Graeme Downie MP: speeches 2026

Speeches

• 2 Jun 2026 · Preparedness for National Emergencies · Hansard source

  More

  I am about to go on to that point; I will mention the need for resilience to be across Departments and involve the public. The impact of these events is often not immediately dramatic but gradual, cumulative and enduring. One crisis flows into another, as I am sure Ministers feel every day. We must think of preparedness as being not just for an event but for a different type of world altogether. In that context, I refer to article 3 of the North Atlantic treaty, which is often overlooked but is highly relevant. It puts a duty on nations to maintain and develop their capacity to resist attack through continuous and effective self-help and mutual aid. Article 3 refers to an armed attack, but I believe that in the unstable world we live in we should read that in the broadest possible terms. Attacks no longer happen instantaneously, as they did when NATO was created, and neither do they come just from other states.

• 2 Jun 2026 · Preparedness for National Emergencies · Hansard source

  More

  I could not agree more. A lot of planning had gone into severe weather events in Fife over the years, but it had never been tested. A lot of it was out of date, and staff had moved on. For example, in High Valleyfield, a former coal-mining village, there was an almost 10-year-old resilience plan that said that the local community centre would be opened. The community knew about the plan, but the council had totally forgotten about it. They did not even know who had the keys for the community centre, so the community figured it out for themselves. Broader lessons were also highlighted during that event, such as vulnerable customer data not being shared, confusion about support for care homes, a lack of generators, limited logistical capacity to deploy that provision, and access to temporary accommodation. Those are very practical failings, but they had very real consequences. The challenges we face now are broad and evolving—cyber-attacks, infrastructure sabotage, supply chain disruption, hybrid threats from hostile states, climate-related events and health and bio-security emergencies.

• 2 Jun 2026 · Preparedness for National Emergencies · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree; that is a point I will come to later. We must engage with the public if we want their permission to plan for resilience. Article 3 tells us that preparedness must be constant and not confined to defence Departments. It must be collective, but it requires active participation across the system. I would be grateful if the Minister picked up on how resilience is being embedded across Departments in the areas of threat highlighted by the national security strategy.

• 2 Jun 2026 · Preparedness for National Emergencies · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is absolutely correct: we need to ensure that we are preparing for all these eventualities, regardless of what causes them—I believe that individual case was caused by one driver shortage. The need to plan and have contingencies in place is vital.

• 2 Jun 2026 · Preparedness for National Emergencies · Hansard source

  More

  As ever, I agree with the hon. Gentleman—I always agree with his interventions, particularly when they are made so well. There is a need to make sure that we break outside of the M25, frankly, when we talk about resilience. We also need to look seriously at the resilience of our critical national infrastructure. What is striking about many of the risks we now face is that they do not require a full-scale conflict. They can arise from hybrid threats, as my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow South (Gordon McKee) mentioned: those are much below the threshold of war but are capable of causing real and widespread disruption. In a recent discussion with senior officials about the threat of Chinese-manufactured cellular internet of things modules, in my role as chair of the Coalition on Secure Technology, it was suggested to me that because the threat from such modules was theoretical—even though it was acknowledged that it was clearly feasible and would have a significant impact—there might be no need to prepare for it. Most risks are theoretical until they are very real, and the public then wonder why we were not prepared. I ask the Minister to specifically say what conversations he is having about the threat of cellular modules to the UK. Which Departments have been involved in those discussions? I move on to our energy system—a key and particularly sensitive part of our infrastructure. We have seen how Vladimir Putin has used energy as a weapon against ordinary Ukrainian people, and he would be more than willing to do the same to British people as well. Without reliable energy, hospitals cannot function, communication systems begin to fail and supply chains break down. The Energy Security and Net Zero Committee, which I am a member of, will hold an evidence session on this very topic tomorrow. I have raised the issue with Defence Ministers before, but I believe that there are areas where we lack clarity on the legal position when it comes to hybrid attacks on our offshore infrastructure. I would welcome the Minister’s thoughts on what role the Cabinet Office can play in resolving that, as there seems to be an unclear boundary between the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero and the Ministry of Defence in particular. I turn to the point made by the hon. Member for Strangford about the importance of the devolved Administrations. Emergencies are experienced locally, as I highlighted at the beginning—they are managed locally, and resilience must be built locally. Too often, the UK’s national security infrastructure can feel as though it is concentrated within the M25 and shaped in central Government rather than fully embedded across all parts of the United Kingdom. I do not believe that that is intended, but it does create a risk: if preparedness is genuinely to be a whole-of-society effort, it must extend beyond Whitehall. In those areas, security, advice and expertise do not always flow consistently to devolved Administrations and local partners. At the same time, those Administrations do not deal with national security issues with the same regularity as central Government. That creates a potential blind spot—due not to a lack of commitment, but the structure of the system. It is exactly the kind of gap that hostile actors could seek to exploit. I hope the Minister will address what more can be done to ensure that security advice and capability are fully embedded across the devolved Administrations and local authorities, and how we can ensure resilience is genuinely UK-wide, rather than only inside central Government. Finally, I turn to a topic that is becoming a bit of a hobby horse of mine: the requirement to trust the public when we are developing our national security and resilience. Preparedness cannot be delivered by the Government alone; it must involve the public.

• 2 Jun 2026 · Preparedness for National Emergencies · Hansard source

  More

  I am sorry to hear that the hon. Lady’s constituents are having that issue; that is terrible. Again, it is why we must make sure that we are preparing for all different types of resilience. That must be at the forefront of the minds of the public and different levels of Government when we consider the different challenges that we face, whether internal or external and whether beyond our control or very much within our control, as it sounds that example was. The national security strategy tells us that the assumptions underpinning UK security are being challenged to an unprecedented degree. We must not hide from the public the scale or nature of the threats that we face. We must trust people with information that we might previously have chosen to withhold and we should worry less about causing alarm and more about appearing to hide the truth. If the public do not feel and understand that, they will not support and force us to carry out the investment and actions required to address the challenges. Any Government who have not undertaken that work with the public at its heart will have very large political price to pay. I have not even had time in this speech to touch on the threat to the public and the need to prepare for ongoing misinformation. If we lose trust with the public, resilience will be weakened. Preparedness for national emergencies is not a single policy or programme; it is a system—more than that, it is a mindset. When the next crisis comes, and it will, the question will not be whether plans existed on paper. It will be whether, on the ground, the Government did enough to prepare and make sure that our communities were ready.

• 2 Jun 2026 · Preparedness for National Emergencies · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered preparedness for national emergencies. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Barker, and I am grateful to colleagues for coming to this important debate. As the Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy has set out, the assumptions underpinning UK security are being challenged to an unprecedented degree in what it describes as “an era of radical uncertainty”. This is not a distant or theoretical challenge; it is happening now, and it is shaping the lives of our constituents already. We are rightly beginning to recognise that resilience at home—across our infrastructure, our communities and our economy—is vital. In opening this debate, I want to do four things: reflect on a recent example of where preparedness fell short; set out the changing nature of the threats we face; address the need for stronger co-ordination across Government; and reflect on the role of the public. During Storm Éowyn in January 2025, thousands of homes across my constituency lost power, many for several days. That came during a period of cold weather, leaving people without heating, electricity and, in some cases, access to essential medical equipment. People did not know where to turn, but they were receiving inconsistent information and had very little clarity on when the situation would improve. What stood out to me was not a lack of commitment, as energy companies, emergency services, local authorities and community organisations worked tirelessly. What it showed was that when the system came under real strain, the weaknesses were clear. Preparedness cannot be about having plans on paper; it must be about whether those plans work when they are actually needed.

• 2 Jun 2026 · Deep Geothermal Energy · Hansard source

  More

  West Fife has huge potential for geothermal. In particular, the Comrie colliery development, at a former mining site, is now being regenerated to create leisure facilities, housing and other mixed-use development. It has been exploring the possibility of using deep geothermal from the former mine. Will the Minister meet me to discuss this in more detail, and perhaps come to visit the site to see its huge potential?

• 21 May 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T7. I recently met two local businesses that have been hammered by the Scottish Government’s changes to business rates—Osborne Motors has seen its business rates increase from £185 a month to £695 a month, and Big Sky Campers in Rosyth has seen an incredible 470% rise from £180 a month to £1,025 a month—putting both businesses at risk. Does the Minister agree that those are ridiculous rises for small businesses to cope with? Will he assure me that he will do everything in his power to—

• 20 May 2026 · Defence Readiness · Hansard source

  More

  Very quickly.

• 20 May 2026 · Defence Readiness · Hansard source

  More

  I totally agree with my hon. Friend that if we are to have an effective deterrent in the Baltics, it must be operationally ready to fight the threat that he identifies, not just look good on paper. I will move on to the role of information and how we are informing the British public of the threat. I have made the point before that we must trust the British people with more information about the threat that they face, whether that is in relation to cyber-security or subsea cables and energy infrastructure. Unless the British people fully understand the threat that they face, they will not put the necessary pressure on Government or give us licence to act more quickly, as all of us in the House know we must, to defend ourselves. I believe that information breeds teamwork and togetherness, and a lack or a void of information creates speculation and misinformation from our enemies—and, indeed, from some in this House. We must ensure that the British people are the ones keeping us on our toes, and that we are defending them in the way that we should. I point to the recent cyber-attacks on Jaguar Land Rover and the retail sector, as have been mentioned. These are all threats that the UK is facing, and we must be much more up front, straightforward and trusting with the British people about that information. I move on to talk about some of the priorities for the long-term defence of the United Kingdom, which I am afraid requires uttering the initials DIP. I do not want to revisit the arguments that we have already had, but I urge Ministers to ensure that the defence investment plan looks at long-term planning as well. When the document is published, we should not focus only on some of the more immediate things. In my constituency, we are looking at the work that needs to be done around our submarine fleet, as was also mentioned by the right hon. Member for South West Wiltshire (Dr Murrison). For example, work needs to be done on contingent docking facilities at Rosyth to ensure that a lack of infrastructure does not delay or curtail the operation of Dreadnought-class submarines in the future. I know that Defence Ministers are aware of the threat that poses. When we get to that position, Dreadnought must be able to enter service immediately and fully, taking the pressure off Vanguard.

• 20 May 2026 · Defence Readiness · Hansard source

  More

  It is a privilege to follow the hon. Member for South Shropshire (Stuart Anderson) in what has been a constructive debate with a lot of cross-party consensus. I welcome the Minister’s speech about the measures that were included in the King’s Speech, such as the Armed Forces Bill and the commitment to support drone testing, which is something that—as we have heard from Members across the House—is very much required. I will make three points in my speech, which are about defence priorities, the threats that we face, and the need for long-term thinking. We heard from the right hon. Member for Wetherby and Easingwold (Sir Alec Shelbrooke), who is no longer in his place, about the need for the British people to understand the threats that this country faces and what warfare looks like in a modern context. I am one of those who believes we are already in a conflict with Russia and should take action along those lines; indeed, I believe that in the High North, not only are we in that conflict but we are a frontline nation. Just this week, we have seen the threat we face in reports of Russian submarines in the north Atlantic and attacks on energy infrastructure, and indeed the threat to subsea cables. Those are things that I see and hear about all the time as chair of the all-party parliamentary group on Estonia. I was privileged to visit Estonia earlier this year to see some of the work it is doing to prepare not only its military, but its society. This week, there was an article in Foreign Policy by Franz-Stefan Gady that I highly recommend everyone reads. It was regarding the threats and weaknesses that NATO faces, not only on the military front but on political decision making. In that article, Mr Gady describes how he defeated NATO while playing a war game. It was not actually about military strength; it was about the need for quick decision making. He describes the UK forces in Estonia as well as other NATO forces in Lithuania. When the Secretary of State sums up, will he provide some reassurance about Cabrit and the fantastic British forces in Estonia, the speed of their response, and the operational decision making that is in place to make sure we are not delayed by political stasis in the event of Russian aggression through hybrid warfare? Russia’s experience in Ukraine indicates that once Russia controls the battlefield, that makes a counter-attack by NATO or anyone else very hard.

• 20 May 2026 · Defence Readiness · Hansard source

  More

  I could not agree more with my hon. Friend. We must bring the British people with us on this journey and trust them with that information. Only by moving together as a country can we defend ourselves against the threats we face.

• 20 May 2026 · Defence Readiness · Hansard source

  More

  I know how closely my hon. Friend worked with Aeralis to ensure that it was considered. Having visited RAF Valley earlier this year, I saw how pressing the need was to replace the Hawk as a trainer aircraft—and it is a need that must be met quickly. I am aware that I have taken more interventions than other Members, so I apologise Madam Deputy Speaker. I urge Ministers to consider, in the DIP and more generally, the submarine recycling project, which the Minister for Defence Procurement is well aware of. As submarines continue through, we need to ensure that we have the space to manage and recycle them effectively and safely. At Rosyth, the HMS Swiftsure pilot project is coming to an end, which has seen the dismantling of one submarine. That steel has been recycled and used in the Dreadnought programme, which is an incredible way of ensuring that we are reusing materials—holding down costs and securing hundreds of jobs in my constituency. It is those kinds of projects that we must focus on for defence. We must ensure that we are aware of the threats we face, that we inform the British people about them, and that we plan for the long term so that this country remains safe.

• 24 Mar 2026 · Energy Bills: Scotland · Hansard source

  More

  Does the Minister agree one reason we need to see lower energy bills in Scotland—and that has been blocked—is the SNP’s ideological objection to nuclear power? I recently received a written answer from the Minister for Energy regarding a study by GB Energy to assess Scotland’s full potential for nuclear power. Will the Minister work with his colleagues to ensure that that analysis is published as quickly as possible so that the people of Scotland can see exactly how much we are missing out on thanks to the SNP’s ideological objection to nuclear power, and how much people are suffering as a result?

• 24 Mar 2026 · Oil and Gas · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman talks about the North sea industry and ideology. What were his views when his Government were in coalition with the Green party, which wilfully wanted to destroy those jobs immediately overnight because of ideology? Did he support that Government coalition?

• 18 Mar 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  T6. Last week I met pupils from Pittencrieff primary school, Dollar academy and Queen Anne high school in my constituency to talk about how to keep them safe online. They were very much in favour of some restrictions to make sure that they were safe on social media but were very cautious of age-based bans. Will the Secretary of State ensure that the consultation coming forward is reflective of what young people say and that it fits their daily lives?

• 16 Mar 2026 · Heating Oil Support · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for his statement and for the very quick action taken by this Government. He mentioned his hope that the Scottish Government will act as quickly as this Government have to pass on these savings to people who use heating oil. Will he ensure that we get more than just hope, as we want an assurance that the SNP Government will not fail my constituents, as they have done so many times before? Will he keep up the pressure on the SNP to deliver what it should be delivering for my constituents and others?

• 16 Mar 2026 · Strait of Hormuz · Hansard source

  More

  Following on from the question by the right hon. Member for New Forest East (Sir Julian Lewis), what discussions is the Foreign Secretary having in the Gulf on the future viability of convoys, and on other actions? Can the Minister assure me and the House that plans will be put in place for such convoys, when it is safe to do so?

• 5 Mar 2026 · Energy Markets · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Secretary of State for his very clear and measured statement. May I ask him about two points? First, if we see rises in bills in forthcoming months, can we ensure that the blame is placed firmly where it should be—on the actions of the Iranian Government in attacking and threatening the strait of Hormuz? Secondly, in the Energy Security and Net Zero Committee meeting yesterday, we heard from the chief executive of Ofgem that a prolonged period of closure of the strait of Hormuz would create an upward pressure on prices. He indicated during that evidence session that the market anticipated that it could manage a period of roughly two weeks. As the conflict continues to develop, does the Secretary of State have any sense of what might be meant by a “prolonged period of time” that would create upward pressure? Will he ensure that the Committee and the House are kept informed?

• 4 Mar 2026 · NATO and the High Arctic · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for leading a debate on one of the most important security and defence issues that we face. I was in Estonia at the start of January, in my role as chair of the all-party parliamentary group on Estonia. I met members of its military, as well as the British troops in Estonia, to talk about the importance of the High North and Arctic. Does he agree that partnerships such as the joint expeditionary force and other work being done in the area are vital to the protection of the undersea cables that he correctly highlighted? It is important that we look for those effective models to defend the High North and the Arctic.

• 3 Mar 2026 · Spring Forecast · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Chancellor for acknowledging the incredible contribution of the workforce at Rosyth to the roll-out of the Type 31 frigate last week. I also thank her for the ongoing investment in energy infrastructure, particularly as we see increasing challenges in the middle east coming towards energy bills. May I ask her to ensure, as she has up to now, that we keep an eye on that situation involving energy bills and, whenever possible, that we invest both for our future energy security and to help people in the short term when that is necessary?

• 2 Mar 2026 · Middle East · Hansard source

  More

  Iranian action in the strait of Hormuz and the attacks on energy infrastructure risk driving up energy prices here in the UK. Will the Prime Minister, in the coming days and weeks, make it clear that the blame for any rising energy prices lies with Iran? Will he also hold all possible discussions to support people in this country, including in my constituency, with any ensuing rising bills?

• 3 Feb 2026 · Town and City Centre Safety · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Dowd. Last Friday I was at a roundtable with local businesses, creative organisations and city centre groups in Dunfermline to discuss the safety of the town centre and how we can make Dunfermline a prosperous city in the future. What struck me was the unanimity of experience: people love their city and are committed to its future, but they feel that too much of the burden of improvement is falling on them, rather than being supported by different levels of Government. Those at the roundtable spoke about day-to-day frustrations that shape how safe a city feels: graffiti that is not cleaned; broken cobbles left unrepaired; street furniture that has seen better days, and a lack of accessible parking, which makes the city centre more difficult for disabled residents. I also heard examples of vandalism and shop break-ins not being meaningfully followed up. Here we come to one of the key responsibilities devolved to the SNP Scottish Government: policing. While frontline officers in Dunfermline and across Fife work incredibly hard, they are operating under sustained pressure from years of cuts, centralisation and under-investment. Dunfermline, with its heritage and potential future, has not received the kind of long-term planning and investment that it deserves from the Government at Holyrood, and that is also true of wider investment in Scotland’s towns and cities. What was striking at the roundtable, however, was a sense of optimism—from places such as Café Wynd, Veneno Music Store and Caledonian Craft Beer Merchant, there was a clear pride in what Dunfermline has to offer. While many of the policy levers for direct intervention in the future success of Dunfermline lie in Holyrood, there are actions that the UK Government could and should take. I hope the UK Government will consider Dunfermline as a pilot area for trialling any kind of tax incentives, which small businesses are calling for to support creation and innovation in town centres. We need a shared vision between the UK and Scottish Governments, Fife council and local businesses to deliver that future. Dunfermline has talent, ambition and enormous potential, and with the right support across both Scotland’s Governments, and a clear, shared and deliverable vision, it can become a leading example of how to build a safe, thriving and modern city centre in the 21st century.

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

  More

  Dunfermline is both Scotland’s ancient capital and its newest city, and we are starting to plan for what Dunfermline can become and how it can truly fulfil its potential. I have launched a survey to ensure that local people have a great say in that, and can give me their ideas about what the city should be. Will the Leader of the House visit Dunfermline to see for himself how fantastic it is? Will he allow a debate in Government time on the importance of our towns and smaller cities across Scotland and the UK?