Graham Leadbitter MP: speeches

Speeches

• 24 Jun 2026 · North Sea Oil and Gas · Hansard source

  More

  That is not the reason for my intervention. If there is such a drive to get investment and renewables in Scotland—there is some, though it is not nearly fast enough—why did it take two years to make a decision about Ardersier? After two years, the rug was pulled from underneath that with a simple no. If that was the decision the Government were going to come to, surely it could have been made sooner, and the project could have moved on and had some investment. That has the potential for 1,500 jobs on site and a further 4,500 in the supply chain.

• 24 Jun 2026 · North Sea Oil and Gas · Hansard source

  More

  The SNP backs new licences with the normal environmental assessments and everything that goes with that, which, the hon. Lady will understand, is part of the regulatory process that the previous Conservative Government also followed. Every Government would have an appropriate regulatory and licensing regime. The roads infrastructure, the foundations of installations, the fuels currently relied on by vessels transporting offshore wind towers and turbines, and even composite turbine blades rely heavily on oil and gas production. More significantly, the skills required to deliver the renewables revolution that will be at the heart of Scotland’s industrial economy are the same skills currently utilised in oil and gas. Those who wish to force the decline of the North sea without creating renewable jobs will do to the oil and gas communities what the Tories under Thatcher did to our coal and steel communities. That would be unforgivable.

• 24 Jun 2026 · North Sea Oil and Gas · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your leadership today, Ms Furniss. I commend the hon. Member for Bromsgrove (Bradley Thomas) for securing this important debate. The North sea oil and gas sector is of critical importance for the many of my constituents who work in the sector. Businesses across the north and north-east of Scotland—and far beyond—either directly operate facilities or provide specialist services and a very substantial supply chain. The oil and gas industry lost 70,000 jobs under the previous Conservative Government, and it continues to lose them under the current Labour Government. It is a complex challenge, and there are far too many people who, like the Tories, are backing full-scale oil and gas extraction with little to no focus on renewables or, like Labour, have a full-on focus on renewables while forcing the decline of the oil and gas sector and ongoing mass job losses. Neither of those extreme positions provides a solution to the challenge. While we must strive to substantially reduce our reliance on fossil fuels, there will still be a need to use oil and gas for many years to come.

• 24 Jun 2026 · North Sea Oil and Gas · Hansard source

  More

  I think that the hon. Gentleman is not keeping up with the current debate because the question was about the SNP’s policy. The strategy will be published in due course. Those who believe that we should drill, drill, drill with little to no investment in the renewables transition are simply pushing the cliff edge further away without dealing with the cliff edge itself. That would also be unforgivable. The industry is clear that it needs the Government to protect oil and gas jobs while building up the renewables sector to transfer those jobs to—a focus not on one or the other, but on a transition from one to the other. It is abundantly clear that neither the Tories nor Labour has a serious focus on that transition. A new report out from the Energy Transition Institute at Robert Gordon University—a highly respected Aberdeen institute—makes for stark reading. The report predicts a further 18,000 job losses in the north-east of Scotland by 2035—1,600 jobs every single year. Crucially, the report then points to the huge benefits that can be achieved from a strong transition to renewables. The report’s author states: “That is not a marginal advantage. It is a structural head start that few other regions in the UK or Europe can match.” He goes on to say: “The priority must be to prevent these losses in the first place, not simply to manage the consequences after the fact.” What this needs now is the investment, policy, alignment and co-ordination to match. That is really simple. Scotland has enormous opportunity to reindustrialise with renewable energy technologies, but to do so requires existing North sea jobs to be protected, or the loss of those vital skills will stall that transition to renewables. There is a so-called “Goldilocks zone”, where growth in renewable jobs more than matches reductions in oil and gas jobs, but crucially, only if the transition is embraced and the oil and gas sector is protected through that transition. Other scenarios have devastating consequences for jobs and the people and communities of north-east Scotland. Pragmatism and pace must be the watchwords on energy policy if we are to make the most of this enormous renewables opportunity in front of us and ensure a future for the workers of the north-east. It is abundantly clear that mass job losses under the Tories and the undermining of those vital jobs by Labour are leading to economic and social pain across the north-east of Scotland. The people best placed to support the transition in Scotland and protect jobs and communities are the people who live and work in Scotland. That is why Scotland must have the full powers and control of energy policy that come with independence.

• 21 May 2026 · Costs for Motorists · Hansard source

  More

  Scotland is an energy superpower, so it is particularly galling for constituents and businesses in my constituency, which is a two and a half hour drive end to end, and where road vehicles are an absolute necessity to conduct daily life, to face the prices they currently face. Will the Government commit to using the hundreds of millions of pounds of extra tax revenue from VAT for a VAT freeze for the duration of the current crisis?

• 20 May 2026 · Defence Readiness · Hansard source

  More

  Less than two weeks ago, the SNP secured a landslide, record-breaking Scottish election victory, including the election of two constituency MSPs who have left this place for Scotland’s Parliament. I know that regardless of political difference, there is a significant level of respect across the parties for their contributions in this Chamber and to the wider work of Parliament. That experience will stand them in good stead for what lies ahead in Holyrood. Much more respect for Scottish voters is required from the UK Government. While the Labour Government here in Westminster have floundered month after month, failing to address the cost of living crisis affecting all my constituents, the SNP has offered a message of hope for what Scotland can and should be, with its vast natural resources, its strategically important geographical position in the world, and the incredible talents of its people. It is particularly notable that in Scotland, support for independence is now consistently polling above 50%, and that Scotland’s voters have elected a significant majority of MSPs who support independence—more than ever before—with a clear mandate from the Scottish electorate to pursue an independence referendum. The theme for today’s King’s Speech debate is defence readiness. Many Members will focus on defence spend, defence procurement, national security threats and other direct defence issues. I agree with many of the points that have been made by hon. Members in the debate this afternoon; many of them were extremely well made. However, I contend that for around 4,500 personnel across three significant bases in my constituency and probably the same number again in family members; around 1,000 permanent defence contractors and their families; and an estimated 12,000 veterans and their families—a total of over 30,000 people with a defence connection—there are many issues that contribute to defence readiness. I turn first to the cost of living crisis. Like every other resident in Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey, our defence community are struggling to cover bills and are having to cope with more month than there is money. Defence personnel posted to the north of Scotland from elsewhere in the UK will experience an amazing place to live and work, but they will also experience among the highest energy prices in Europe, caused by a regulatory system that is hugely discriminatory to the north of Scotland. Labour MPs promised that people would see a £300 reduction in energy bills, but people there are projected to see a more than £400-a-year increase. There is little to nothing in the King’s Speech that seeks to reverse that £700-plus difference from Labour’s manifesto promise or that would remove the discrimination faced by households and businesses in the north of Scotland—discrimination that has gone on for decades, with no action to address it by the Conservatives, the Liberal Democrats and now Labour. Up until yesterday, there was no plan from the Westminster Government to address growing food costs—something that the SNP is tackling head-on. Seemingly, the Chancellor is now looking to do similar, but, critically, not in a compulsory way. I very much welcome the Government’s late acceptance of the SNP’s wisdom in this matter, but if the Government are going to do it, I strongly urge them to do it properly. There is no plan to cut fuel costs. There has been a promise not to increase tax further, but there is no plan to reduce it. In constituencies like mine, where car use is necessary for accessing basic services and education, leisure and employment opportunities, that is especially disappointing. People in the north of Scotland deserve better than to be punished by Westminster just for living where they live. Defence personnel, who are often hundreds of miles from their family, also deserve better than having to incur substantial costs when they drive home. When it comes to energy and net zero, a sector that has always been a strong destination for retiring forces personnel, and which is very much suited to the skillsets of many who come from a military background, the current Government are intent on repeating the mistakes of the past by accelerating the decline of one sector, in this case oil and gas, at a rate that does not match either demand changes or the growth of the renewables sector. That is simply Thatcherism all over again, which saw the tearing apart of coal and steel communities in Scotland. It is also a betrayal of North sea workers and those in the vast supply chain associated with those jobs, from skilled parts manufacturing jobs to the hospitality staff across the north of Scotland—taxi drivers, cafés and corner shops—who are seeing their revenues eroded to an unsustainable level. The Government’s policies are eroding the opportunities available to defence personnel, too, and the Conservatives are no better. Their answer is simply to push the cliff edge further away, rather than embrace a managed transition, which is what the industry wants to see. Neither of those scenarios is acceptable to Scotland or to my constituents. That brings me back to the theme of today: defence readiness. It is not attractive for people to join the military when jobs and opportunity are being eroded around key bases. That stifles transition opportunities for personnel leaving the services and erodes the vitality of the communities of which those bases are an integral part. Defence spending needs to be significantly increased, we need a better offer for new military personnel, and we absolutely need much stronger defence resilience in a more challenging world—where dictators such as Putin are prepared to threaten peace on a shocking scale and threaten the infrastructure that is critical to our economic and social wellbeing. At the heart of this issue are the defence communities that are embedded in their wider communities. Those defence communities have the same aspirations, and want the same opportunities for themselves, as their surrounding communities and regions. Getting these fundamentals right supports that bigger community, aids recruitment and retention in our armed forces, and provides the opportunities that our veterans deserve when they exit service.

• 20 May 2026 · Banking Hubs · Hansard source

  More

  Absolutely. That consistency is vital, but flexibility within the criteria is also vital. I will come on to that as well. It is frankly hard to stomach that the big high street banks use the argument of increased digital banking to justify local bank closures while building large, centralised banking centres in our cities. Surely the same argument can be applied to push workforce and management out to existing bank branches in local communities and enable that local workforce to carry out tasks on national functions such as mortgage services and business banking using the very same digital technology.

• 20 May 2026 · Banking Hubs · Hansard source

  More

  Absolutely. Again, that goes back to the point I made about people needing a business service and basic business advice without having to travel dozens of miles to access that. Setting up a business is hard at the best of times, and having simple access to somewhere that will answer simple questions is really important. To conclude my 12-minute speech that has now lasted for 20 minutes, banking hubs would make a massive difference to communities like Lossiemouth, Grantown, Aviemore and Nairn, and to the many other communities that Members from across the House have mentioned in the debate. I trust that the Minister will recognise the firm but constructive approach that I and other Members have taken on this important issue.

• 20 May 2026 · Banking Hubs · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree about face to face, particularly for vulnerable people, but also for businesses or maybe somebody who might be thinking about starting up in business. Being able to talk to a community banker who can give them a little bit of early advice about access to basic business services is really helpful.

• 20 May 2026 · Banking Hubs · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree. I am pleased to see the Bill coming forward, as it will provide opportunities to make progress on this important issue. There is also the vital question of community sustainability. The loss of banking services in rural communities makes it harder to attract people to live and work there. It also means the loss of local banking jobs that have long provided access to respected professional jobs and the potential of a career in financial services.

• 20 May 2026 · Banking Hubs · Hansard source

  More

  Absolutely. I am about to talk about the critical services offered by banks through banking hubs, which addresses the hon. Gentleman’s point. Community bankers located within banking hubs can offer much needed savings, loan and mortgage advice. Recently, a local community leader in Grantown made the strong point that basic business support, such as collecting change, depositing and withdrawing cash, transferring money between business accounts, making payments, managing cards, fraud support and money advice and even offering simple advice on how to open a business bank account, can be the difference between a business thriving and a business failing in a rural community. Paying utility bills, depositing cheques and, for local charitable groups, even depositing the proceeds from a coffee morning or a raffle stall at a Highland Games, can make the difference between succeeding or struggling. The golden thread in all of this is that without banking hubs in the areas that need them, current policy is making it harder for people to buy their own homes, to run their own businesses and even to simply access cash in these areas. I am pleased to acknowledge the Government’s announcement last week of an independent access to cash review, which will report in October 2026. I would have liked that work to have been done and concluded by now, but now it is in place I do not want to be churlish or grumpy about it. I know that those engaged in that review will be paying close attention to debates like this. I am sure that they will have noted the number of hon. Members from all political parties who are contributing to this debate and making their views and those of their communities known on this important issue. It is important that the regulators and the independent reviewer hear that breadth of opinion, because that will inform the response to the review.

• 20 May 2026 · Banking Hubs · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Gentleman for that. After the election, the Government said they were working closely with industry to roll out 350 banking hubs across the UK, which is very welcome, and that the banking sector was committed to deliver those hubs by the end of this Parliament. But that is not far off just one for every two constituencies, and we need more and much better targets than that.

• 20 May 2026 · Banking Hubs · Hansard source

  More

  Absolutely. I turn to the inadequacies in the current framework, and I will try to make some progress. Current criteria include the number of remaining branches, the population size and the retail centre size, which is frankly ridiculous when some communities can be compact while others can have a narrow spread over a greater distance, often constrained by physical landscape and infrastructure features, such as rivers, railway lines, roads and, in some cases such as in my constituency, the foot of a mountain range. Transport distance, public transport links, population vulnerability and existing cash services are also all considered by Link. It is, however, the flexibility of those criteria that is the problem and the lack of cognisance of the wider geographic and population context, especially in areas such as the north of Scotland. Friends in Kinross in Perthshire, while not in my constituency, noted that one criterion their community failed to meet was the retail centre requirements. They are sandwiched between a loch and a motorway, so the town can only realistically expand in two directions, resulting in smaller retail hubs rather than a bigger central area. Surely the answer is not reclaiming the loch or moving the motorway to get support for banking facilities. Equally, the lack of progress on potential banking hubs in Grantown, Lossiemouth, Nairn and Aviemore in my constituency tells me that the current criteria are simply not good enough. Current population criteria ignore the needs of smaller hub towns in rural areas. Bus and train services to even relatively close alternatives still require significant journey planning and, indeed, cost for people who had previously been able to access facilities for free within walking distance. What may seem a relatively short distance can see a bus going off the most direct route into other communities, en route to the destination, and the return journey is not always available immediately on concluding banking transactions. In inclement weather, this process is even less appealing, and in mid-winter it is deeply concerning that elderly people may be waiting for buses in temperatures well below zero. That is very common through the winter months in the Cairngorms area where several of these communities are located. The lack of banking facilities in Lossiemouth, for example, means that many businesses have to rely on services in Elgin, which is five to six miles away. Although that may not sound like a significant distance, travel times, paid parking and the impact of these repeat journeys to Elgin on smaller businesses’ workforces pose severe problems for Lossiemouth-based customers. For the towns of Newtonmore, Kingussie and Aviemore, their last banks have all closed. The closest bank is in Inverness, which is up to an hour’s drive away across a distance of 30 to 45 miles. That is especially concerning as Aviemore is the UK’s principal ski resort, but locals and visitors alike do not have a bank to use. A banking hub would be a great way to boost the local economy, which is reliant on tourism and hospitality—traditionally a more cash reliant part of the economy. For Grantown, a market town, its nearest non-Post Office banking service is now a 30-minute drive away in Forres, on a road with snow gates and snow poles that I can assure Members are necessary on numerous occasions over the winter. A banking hub would reduce journey times, costs and banking uncertainty for residents. In Nairn, another busy town with significant tourism and a population of approaching 10,000 people, which is much higher in the summer with the tourist population added, there are no more banks in town. Alternatives are in Forres and in Inverness, but people cannot reasonably travel to and from those towns on public transport in under two hours, in addition to the time taken to transact their banking business. Finally, I would like to point to an area not related to access to cash but to the other critical services offered by banks through banking hubs.

• 15 Apr 2026 · Cost of Heating Oil · Hansard source

  More

  I will come on to the energy powers that should be devolved, but it is currently the UK Government’s responsibility. Over the years, Scotland has sent over £350 billion to the Treasury from oil and gas activity, yet when it comes to the crunch, all the Treasury can come up with is the equivalent of £35 per household for oil. Yet again, the Scottish Government have had to step in and boost support by more than doubling the fund, for an issue that the UK Government have failed to address properly in the first place. Rural homes and communities in Scotland are being overlooked and ignored. Is the Minister really happy that he is presiding over discrimination that is putting so much financial stress on vulnerable households? Will the Government take urgent measures to increase significantly the support funding? Will they provide support to those reliant on LPG gas for their heating? Will they properly regulate heating oil with a price cap, which I fully support? If the Government are unwilling to take those actions, will they devolve energy powers and budgets to the people of Scotland, so that they can make their own decisions in their own Parliament on these vital and urgent issues?

• 15 Apr 2026 · Economic Growth · Hansard source

  More

  In a Westminster Hall debate on heating oil support this morning, the hon. Member for Na h-Eileanan an Iar (Torcuil Crichton) suggested that the Scottish Government should be supporting businesses with energy costs. I agree that powers over energy should be totally devolved to the Scottish Government—does the Secretary of State agree with that?

• 24 Mar 2026 · Oil and Gas · Hansard source

  More

  No, I will not give way again because I do not have much time. There are many reasons why we need to support oil and gas, not least protecting the workforce and not losing the skills. There are also numerous other areas where the Government are not making decisions quickly enough. On the transmission network’s use of system charges, Government policy has taken 18 to 20 months to come through, and it will be several more months before it is in place. That will be after the start of allocation round 8, which is being accelerated, and many companies in the North sea are saying that they will hold on and wait for AR9 before making an investment decision, because they want certainty. That lack of certainty, pace and pragmatism is preventing those jobs from being created and preventing a just transition. I can apply the same point to Ardersier, which is in my constituency, and the proposal by a Chinese company, Ming Yang, which wants to invest there. I understand that the Government have reasons and things that they need to consider in this matter, but it has been on their desk for 18 months. A decision is needed to either move on to other investors or decide that there is a risk, so that we can mitigate the risk, let them get on with it, create supply chain jobs and have serious, high-skilled, high-paid jobs that will provide a just transition and a serious opportunity for North sea workers. That decision needs to be made sooner rather than later. We experienced an excessive delay in the run-up to decisions on carbon capture, usage and storage; it took forever to get there, and jobs have been lost because of that lost time. Let me turn very quickly to consumer pricing. The Government have been waxing lyrical about price gouging by energy companies at the moment. The Government and previous Governments have been responsible for state-sponsored price gouging in the energy market, with the highest prices for electricity in Scotland. With that, I urge Members to—

• 24 Mar 2026 · Oil and Gas · Hansard source

  More

  I will start with some facts: energy security is national security, global instability is rife, and our closest ally is now, at best, hugely unpredictable, and it is questionable whether it is reliable. When the UK Government should be protecting energy supply, they are instead sacrificing North sea jobs and communities on the altar of ideology. Job losses continue month on month, and the loss of skills is rife. “Just transition” are mere words for the communities affected. For me, this is a repeat of what Thatcher did to Scotland’s mining communities and the steel industry in Motherwell in the ’80s, destroying an industry without proper future planning and transition arrangements. Scottish Labour MPs—indeed, all Labour MPs—should be ashamed of their Government’s actions in that regard. It is utterly shameful.

• 24 Mar 2026 · Oil and Gas · Hansard source

  More

  I think I am here to scrutinise what your Government are doing—that is the job of MPs in the House of Commons. I would also say that Conservative Members are no better on this. Government Members have an ideology of driving towards net zero and clean power, but it appears with no regard for the North sea; Conservative Members have an ideology of protecting oil and gas in the North sea, while getting rid of climate change targets. The industry does not like either of those positions—not the oil and gas sector, and not the renewables sector—and everybody in the Chamber knows that. Those sectors need each other to survive, and they need the skills to transition from one to the other. If we lose skills in the oil and gas sector, we will not develop the renewables sector as quickly as we need to, and those are the facts of the situation. If those skills and jobs are lost, or disappear into other places around the world, such as the Caspian sea or the Gulf of Mexico, they will not easily be brought back.

• 24 Mar 2026 · Oil and Gas · Hansard source

  More

  I supported the coalition at the time because we were gaining plenty of other benefits from it, but I concede that I was not 100% supportive of its position on oil and gas. I suggest that under the current SNP leadership, there is a balanced view of the North sea, and a pragmatic approach to protecting jobs in its oil and gas sectors, while still driving towards renewable jobs and the reindustrialisation of Scotland through the diversification into renewables that we need, recognising that oil and gas will be needed for decades to come.

• 18 Mar 2026 · Fuel Duty · Hansard source

  More

  And the taxation being paid gives people back more services and better services. Things such as the removal of peak rail fares and the freeze on bus fares—the cap on bus fares has been put in place and is being tested in the north of Scotland—all really benefit people. Beyond that, however, more than half of taxpayers in Scotland do not pay more income tax than people do south of the border. That is a fact. I urge the UK Government to consider many of these proposals. They could consider measures on bus fares and peak rail fares, but they also have the power over key taxation levers, including fuel duty. They need to make decisions quickly to give people more certainty and a little bit less risk about where things are going. Some things are not controllable, and I wish the Government did not have to consider them, because they are difficult, but the Government have levers that can make it a bit easier for people, and they should use those levers.

• 18 Mar 2026 · Fuel Duty · Hansard source

  More

  I have always believed that the tax we pay is part of a contract with the state, and that we should consider whether it is reasonable to pay that price for the services we get back. I would also observe that we have to look at tax in the round. Broadly speaking, council tax in Scotland is considerably lower than in the rest of the UK. The tax on the accommodation I use in London is certainly considerably dearer than that on my own property at home, which is larger, and that is pretty much the case throughout Scotland. The cost of living is generally cheaper in Scotland than it is in central London.

• 17 Mar 2026 · Immigration Reforms · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stringer, and I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Perth and Kinross-shire (Pete Wishart) on securing this important debate. Right across my constituency, through the highlands and islands, across Aberdeenshire and right across Scotland, successive Governments continue to fail our communities, our public services and our businesses with immigration policy that bears no scrutiny when it comes to labour requirements. Many Members have talked about the hardships faced by refugees and the impact on their lives, and the humanity or otherwise of our actions. I agree with those sentiments, but I am going to focus on the big impact on employment, and how that impacts the communities in my constituency. Every day in Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey, there are people with care needs that cannot be fully met and businesses that cannot be staffed, not because of lack of budget, but because of lack of labour. “But,” say some, “there are people in the UK who can do these jobs,” but are there, really? In areas like my constituency, much of which is a two-and-a-half-hour drive north of Perth, which itself is an hour north of Edinburgh and five hours north of London—we are talking about somewhere that is 11-plus hours from here—are we really going to drag people away from their families and friends to do these jobs, when there has been and there could be a willing workforce to do them, contribute to our communities and be part of a constructive, progressive and successful whole? People do come by choice and love the places they move to, but their number does not come close to closing the gap between labour demand and labour availability. The fact is that before Brexit there was far more labour available to care and hospitality. Sadly, that has disappeared in broken Brexit Britain. Care providers that do have foreign workers under excessively strict working visa rules are often left with the utterly invidious choice of not fulfilling care needs of vulnerable clients, or breaking visa rules on hours worked in order to do so. They are then punished severely simply for the act of caring, which is a disturbingly dystopian situation. Business leaders across Scotland, in Federation of Small Businesses branches and chambers of commerce, point to labour shortages and the stalling of economic growth as a result of current immigration policy.

• 17 Mar 2026 · Immigration Reforms · Hansard source

  More

  Absolutely. That is just another example of delays in a system that does not work—a system that is not able to process applications or to deal with the legitimate issues that are raised by people within it in a timely and reasonable way. These are people who could be doing jobs, paying taxes and contributing to society, but have restrictions placed on what they can do and how they can live their lives. Scottish Labour says it supports a more bespoke immigration system for Scotland, which would be great if its own Ministers paid any attention to it. The oppressive and stifling immigration rules that were imposed by the previous Conservative Government and are now being copper clad by, of all people, a Labour Government, are deeply damaging to the highlands, Moray and far beyond. Will the Government take responsibility for the harms that they are inflicting on vulnerable citizens whose care needs cannot be met from our current working population, and on those in the hard-pressed hospitality sector who cannot provide the service they wish or grow their businesses to meet demand due to an immigration policy that utterly fails them?

• 4 Mar 2026 · Energy Security and Net Zero: Scotland · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member has already covered the EPL, but it is important to recognise that Scottish Renewables and Offshore Energies UK wrote jointly to the Secretary of State and the Chancellor of the Exchequer expressing their deep concerns about its impact on the transition. It will not be possible to deliver the renewables transition we all want if the North sea is allowed—or even forced—to decline at the rate it is doing, and not enough effort is put into the renewables side and supporting that transition. Does the hon. Member agree that the Government need to address that rapidly? We need pace of decision making and certainty for investors and developers if we are to ensure that we make that transition effectively, which will provide the jobs for the skilled workforce she rightly referred to.

• 3 Mar 2026 · Sustainable Aviation Fuel Bill · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman rightly points to the need for a suite of measures to deliver the Bill’s objectives and the overall reduction in fossil fuel usage by the aviation sector. One of the means of doing that is to massively ramp up green hydrogen production, which will have to happen over a number of years. I am sure that the hon. Member for Falkirk (Euan Stainbank), whom I have seen bobbing, will no doubt point to that. A quick way to kick-start that marketplace and boost sustainable aviation fuel would be to increase the amount of hydrogen that can be injected into the gas grid to 20%. The evidence is there to say that it would work. It would act as a massive kick-start for the industry. Does the hon. Gentleman agree?