last charter review I raised my concern about the prevalence of a metropolitan elite at the heart of the BBC—not just at UK level but in Scotland—who do not always convey that they understand or indeed respect rural or older constituents such as my own. Will the Secretary of State confirm that, in order to preserve the BBC as a national institution, this charter review will convey an understanding of people right across the UK, wherever they live?
5 Nov 2025 · Fresh and Nutritious Food: Inequality of Access · Hansard source
More
I am going to take it that that was your speech, Mr Moon. I will not call you subsequently.
5 Nov 2025 · Fresh and Nutritious Food: Inequality of Access · Hansard source
More
I call Ben Coleman, who has up to five minutes.
5 Nov 2025 · Fresh and Nutritious Food: Inequality of Access · Hansard source
More
I will call Gordon McKee to move the motion. I will then call the Minister to respond. Two other Members have indicated that they may wish to speak, but they can make a speech only with the approval of both the Member in charge and the Minister. I proceed on the basis that those two Members have that permission. There will not be an opportunity for the Member in charge to wind up, as is the convention in 30-minute debates.
5 Nov 2025 · Fresh and Nutritious Food: Inequality of Access · Hansard source
More
Can the hon. Member respond and also conclude, so that the Minister may respond to the numerous points that have been made in the debate?
5 Nov 2025 · Fresh and Nutritious Food: Inequality of Access · Hansard source
More
I sense that a large number of people want to make an intervention, but they must keep them short; otherwise, Mr McKee will not get to deliver his speech.
5 Nov 2025 · House Building: London · Hansard source
More
Duly noted.
5 Nov 2025 · House Building: London · Hansard source
More
Mr French, you have 30 seconds to conclude the debate.
5 Nov 2025 · House Building: London · Hansard source
More
I call Luke Taylor on behalf of the Liberal Democrats. You have eight minutes.
5 Nov 2025 · House Building: London · Hansard source
More
Order. I think this might be the point at which you need to conclude.
5 Nov 2025 · House Building: London · Hansard source
More
I call Peter Fortune, who I am sure will stick to the five-minute limit.
5 Nov 2025 · House Building: London · Hansard source
More
Order. I have to draw you to a close there, Mr Bailey.
5 Nov 2025 · House Building: London · Hansard source
More
I ask our last three speakers to stick to their five minutes.
5 Nov 2025 · House Building: London · Hansard source
More
I call the Minister to respond to the debate, and perhaps he can give Mr French a minute at the end to wind up.
5 Nov 2025 · House Building: London · Hansard source
More
Order. Mr Taylor, you have taken two lengthy interventions. I am afraid that they will not be in addition to your time.
5 Nov 2025 · House Building: London · Hansard source
More
I am going to impose an informal five-minute limit, and we will see how we get on.
5 Nov 2025 · Council of Europe and the European Convention on Human Rights · Hansard source
More
The hon. Gentleman is not taking that intervention, so let us continue.
5 Nov 2025 · Council of Europe and the European Convention on Human Rights · Hansard source
More
I already know that is not a point of order in relation to the content of the hon. Gentleman’s speech.
5 Nov 2025 · Council of Europe and the European Convention on Human Rights · Hansard source
More
Sincere apologies to everyone I was not able to call. We now come to the Lib Dem spokesman, who has five minutes.
5 Nov 2025 · Council of Europe and the European Convention on Human Rights · Hansard source
More
Can the hon. and learned Gentleman conclude in 30 seconds, because there is no additional time for interventions?

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