David Mundell MP: speeches

Speeches

• 21 May 2026 · Middle East · Hansard source

  More

  While the trade agreement with the GCC is obviously welcome, why does the Minister think it is possible to reach a trade agreement with the GCC but not to influence its members to play a more positive role in resolving the issues in Yemen, Sudan and elsewhere? They have a key role to play in these disputes. I know that he takes a very specific issue on Yemen. What more can he do to make the United Arab Emirates, for example, play a more positive role there and elsewhere?

• 12 Mar 2026 · Marriage Regulations · Hansard source

  More

  I agree. The hon. Lady will be aware that many humanists come to Scotland, and indeed to Gretna Green, to get married for that very reason. That issue needs to be addressed in the context of modernising marriage regulations. Dumfries and Galloway council, one of the three councils in my Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale constituency, has indicated that it could complete all the necessary checks within five days, yet the law mandates a wait that effectively stretches to 29 days in real terms. In the United States, Minnesota and Massachusetts require a similar three to five days for checks, while New York and Las Vegas allow for marriages within minutes or 24 hours. The British overseas territory of Gibraltar requires only 24 hours, and Denmark, sometimes competing with Gretna Green to be the Las Vegas of Europe, requires just five days. In Denmark, a jurisdiction that the Home Secretary seems very keen to promote, the system protects against abuse and fraud while allowing couples to marry within days rather than weeks. Why can the UK not do the same? This debate is not about weakening safeguards or making marriage easy in a way that invites fraud; it is about asking whether our system reflects the realities of modern life. Under the Immigration Act 2014, the UK Home Office already has the power to extend the standard marriage notice period to 70 days. If the UK Government already have the power to identify, investigate and disrupt sham marriages, why does every couple need to have their wedding delayed? The public are clear. They want a system that is simpler, fairer and more flexible. A recent YouGov poll found that 88% of UK adults support the ability to fast-track the marriage process. With fewer than half of UK adults now married, we are witnessing an historic shift in the structure of our families. While shifting social ideas play a part, 61% of adults cite the rising cost and complexity of weddings as a key reason for the decision to decline the opportunity. Inaction also has an economic cost. The UK wedding sector is estimated to be worth £10 billion to £15 billion annually, supporting countless jobs and venues across the UK, as in Gretna Green. Such venues are spread across the breadth of the country, and I am sure Members present have venues in their own constituencies that come to mind. By maintaining a needlessly slow process, more flexible jurisdictions will come to benefit more than Britain from spending on weddings. Many visitors from the United States now come to Scotland to get married, having seen “Highlander”, “Outlander” and other such programmes on international television channels and realised the beauty of the country. I of course appreciate that the Government in Holyrood and the Scottish Parliament have responsibility for some of these issues in Scotland, and I would also be delighted to see the Scottish Government take forward proposals at the first opportunity, but in the absence of them doing so, the UK Government have the capacity to demonstrate a different way of doing things. I do not wish to pre-empt what the Minister may have to say, but she may reference the Law Commission’s 2022 report, “Celebrating Marriage: A New Weddings Law”, and the announcement in October last year that the UK Government would reform wedding law. Although the Law Commission’s report was extensive and thoughtful, its focus was largely on where weddings can take place and who can conduct them. It suggested moving towards a system focused on authorised officiants, rather than on licensed buildings, which would allow for more outdoor and home ceremonies—reforms that I wholeheartedly support. The administrative notice period, however, received far less attention in that review. With the Government already having accepted that marriage law needs modernisation, why not tackle the waiting time, too? To be clear, this is not about deregulating marriage law, but about making it fit for the modern day through digital notice systems and more flexible waiting periods, the recognition of independent celebrants to allow personalised, but legally binding ceremonies—the hon. Member for Luton South and South Bedfordshire (Rachel Hopkins) has already referred to the opportunity for humanist weddings—and simplified documentation that reflects modern administrative capability. One suggestion has been the appointment of a marriage tsar to move forward the aforementioned modernisation. However, I am sure that if it is driven from within Government, it can take place. Administrative delays are not merely bureaucratic inconveniences; they carry a profound human and financial toll. For many, particularly in our armed forces, these administrative hurdles are not merely inconvenient; they can be fundamentally incompatible with the realities of service life. In recent days, we have all seen service personnel deployed at short notice. That is part of being in the services, as are unpredictable posting cycles that do not align with a rigid, 28-day delay, and the marriage system’s opaque exceptions are difficult to navigate at a time of high stress. Moreover, with the average UK wedding now costing more than £20,000, delays can lead to the loss of substantial venue deposits and the risk of escalating catering and other fees, which have also risen by about 24% due to inflation. This “cost of worry” creates uncertainty, where heartbreaking last-minute cancellations become a reality for those caught in an antiquated system. These hurdles, and the costs associated with them, effectively put marriage on the back burner for many who would otherwise want to marry. The history of Gretna Green shows that love cannot wait, love should not wait, and neither should we. I look forward to the Minister’s response and hope that she will agree that the time has come to review the administrative hurdles that stand in the way of love today.

• 4 Mar 2026 · Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office · Hansard source

  More

  Let me begin with a very specific request to the Minister, which I hope he will be able to grant. My request is for a continuing commitment to Abercrombie House in East Kilbride as the FCDO’s second headquarters. The Government scrapped plans to build a new headquarters in Glasgow, and have so far confirmed that they are staying at Abercrombie House. However, as the International Development Committee has heard, that building requires significant investment, and at a time of such significant cuts in the FCDO budget and, obviously, staffing changes, there is concern about whether this will actually be done. As a member of the International Development Committee, I now want to turn to the issue of official development assistance and development finance. As the Financial Times has reported, recent analysis from the Centre for Global Development reveals a startling reality: that this Labour Government are presiding over cuts in our overseas aid budget that are not only deeper but faster than those being implemented by the Trump Administration across the water. I cannot believe that that was the objective of a Government who said that they wanted to achieve global leadership in these matters. I understand the necessity of financial discipline, and, of course, the funding pressures with which the Treasury is wrestling, even if some of them are self-inflicted. I have often argued in the House that we must be pragmatic and strategic with our development resources, looking for where we can make the best and most profound difference. I agree with the Chair of the International Development Committee, the hon. Member for Rotherham (Sarah Champion), that scrapping ICAI, which is monitoring how we obtain value, is the best way to achieve that. There have been some very significant ICAI reports, including the 2020 report that dealt with the extent of the value the Government obtained from investment in nutrition for every pound that was spent. As a champion of nutrition, I have long supported the Child Nutrition Fund. With a relatively modest investment from the UK Government, the fund can leverage philanthropic and private capital while mobilising domestic resources to dramatically improve the wellbeing of millions of women and children. In my view, the child nutrition fund meets the test of public expectations for ODA funding: it puts food in stomachs and jags in arms. Because I realise that we are in a changing world, I have also supported the IDC’s inquiry into the future shape of aid. We recognise that things will have to be different, but we want to see leadership from the UK Government in this regard, and we want to see a plan. When the UK Government are slashing development spending by some 27% by 2027—outpacing the reduction proposed in Washington, as I have said—one must ask: how does this stack up against other Government objectives, and where is the plan? Whereas the US Congress has acted as a vital check, I see little of the same approach here in the UK, despite the very best efforts of the International Development Committee. As I have said before, if cuts have to happen, they need to be thought through, and that thinking needs to come prior to the cutting. Sadly, that has not been the case. Unless the Minister pulls it out of the hat at the end of this debate, there is no evidence of a plan. Reductions in ODA were announced over a year ago, but the UK’s future of aid conference will not take place until May this year—if at all, I suspect. In the meantime, services that could be put on a sustainable footing through new and innovative approaches, or through being transferred to capable local partners, are falling over. The change in US policy has significant ramifications, which we should address now, particularly the withdrawal of funding for LGBT and family planning issues. This is most certainly not the time for the FCDO to cut its LGBT budget, as the Elton John AIDS Foundation, among others, has highlighted. We are told that the reductions are to fund our defence capabilities against Russian and, indeed, Iranian aggression. However, the Government must be careful not to create a vacuum of influence and allow malign actors to move in while we do this, as others have already highlighted. One need only look at the example of Russia’s Wagner Group and its operations in Africa, particularly around critical minerals. As co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group on HIV/AIDS, I want my final remarks to focus specifically on the impact of the changes on the fight against HIV/AIDS. I particularly commend The Independent newspaper and its correspondent, Bel Trew, for highlighting some of these issues. Last November, I was pleased to welcome the Government’s pledge of £850 million to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. At a time of tight resources, it offers real value for money by dealing directly with devastating and widespread diseases, but also by building capacity in the health systems of partner countries. The fund can be a crucial pathway to ending dependency, but although £850 million was welcome, it was none the less a £150 million reduction from 2022, and it was also coupled with uncertainty for other organisations, such as the Robert Carr Fund, Unitaid and UNAIDS. The One Campaign expects the shortfall to result in a very tangible 250,000 additional deaths and 1 million new infections. Here in the UK, the Government’s ability to reach our own target of zero new transmissions by 2030 would be imperilled by rising rates of HIV elsewhere. The UK’s life sciences and pharmaceutical sector—for which the Global Fund, among other organisations, is such an important partner—will also suffer. What that tells us, as we have heard already, is that the reductions come at a cost, particularly if they are not thought through. They come at the cost of influence, the economy and, sadly, lives. At the end of this debate, I want to hear from the Minister what the Government’s plan is. Everybody understands that there will be reductions, but they must be on a planned basis.

• 4 Mar 2026 · Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Chair of the International Development Committee for her opening remarks, and I echo the sentiments of the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon). Does she agree that it was extremely disappointing that the previous Government, and indeed this Government, did not follow the recommendation of the International Development Committee that there should be someone from the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office on the board of BII—not to make investment decisions, but to ensure it is aligned with Government strategy and policy?

• 3 Mar 2026 · Sudan: Humanitarian Situation · Hansard source

  More

  I hope that the Foreign Secretary will read the evidence from Samaritan’s Purse to the International Development Committee last week, which reiterated the issues on sexual violence. We also heard that in refugee camps, many people have to be naked because they have had no option but to sell their clothes to get food. I am sure she agrees that is completely and utterly unacceptable. In her last statement, she said that she was seeking to engage with the African Union and to bring it more into participation in bringing a resolution to the conflict. Has she made any progress in that regard?

• 5 Feb 2026 · Sudan · Hansard source

  More

  I commend the Foreign Secretary for her proactive engagement with Parliament on this issue, because that is part of the way we will shine a light on these horrendous circumstances. I concur with the right hon. Member for Oxford East (Anneliese Dodds) about the importance of civilian engagement, that any ceasefire is linked to the development of a political process, and that perhaps there can be civilian engagement at the Berlin conference. Will the Foreign Secretary say more about how she intends to engage the African Union? There is a general view that if the African Union were more engaged, it would be a lot harder for Russia to veto UN Security Council resolutions.

• 2 Feb 2026 · China and Japan · Hansard source

  More

  I echo the tributes to Jim Wallace. He was one of the most significant Scottish politicians of his generation and it was a privilege both to know him and to work with him. We have established that the Prime Minister was in the room, but what difference will it make for people who were not in the room in Ukraine?

• 5 Jan 2026 · Middle East and North Africa · Hansard source

  More

  I also very much welcome the fact that the Minister made such reference to Yemen. As the hon. Member for Cowdenbeath and Kirkcaldy (Melanie Ward) has just said, we often say that Sudan does not get enough attention in this Chamber, but I am afraid that the attention that has been focused on Yemen in this Parliament, given the scale of the crisis there, has been pitiful, and I hope that today reflects a change in that. How can the Minister convince us that that he and the Foreign Office can actually deliver on prioritising these issues when, as we heard in the previous statements, there are so many other issues that are commanding attention?

• 18 Dec 2025 · Christmas Adjournment · Hansard source

  More

  My constituency is larger than any in England and has over 100 distinct communities, which I could not even list in three minutes, so I intend just to focus on the highlights. I am delighted that the Backbench Business Committee has granted a debate on modernising marriage laws, because Europe’s self-proclaimed marriage capital, Gretna Green, is in my constituency. In Annan, the main issue for the community remains the replacement of two footbridges swept away during flooding in 2021. There is still no plan to replace them, despite the community’s own efforts to bring forward plans. That is why I hope that project can come under the important Borderlands growth deal, which covers the south of Scotland. It has been a positive force, but, as I said in a recent debate about Scotland, it needs the Government to put a bit more oomph into it. Two very positive projects are unfolding. One is at Eastriggs, with the potential for a UK munitions factory on the site of HM Gretna, which was a munitions factory during the first world war. That would give a huge boost to not only my constituency but that of the hon. Member for Carlisle (Ms Minns). There is also a plan for a green energy hub on the Chapelcross site. Although I would have preferred to have seen a new nuclear plant on that site, I am happy to support the project. I can demonstrate that coming to business questions with the Leader of the House has an impact. On one Thursday in October, I called on the Bank of Scotland to sell its branch in Peebles to the Peebles Community Trust, and the very next day it announced that it was doing so. I take that intervention as having been helpful. The constituency covers not only a large rural area but former mining communities. I was pleased, along with many Government Members, to support constituents in their call to have the British Coal staff superannuation scheme extended to include them—that was one announcement in the Budget that I was able to welcome. As we approach the Scottish Parliament elections, two Members who overlap with my constituency are standing down. They are Christine Grahame, who has served for 27 years and my son Oliver Mundell, who has served for 10.

• 18 Dec 2025 · Ukraine · Hansard source

  More

  Can the Minister update us on de-mining in Ukraine? Ukrainian civilians are still regularly being killed by mines or improvised explosive devices. The last time that I had the opportunity to visit Ukraine, it was with the HALO Trust, which is based in my constituency and carries out the meticulous work of removing mines. The scale of the mines is such that there remains a serious threat to the civilian population.

• 26 Nov 2025 · Defence Sector: Skills and Training · Hansard source

  More

  I was delighted when Eastriggs in my constituency was shortlisted for a new UK munitions factory. The Secretary of State will know about its long history in munitions and the fact that the Ministry of Defence already owns the site. Will the Scotland Office continue to promote the project and join me in facing down the Scottish Government’s anti-defence-industry stance?

• 25 Nov 2025 · G20 and Ukraine · Hansard source

  More

  I was very pleased that the Prime Minister mentioned Sudan; we cannot be blind to Russia’s malign interest there or across the Sahel. What discussions has he had with Prime Minister Modi about his approach to Russian oil and what appear to be his overly friendly social media posts towards President Putin?

• 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.

• 4 Nov 2025 · Official Development Assistance Reductions · Hansard source

  More

  That is partly right, because negative stories have prevailed and we have not had people on the other side rebutting them, as we have not had advocates on the ground. I feel that many non-governmental organisations became far too corporate in their approach: they did not have the local people who were able and willing to collect money or to stand up and make the case in their community environments. The International Development Committee has visited the US, to try to find out what is happening there. One of the great ironies is that—subject to the budget currently being frozen—it looks as though the US cuts will be less than the cuts in the UK, because various interests in the US have pushed back on them. There is no doubt that what is happening in the US will significantly affect the global development structures, and we must react to that. We cannot simply say, “We want to go back to 0.7%, and it will all be all right.” That is not the world we are in. We will have to demonstrate specific things that the UK can contribute in a leadership capacity. For example, we have heard that the US will not be funding any family-planning activity or LGBT activity, so others will have to step up in a strategic and co-ordinated way. Whether it is our Government, other Governments or philanthropists, we must find a co-ordinated way of doing this. We must also look at how we can deliver most effectively with the reduced funding that we have. As the hon. Member for Rotherham knows, I have been a strong advocate for nutrition. One of the biggest disappointments to me of late has been that, after the International Development Committee conducted an inquiry into sustainable development goal 2, we received a very, very poor response from the Government. I accept that it took place during a period of change, but there was nothing concrete in the response. In fact, there was less in it than what was said a few months ago at the nutrition for growth summit in Paris. It seems to me that the Government embarked on these cuts without a strategy. We might disagree with the strategy in the US, but at least there was one: there was a clear objective, and it took certain actions to pursue it. I am not aware of any clear strategy being pursued in the UK. Finally, as co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group on HIV/AIDS, I want to make a pitch for the Global Fund. The Global Fund has been a huge success in combating HIV and AIDS, and I hope that the Government can proceed with a replenishment of £1 billion. I campaigned against my own Government to get £1 billion last time, and it would be very disappointing to find an incoming Labour Government cutting that.

• 4 Nov 2025 · Official Development Assistance Reductions · Hansard source

  More

  It is a great pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Rotherham (Sarah Champion), the Chair of the International Development Committee, because I want to refer to one or two things that the Committee has been doing. I thank the hon. Member for West Dorset (Edward Morello) for securing the debate. Given that this is a major change in Government policy, there has been very little debate in Parliament about it. I fear, though, that we will not be able to secure an increase in spending unless we can increase public support for development. Those of us who have been committed to development have to concede that we have been complacent in thinking that that support would automatically be there, and that people would see good for what it is. That is not the case. As I think most Members would recognise from their mailbags, when this change was made there was very little public reaction.

• 30 Oct 2025 · Sudan: Protection of Civilians · Hansard source

  More

  I thank you for granting this urgent question, Mr Speaker, as you have done with a number of others, but this important issue should not have to come to the Floor of the House by way of an urgent question. The Government must be more proactive. The Minister for Africa gave a commitment to the International Development Committee that they would be more proactive during this Parliament, and I hope that that commitment will be honoured. Will the Minister set out more fully what discussions there have been with the UAE? Not only are there concerns about the use of weapons, but it is clear that the UAE has significant influence over the RSF and is a key player. It is stated by the Government that we have influence with the UAE, so are we using that influence to ensure that it uses its influence with the RSF?

• 14 Oct 2025 · Middle East · Hansard source

  More

  I very much welcome the release of the hostages and what the Prime Minister said about aid. However, flooding Gaza with aid is not an end in itself; this is about its distribution to those who need it most. What reassurances can he give the House that gangsters and criminal gangs will not play any part as intermediaries in the distribution of that aid?

• 2 Sept 2025 · The Battle of Britain · Hansard source

  More

  The Dumfriesshire town of Moffat, which I have the privilege of representing and of living in, has a close association with a number of famous people. But few of our notable local sons or daughters had such a profound influence on the future of the United Kingdom as Hugh Dowding, who was born on 24 April 1882 and whose leadership of RAF Fighter Command during the battle of Britain was decisive, as we heard from my right hon. Friend the Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith), in defending the nation from both air attack and invasion by Hitler’s Nazi armies. It was during those summer and early autumn months of 1940 that the struggle for what was literally the survival of our nation was fought and ultimately decided. Central to that fight were the character, leadership and effective tactics of Air Vice-Marshal Hugh Dowding. The later Lord Dowding was not a flamboyant man. He was pragmatic, and a believer in meticulous planning. Having served during world war one and thereafter joined the RAF, he made his mark during the 1930s as a member of the Air Council for Supply and Research, as a firm believer that research and development was essential. He argued for adequate funding for research, knowing that the days of the biplane were numbered, and pushed for development of faster, advanced fighter aircraft. This initiative is largely credited with the development of the legendary Hurricane and Spitfire aircraft, which were ordered into production in 1934, and which would go on to play such an iconic and pivotal role in the Battle of Britain. Dowding showed enormous interest in emerging technology connected to the detection of enemy aircraft, and threw his support behind radio direction finding equipment, which again was central to victory in the skies over Britain in 1940. The foresight and determination to match emerging advanced aircraft and technologies with new, effective tactics led to the creation of what would become known as the Dowding system, which the hon. Member for Tewkesbury referenced in his opening remarks. That was an innovative air defence network, which integrated radar stations, ground observers and a centralised command structure. For the first time in history, an air force could see incoming attacks, track them in real time, and direct interception with precision. The new system meant that Britain, with its smaller number of aircraft, could resist the numerically far superior Luftwaffe, leaving German pilots often astonished at how swiftly RAF pilots appeared, seemingly out of nowhere, to disrupt their formations. However, Dowding’s enthusiasm for new equipment, technologies and tactics was matched by an equally important human quality: his commitment to the principle that preserving trained men was as vital as preserving machines. He rotated squadrons to rest them; made full use, as we have heard, of pilots from across the Commonwealth, occupied Europe and even the United States; and was deeply moved by the sacrifice of his young airmen. Behind what was undoubtedly a reserved demeanour, he was deeply concerned for the wellbeing of his pilots and all his men, even speaking in later years of feeling their presence after death.

• 2 Sept 2025 · The Battle of Britain · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree with my right hon. Friend. Dowding was someone who valued the trained individual and who really stood up for his men. From a number of excellent contributions we have heard Churchill’s assessment of the battle of Britain, in which he paid tribute to the courage of the RAF fighter pilots whose defence of our skies delivered both victory and the survival of our country. However, it is perhaps the more unvarnished estimation of an opposing protagonist that pays the most compelling tribute to Dowding. Following the battle of Britain, Field Marshal Gerd von Rundstedt commanded German forces in the west and had been involved in planning the invasion of Britain which was ultimately cancelled after the battle of Britain. During interrogation by the allies, the Field Marshal was asked at what point during the course of the war he had seen the tide turning against Germany—was it Stalingrad, Leningrad or El Alamein? “Oh no,” replied von Rundstedt, “it was the Battle of Britain.” That was the first time he realised that the Nazis were not invincible. That shattering of progress towards what was seemingly an inevitable Nazi victory was down to the courage of the young pilots who fought and died in the skies over Britain in 1940, and their memory must always be honoured; but the vital contribution made by the son of a schoolmaster from Moffat should also be remembered. The quiet determination of Hugh Dowding, which gave those pilots the tools, the system and the strategy to succeed, was central to winning the battle of Britain and ensuring the survival of a nation and the freedom and liberty we enjoy today.

• 21 Jul 2025 · Middle East · Hansard source

  More

  Everybody condemns the deaths as people queue for aid, but this aid system that was enforced is only possible because of the support of the United States in its delivery—so what is the Foreign Secretary doing to persuade the United States that this is not the way to deliver aid into Gaza?

• 21 Jul 2025 · Victory over Japan: 80th Anniversary · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree, which is why this debate is so important. Many of those men did not feel able to speak about their experience, or found when they returned to the UK that the public wanted to move on, now that the war was over. It is incumbent on us to relay these experiences, which is why I want to tell Jock’s story tonight. Red Cross parcels rarely arrived in the camp, and dysentery, beriberi and malaria ravaged the prisoners. Somehow, Jock managed to stay alive, and he became a beacon of hope for other prisoners as, in the dark nights, he sang a song called the “Dumfriesshire Foxhounds”, a tune that lifted spirits and became so well known that even the Gurkhas and Australians joined in. Jock never gave in to bitterness, but the scars he carried—both physical and emotional—never truly healed. When he returned to Lockerbie, he embraced his family and the life he had left behind, becoming a major part of the annual Lockerbie gala. He shared his stories not to gain sympathy, but to honour truth and bear witness. He spoke of the Gurkhas—the “bravest little men”, who moved like ghosts in the jungle. He never forgot the cruel warnings prisoners were given, after being forced to dig potentially their own burial pit, that if the Americans came, the prisoners would all be burned alive, as he had seen happen to Gurkhas in Singapore. Let us take this opportunity to remember not just what Jock and his fellow prisoners of war endured, but what they stood for: duty, dignity and decency. We owe Jock—a man who, despite everything, found the strength to go on—and the men and women like him, more than monuments. Let us not allow the fading of photographs or the yellowing of old newspaper clippings to erase stories like his. Let us speak them aloud, share them and learn from them. When the last witnesses are gone, all that remains is what we choose to remember.

• 21 Jul 2025 · Victory over Japan: 80th Anniversary · Hansard source

  More

  Last weekend I met my constituent Margaret Barbour, of Rosefield farm near Annan, to hear about the experience of her father, Sergeant Major Jock Wylie, and to look through the letters, paperwork and photographs that she has kept. A riding instructor in the Lanarkshire Yeomanry Territorials, Jock was deployed in 1940 to the far east. By 1942, after the fall of Singapore, he was taken prisoner by the Japanese. Thus began three years and eight months of unimaginable suffering. Jock was not a “guest” of the Imperial Nippon Army, as their propaganda called it, but their slave. Jock spent time in Changi prison in Singapore before being sent to the notorious Kinkaseki jungle camp on Formosa—now known as Taiwan. Hundreds of Jock’s fellow prisoners died on that journey. There, along with hundreds of others, he was forced to work in copper mines in horrific conditions, often up to 18 hours a day. Starved, beaten and stripped of dignity, men were tied to stakes under a burning sun, given salted rice or left in bamboo sweat boxes without water. Every day they were forced to take a walk past prisoners who had been beheaded for alleged misdemeanours and had their heads placed on poles, with their full military headgear still worn as the flesh around it decayed. Jock and his colleagues were reduced to skin and bone. He was over 12 stone when captured, and barely 6 stone when released. The first person to see him at the local railway station on his return burst into tears at the sight of him.