Joani Reid MP: speeches 2025

Speeches

• 25 Apr 2025 · Devolution (Immigration) (Scotland) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

• 25 Apr 2025 · Devolution (Immigration) (Scotland) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Member talked about the consequences of Brexit. One consequence is that we have seen record soaring net migration rates across the UK, but the proportion of people coming to Scotland is low. Has he looked at how the SNP can attract immigrants and migrants to Scotland without blaming Westminster?

• 25 Apr 2025 · Devolution (Immigration) (Scotland) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  indicated dissent .

• 25 Apr 2025 · Devolution (Immigration) (Scotland) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend rightly points out the outrageous situation that so many women in Scotland have faced over the last few years. Does she agree that if Scotland wants to attract more immigrants and more migrants, it needs to understand women’s issues more coherently?

• 3 Apr 2025 · UK Democracy: Impact of Digital Platforms · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree. I want to give Members a sense of what I have reported to X, which I have been told does not meet its threshold for action and I can just block the accounts if I want to. Here are some of the comments being directed at me: “Why are Jews allowed to invest in politicians in the UK?” “Are you Jewish? Most Jewish children are weak and neurotic and struggle to understand things the way advanced Aryan children do.” “You are not well-bred. You are 1/4 tainted of Jewish blood. This softens the heart and darkens the soul.” In relation to the Holocaust, I have been told it “didn’t happen, mate.” That didn’t reach X’s harmful content threshold and was allowed to continue. These people operate with impunity in this country. Transparency in the algorithms, proactive content moderation and genuine co-operation with regulators such as Ofcom should absolutely not be optional. Tech companies must understand that accessing our markets and citizens carries clear responsibilities and that if they want to operate here, they need to obey the law of our land. This is not about stifling innovation or freedom; it is about—

• 3 Apr 2025 · UK Democracy: Impact of Digital Platforms · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful for the opportunity to speak in this debate, and I thank the hon. Member for Lagan Valley (Sorcha Eastwood) for raising this important issue. It is all too tempting to believe that democratic processes were once stronger, more resilient or perhaps more civil, but I do not think nostalgia is a particularly practical strategy. Nor, however, can we assume that progress towards a better world is natural and without setbacks. It is our responsibility as legislators not simply to comment on history but actively to shape it, particularly when we are confronted with new and complex challenges. The impact of digital platforms on our democracy represents precisely such a challenge. They promised to democratise the debate and give every citizen an equal voice, but the reality has been far more complicated and, I would argue, more destabilising than democratising. Polling by More in Common has revealed that 72% of Britons believe that social media negatively impacts young people, and even more people showed a strong appetite for greater accountability from tech companies, particularly regarding misinformation and online harm. Ofcom’s latest findings show that three in 10 children aged eight to 17 encountered harm online in the last month. That is not abstract; just because it is online does not mean it is not a real harm. We do not allow it offline, so we should not allow it online. Social media companies have enormous power to influence the public debate. Their platforms have too often facilitated harmful content—hate speech, misinformation and abuse—and the reality is that they continue to profit from division and outrage. We should expect a lot better from such influential businesses. I chair the all-party parliamentary group against antisemitism, so I am subjected to a particular kind of abuse that gives me the tiniest glimpse into what it is like to be either Jewish, or indeed any minority, in the UK. I just ignore most of it because it is so widespread, but occasionally I will get something and think, “That is really not acceptable”, and I will report it.

• 25 Mar 2025 · Independent Review of Data, Statistics and Research on Sex and Gender · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Secretary of State for his response, which will give much-needed reassurance to patients across the UK. Any public body that fails to accurately record sex and instead conflates it with gender puts people at serious risk of harm. Unfortunately, this type of organisational capture has been widespread across Scotland, with devastating consequences. Can the Secretary of State assure me that he will raise this issue with his counterparts in the Scottish Government to ensure that NHS Scotland does not put my constituents at risk?

• 25 Mar 2025 · Independent Review of Data, Statistics and Research on Sex and Gender · Hansard source

  More

  4. What assessment he has made of the potential implications for his policies of the independent review into data and statistics on sex and gender by Professor Alice Sullivan.

• 7 Mar 2025 · Protection of Children (Digital Safety and Data Protection) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Will my hon. Friend join me in congratulating Anas Sarwar, the leader of the Scottish Labour party, on announcing two weeks ago that he would ban mobile phones in schools across Scotland?

• 5 Mar 2025 · Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office · Hansard source

  More

  I am sorry, but I will not, for reasons of time. East Kilbride is Scotland’s second largest town, with its own economy, its own economy, its own identity—

• 5 Mar 2025 · Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office · Hansard source

  More

  East Kilbride in my constituency has a long and proud history as a key part of the UK’s international development efforts. Generations of dedicated civil servants have worked there to tackle global poverty, strengthen partnerships, and uphold Britain’s reputation as a force for good in the world. However, I must express my deep concern about the fact that the Government are on the verge of severing that proud connection. The proposed closure of the overseas development office in East Kilbride is a mistake, not just for my constituents but for the integrity of Britain’s global development work. Let me be clear: East Kilbride is not a suburb of Glasgow. It is a town in its own right, designated as part of the new town movement by the post-war Labour Government.

• 5 Mar 2025 · Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. As I said, East Kilbride is not Glasgow. Closing the development office and shifting the jobs to Glasgow is not just tinkering with the administration of the FCDO; it is a blow to our community, which has built itself around the development opportunities that the office provides. It is taking well-paid, skilled jobs from a town and centralising them in a city—the kind of decision that too often leaves towns behind. I know that many of my hon. Friends share my concerns about the hollowing out of towns such as East Kilbride, and I urge the Government to think again. The decision to close the development office has been made at a moment of deep uncertainty for the civil servants working in international development. The Government have already made this very difficult and painful decision. It is not a decision that I celebrate, but I support it, because governing means taking tough choices, not easy ones. However, closing the office and moving it to Glasgow, at a time when there is such deep uncertainty about the international development budget and no clear evidence that it will do anything other than cost money in the immediate term, is ill advised. Labour has a proud legacy, built by pioneers such as Judith Hart, and we must not allow it to be weakened by short-term thinking. We are now in an era where words are not enough and an era of show, not tell. If we really believe in the role that East Kilbride can continue to play in shaping Britain’s international engagement, the answer is clear: take the closure off the table, and use the money to focus on the announced priorities in international development.

• 5 Mar 2025 · Defence Spending · Hansard source

  More

  Does the Secretary of State agree that the SNP’s reckless pledge to scrap our nuclear deterrent at Faslane threatens our national security at a time of significant international volatility? The First Minister has said that Trident is of “no tangible or realistic benefit” to our current security challenges. Does the Secretary of State share my view that that stance is fundamentally naive, and demonstrates that the SNP cannot be trusted with Scotland’s future?

• 10 Feb 2025 · Rosebank and Jackdaw Oilfields · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for his statement and appreciate his approach in not wanting to prejudice the judicial process. I wonder whether we would be discussing this if Conservative Members had had a similarly responsible approach to government. In very general terms, does he agree that it is vital that the Government honour not just the letter but the spirit of our manifesto commitment, and that this proposal was originally approved over 20 years ago?

• 10 Feb 2025 · Undersea Infrastructure · Hansard source

  More

  Last week, I had the privilege of visiting His Majesty’s naval base Clyde with a number of my colleagues from across the House. Will the Secretary of State reassure the House that he is working with the Scottish Government to address the capacity and retention issues at the base, and that the Scottish Government are engaging positively on the industrial defence strategy?

• 15 Jan 2025 · Higher Education Regulatory Approach · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Secretary of State for her statement, and I particularly welcome the funding for tackling antisemitism on campus, which is a well-documented problem. When the original guidance on the Act was published, it took an approach to free speech that did not take account of the limitations on freedom of expression for minority groups that arise from hate speech. As chair of the all-party parliamentary group against antisemitism, I am particularly concerned about the risk of giving that hate implicit protection and amplification on campuses. Can the Secretary of State assure me and minority community representatives who have raised this issue with us that any future guidance will more carefully outline the importance of expression for all, including minority groups that are sometimes crowded out by loud, hateful voices?

• 13 Jan 2025 · Children’s Social Media Accounts · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Twigg. I pay tribute to Ellen Roome in the most genuine and heartfelt way for what she has achieved and what she does. The pain she has been through is utterly unimaginable. What we can do today, as I hope the Minister’s response will, is make her bravery worth while. I will focus my brief remarks on the Online Safety Act 2023, because so many of our hopes as parents, campaigners and elected representatives were pinned on that legislation. It is a step forward, but only a first step. I believe that more should be done. The Act was the product of a weak Conservative Government, with many Ministers and Back Benchers who shared the then Opposition’s conviction that strong regulation of social media companies was essential but were being held to ransom by extreme libertarians who had dressed up their ability to monetise hatred and extreme content as a free speech issue. Government Ministers gave in to an alliance of social media companies that were not willing to dilute profits to spend on effective moderation and that had a financial and political interest in driving engagement with extreme content. That was a deplorable outcome, as many hon. Members said at the time. Plainly, as a first task, the new Government must make that legislation work as best they can. I understand why my right hon. and hon. Friends are pressing on with implementing it as best as they can. However, my request to them is to heed the petition and recognise that what was good enough for the then Government under those circumstances cannot be good enough for this new Government in the medium and long term. It is certainly not good enough for our children. The immediate concern for me, for the people I speak to at the school gates and for many of my hon. Friends is that the proposed regulatory regime will let some of the most dangerous and extreme websites escape the proper regulation that the vast majority of people in this country expect them to receive. It cannot be right that we allow some sites to escape accountability for their failure to remove certain promotional material speedily simply because they are small. Of course they are small—such content is so vile that the chances of the promoters getting bigger audiences will always be limited—but the need for the firmest regulation in these cases is driven by content, not by size.

• 13 Jan 2025 · Children’s Social Media Accounts · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention. I believe that more needs to be done. I do not believe that the Government have ruled that out: they are collecting evidence, so I believe that in future iterations of the code, if that argument is accepted by Ofcom, they will make the appropriate changes. It is up to us to continue to submit the evidence and to call for those changes to be made. The main point in the debate is about the balance between regulation and innovation and about where we draw the line between the obligations of site users and those of content providers, so that we do not discourage new services and investment. However, I believe that that is not the issue that the petition we are debating addresses. Hatred and the data to which we are calling for access are not drivers of economic growth. Nor is the inclusion of high-harm sites in category 1 a barrier to investment plans for the frontline market leaders. This is about doing the right thing. I hope that all the voices will be heard today.

• 13 Jan 2025 · Knife Crime · Hansard source

  More

  9. What steps her Department is taking to help tackle knife crime.

• 13 Jan 2025 · Knife Crime · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer, and of course my sympathies also go out to that mother this weekend. Recently published data showed a sharp rise in serious violent crime in Scotland, particularly in our cities and towns. Too many of my constituents feel unsafe in East Kilbride town centre and the Village, particularly at night. Meanwhile, the SNP Government’s chronic underfunding of Police Scotland has resulted in officer numbers being at their lowest level since 2008. Does the Secretary of State agree that the SNP now has the funding in place to increase police numbers, and that protecting our community and citizens should be its priority?

• 9 Jan 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  I recently met two special educational needs teachers in my constituency who are two of the thousands of teachers across Scotland who are owed millions of pounds in overpaid taxes. Unfortunately, His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs and the 16 local authorities affected are at gridlock. Will the Leader of the House consider granting time for a debate so that we can help to overcome this intolerable situation for our valuable public sector workers?

• 9 Jan 2025 · Violence against Women and Girls · Hansard source

  More

  I sincerely thank the hon. Member for Lagan Valley (Sorcha Eastwood) for what was a moving, extraordinary and really brave speech—thank you very much indeed. The Chair of the Women and Equalities Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen), rightly said that this is a timely debate. It is timely, but the truth is that violence against women and girls has been a scourge on England, Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales and beyond our islands since time immemorial, and it will take serious, calm and well thought through policies and a collaborative approach to tackle it. That is exactly what the Government are trying to bring. There should be no illusions about how serious a problem this is. Nor should we pretend, as some on the Conservative Benches have appeared to do in recent weeks, that it is a problem only for one culture or ethnicity. That alone will not remove the threat of sex-based violence. In fact, in most places in the UK, including in my constituency, it would be unlikely to make any difference at all to the threat that women and girls face from violent men. If we want to be serious about tackling the grooming that leads to such violence, we must recognise the role that social media companies play in monetising hatred, promoting extreme misogyny for profit and making a packet out of legitimising the exploitation of women. The Minister mentioned in her opening remarks the problem of toxic masculinity, which we all know is ubiquitous online. The profiteers of this hatred dress up their indulgence of extremism as free speech advocacy, but they are in fact consciously hoping to create a world in which women—particularly those who stand against the extreme hatred promoted on social media, which is based on sex and ethnicity—are cowed into submission. In this House, our speech is formally protected, and no billionaire can hope to launch a libel suit to shut us up, but that does not stop them trying to find other means that they hope will silence us—principally the mob. We have all been on the end of it. Every woman in this House knows that anything we say in here that challenges power and privilege can put us at risk in a way that is quantitively and qualitatively different from our male colleagues. There has been far too much admiration for the tech bros, and too little willingness to challenge abuse. I thank the Prime Minister and the Ministers for their robust words this week, which made me proud to be a Labour MP. I hope that they mark a departure from what we have seen, and that we will see many more such responses in future. We should do more to tackle the abuse that the tech industry has been allowed to get away with for so long. I associate myself with every word that my hon. Friend the Member for Lowestoft (Jess Asato) said about the role that pornography plays, but I would add one piece of evidence that I find shocking. Eight-year-old boys regularly access pornography, and that has a well documented impact on violence against women and girls. I will take this opportunity to mention another area of tech that I think needs to be addressed: pimping websites, on which women’s bodies are freely advertised for sale to abusers. UK Feminista carried out a survey just before Christmas, and found that 368 women in my constituency of East Kilbride and Strathaven, and the surrounding area, were freely advertised online as for sale. That is legal. I know that many people argue that that is sex work, but as a socialist and a feminist, I remain wholly and utterly opposed to that dangerous idea. It is grotesque abuse and exploitation of vulnerable women, and it indicates to men that women are commodities to be bought and sold. Money should not make acts of physical abuse legal and lawful.

• 9 Jan 2025 · Violence against Women and Girls · Hansard source

  More

  Yes, I wholeheartedly agree with that sentiment, and I hope that we can work across the House to make that happen. My plea to Ministers is that they consider introducing legislation to tackle pimping websites, pornography and the abuses of dating apps. Perhaps the Government could take firmer action against online abuse at its source, and spend money on some of the wonderfully thought through measures that the Minister outlined in her speech, the likes of which we have not seen for some time.