John Grady MP: speeches 2025

Speeches

• 29 Apr 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister, although he must feel awfully lonely as the Front-Bench Scotsman. As the Member for Rutherglen just on the other side of the Clyde from me, does he agree that the charging of fees for necessary wayleaves is a rather odd way to relitigate the referendum that took place in 1999, and a rather odd way to relitigate the questions of devolution? I know that the Conservative party has some trouble, from time to time, in accepting the devolution settlement. We seem to have moved from the West Lothian question to the Hamble Valley question. It is remarkably confusing.

• 29 Apr 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I will make a couple of brief remarks as a resident Scottish MP. The Minister has referenced co-operation between the Scottish and UK Governments. That is to be welcomed; it reflects this Government’s determination to do right by Scotland and to work productively with the SNP Government in Holyrood. These provisions will help to unlock significant investment in Scotland. We heard last week how SSE’s programme of projects, which these provisions help to unlock, will lead to £22 billion of investment by 2030. That is the biggest investment we have seen in the north of Scotland since the second world war. Just think what we could achieve if we had a Labour Government in Scotland as well as in England. The Minister is right to have worked closely with the Scottish Government on reforming the provisions, which in many cases predate 1989, because the 1989 Act was a consolidation. He is right to have worked productively with the Scottish Government, putting Scotland first, because that will give rise to significant investment and jobs—jobs for our young people and high-quality jobs—as well as access for the people of Great Britain to greater volumes of fixed-price electricity that is not subject to fluctuations in wholesale markets, as we have seen over the last few years.

• 29 Apr 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I rise simply to add my support to this provision. There is an extensive requirement to develop the electricity generation industry in Scotland and England, and this will give rise to great long-term jobs and apprenticeships for young people, as well as move us on to cheaper, secure, lower-carbon energy. Such queues have been a long-standing issue in the electricity industry, as any developer will tell you, and half the time it is absolutely impossible to know when their project will be connected. That is no basis on which to attract the significant investment we need in our industry in this country, because developers can go to other jurisdictions and get much quicker connections. This reform has been carefully put together by the ministerial team and Ofgem. The Minister for Energy has addressed the issue, and the reform is to be applauded. It may seem a rather arid and dry topic, but ultimately the reform is of significant benefit to industry in the United Kingdom.

• 29 Apr 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  rose—

• 29 Apr 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Hobhouse. Is the hon. Member disagreeing with the evidence that we heard from Catherine Howard, one of the most eminent planning lawyers in the United Kingdom? Catherine Howard said: “We cannot magic up more comms consultants, lawyers, environmental impact assessment consultants and planning consultants in that period, so we desperately need a way to apply those professionals most efficiently in a really focused way across all the projects we need.” She then went on to talk about the pre-app process, which has gone up from 14 months to 27 months: “I suspect it is even longer now…The pre-app is always something I feel I have to apologise for and explain, and give the best story about how quick it might be”. –– [ Official Report, Planning and Infrastructure Public Bill Committee, 24 April 2025; c. 67, Q86.] She explained that investors welcome this change. The pre-application process, in the mind of investors who want to invest in clean energy projects that lower carbon emissions and other critical infrastructure, is a very material source of delays, according to that witness.

• 29 Apr 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Does the hon. Gentleman agree that people are also very concerned about the anaemic economic growth in the United Kingdom over the past 14 years, as well as the housing and energy crises, and that the Bill seeks to strike a balance between all these competing considerations? At the moment, we do not have a balance—the balance is against development—and we desperately need developments such as Hinkley that create brilliant, well-paid jobs, including for many young people in south-west England.

• 29 Apr 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  rose—

• 24 Apr 2025 · Co-operation with Devolved Governments · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the steps that the Government are taking to strengthen co-operation with the Scottish Government, to cut waste and inefficiency and to ensure that Ministers take responsibility for public services. This is an important area for potential co-operation and dialogue, because, in Scotland, we currently have more quangos than there are MSPs in Holyrood, which wastes millions of pounds a year. Does my right hon. Friend agree that the SNP Scottish Government should stop hiding behind these quangos, end the culture of waste and take responsibility for plummeting standards in Scottish public services?

• 24 Apr 2025 · Co-operation with Devolved Governments · Hansard source

  More

  15. What steps he is taking to strengthen co-operation with the devolved Governments.

• 24 Apr 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Yes. Beatrice Filkin: Absolutely. We see this in terms of not only the build process, but the operations of these pieces of infrastructure.

• 24 Apr 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Until the general election I, too, was a solicitor and I had a practice for many years in the energy sector.

• 24 Apr 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q I want to ask about coastal Scotland, and I declare an interest: my granddad and several of my cousins were trawlermen in Scotland. Offshore wind represents a big opportunity in Scotland for coastal communities and harbours, which have suffered economic decline over the years. Have I got that right? Beatrice Filkin: Are you asking whether it provides an opportunity to local communities?

• 24 Apr 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Charlotte, some of the projects you are doing rely on Scottish infrastructure. Is it the same in England: more jobs, more activity? Charlotte Mitchell: Yes, more jobs and more activity. Picking up on the point about consenting, we have similar yet different challenges in England and Wales. As you note, the Bill looks to streamline the NSIP regime. That is incredibly important for us at National Grid. We are very supportive of the measures in the Bill, and there are three in particular that I would like to namecheck as helping us to accelerate the projects that we need to move that power around, as we have been discussing. The first one is the commitment to refresh the national policy statements every five years, or more frequently. We really welcome that, because it is incredibly important that we have policy stability for our projects. I would just caution that we do not update them so frequently that the policy landscape moves, but five years feels like the right cadence for refreshing those. Another measure in the Bill that will help is the ability to opt out of the NSIP regime, where that is more appropriate for particular projects. At National Grid, for example, sometimes when we are upgrading a substation we need to move some overhead lines around. You can trip that threshold and end up in the NSIP regime, where really that does not feel like the spirit of the regime—that is not what it was set up to do. The ability to write to the Secretary of State and explain why it is not the most appropriate regime is really helpful for us, and we really welcome that measure. The third one was spoken about by the previous panel: yesterday’s announcement of looking again at the consultation requirements and moving to a non-statutory footing for consultation on NSIP projects. Again, that will help us to engage in a more targeted, effective and proportionate way, so that we can bring projects forward while continuing to engage communities. That will help us to ensure that we have the right projects in the right places.

• 24 Apr 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q I have a question for Christianna, Beatrice and Charlotte. To bring this to life, I am a Scottish MP, so if I am building a set of offshore wind farms in the north of Scotland, I also need to build transmission infrastructure from Scotland down to England. The holdouts of this involve connection queues, planning delays in Scotland and planning delays in England. The Bill, with the reforms in England and Scotland, seeks to reduce those delays. I want to unpick what that means for my constituents in terms of jobs and investment. How much money will be invested in the grid in Scotland over the next five to 10 years, because this Bill helps speed that investment up? Christianna Logan: Our programme of projects to deliver for 2030 is a £22 billion investment. It is the biggest investment that we have seen in the north of Scotland probably since the second world war, so it is really significantyou’re your constituents. Our colleagues in ScottishPower have their investments in your area as well. Alongside that, there is a significant number of jobs—we expect around 6,000 jobs enabled through our investments in Scotland specifically. Just this year, we will be recruiting another 600 people into SSEN transmission to help with this transformation of our grid network. All of that, as you say, is dependent on us getting consent to progress all these projects and the necessary regulatory approvals for the investments. We have been working very closely with Government and Ofgem on the reforms, and we believe that the proposals put forward in the Bill will take us forward in that regard. As I said earlier, the secondary legislation and the work with the Scottish Government will be critical to capturing those benefits.

• 24 Apr 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q So this Bill, which speeds up planning and consent for transmission and generation infrastructure, is really important for Scotland’s coastal communities. That must follow, mustn’t it? Beatrice Filkin: Yes. Christianna Logan: Investment in things like ports infrastructure comes directly as a result of the investment in these projects, and that investment is not secured until we achieve consents, whether that is networks or offshore wind as our customer. So absolutely there is a benefit. There is also the community benefit that will come as a result of these projects. Beatrice Filkin: There are also the wider supply chain opportunities. Obviously, we want to see the international and UK supply chain relocating here and providing degrees of the supply chain directly for these projects from our home communities.

• 24 Apr 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q I have a quick final question. We need huge investment in infrastructure in the United Kingdom. The capital for that is international, so we need to attract international investors to fund this investment. In your professional view, does the Bill make us more attractive or less attractive to international investors? Catherine Howard: It definitely makes us more attractive to international investors on the nationally significant infrastructure side. I also like the fact that we can now opt out of the DCO regime for nationally significant infrastructure projects, because sometimes it is lighter touch and more helpful to go local. That is helpful as well. As I say, the pre-app stuff is incredibly helpful, and the national policy stuff. The EDP stuff is helpful, and the nature recovery matters in relation to housing. I will flag, however, that I will be making a submission about how I think the Bill could go a bit further on habitats regulation matters with regard to nationally significant infrastructure, because the nature recovery plans are slightly harder to apply—

• 24 Apr 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q It is great to have three very experienced councillors before the Committee. We have heard evidence today, including from two former special advisers to No. 10 under the last Government, that the Bill will help with energy security and energy costs, driving forward housing and getting jobs and significant investment. To channel your discussion about the beam in the person’s house, Councillor Clewer, a significant amount of frustration was evinced about where we are with things in planning more generally. Could each of you identify what you see as positive in the Bill? Councillor Clewer: I agree that there are areas at the moment where planning simply delays or blocks infrastructure provision. That needs changing; I absolutely agree with that. I suspect people will judge the extent to which it needs changing based on where they live and the specific infrastructure that they are facing, but I think that that needs unblocking. You need to be very careful with the assumption that the Bill will build more houses. It will not build more houses. The Bill, and the reforms that we have seen to the NPPF, will see more planning permissions. I have 18,837 extant planning permissions in Wiltshire at the moment. Developers told me that they could build only about 6,000 the last time I asked them, which strangely enough was just under the four-year housing land supply under the last Government. I am sure that if I asked them today, they would say that they could build just about 8,000. I have 2,400 houses south of Trowbridge that have been stuck, failing to get the section 106 agreement signed, for something like 14 years. There has to be something in the Bill that forces building. If we are to issue planning, it has to come with the actual development. We have to compel. If developers have signed a commitment that they will complete houses on whatever basis and have fallen behind, they need to start paying the council tax on them or something. At the moment, the Bill is not going to do that, I am afraid. I do not see anything in it that will actually achieve that. Councillor Hug: I support Richard’s point about working for more “use it or lose it” powers to ensure that planning permission does not just go on the books to raise land value and not do much else, although I note the points about hope value and everything. We recognise that there is a whole heap of challenges to delivery that sit outside the scope of the Bill. On the Bill, we support the Government’s general principles about clarification and simplification. We recognise that the strong national growth and infrastructure demands open up some of the opportunities for green energy and all sorts of other things that we are calling for in local government. I want to draw attention to the work being done on planning fees. Ensuring that local authorities have the best possible remuneration for the work to make sure they are covering their costs fully is key to making the system work well to deliver the outcomes that you are looking for. But we recognise that that alone will not deal with it, so we have to look at how we can further strengthen the planning workforce. Again, that is about making sure that the language does not say that the planning system or the planners are the problem. We want people to go into the industry and we want them to do it, but the planning fee stuff is helpful in supporting that. We support the principles, but the key thing is to ensure that the local authorities retain a voice in what goes forward and work with the Government on some of the practical things such as the scheme of delegations. Councillor Wright: I think we have got close to it. As we said, we have nothing against the professional training of planning committees so that the industry knows what it is dealing with and so that the idea that we do not know what we are doing on planning committees cannot be used to beat us over the head all the time. In my district, similarly to Richard’s, 11,500 permissions were put in place between 2016 and 2024 and 5,500 were built out. There is no excuse for the rest not to be built. Unfortunately, the proposals that have been put forward do not include anything at all to mandate that builders will build. There is a proposal over CPO powers, and the missing thing that we would like to see is “build it or lose it”. If there is an allocated site and they have permissions, but they simply do not build on it, give us the CPO powers so we can CPO that. That would help to build houses, because we could then start to control the destiny of those sites. At the moment, there are some really useful things that could have been in the Bill that are missing. Councillor Clewer: But CPO it at agricultural value. Councillor Wright: Yes: agricultural value, not hope value. Councillor Hug: I very much support the planning training. The LGA supports the approach to hope value that the Government are taking. The CPO power is particularly being deployed in urban settings around land assembly, which is the intent behind the Bill.

• 23 Apr 2025 · Sewage · Hansard source

  More

  On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. At Prime Minister’s questions earlier, the Leader of the Opposition said that Anas Sarwar, the Scottish Labour leader “was whipping his MSPs to get male rapists into women’s prisons”. That is categorically and utterly untrue. Scottish Labour MSPs repeatedly called for the Scottish Government to ensure the safety of women prisoners. Please can you advise me how I can ensure that the Leader of the Opposition corrects the record and withdraws this disgraceful slur?

• 2 Apr 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q1. If he will list his official engagements for Wednesday 2 April.

• 2 Apr 2025 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  This week, the full state pension will rise by £472 a year, putting money in the pockets of pensioners in Glasgow and across the United Kingdom. Does the Prime Minister agree that this rise is possible only because of Labour’s plan for change and our commitment to the triple lock?

• 26 Mar 2025 · Spring Statement · Hansard source

  More

  Reckless management of public finances leads to higher costs of Government borrowing. As any economist will say, that increases the cost of capital across the British economy, putting at risk and increasing the cost of the essential investments in housing and infrastructure that my constituents desperately need. Does my right hon. Friend agree that that is a very important reason why it is essential to manage public finances carefully, unlike the last Conservative Government, and unlike the Government in Scotland, who are overfamiliar with emergency Budgets?

• 24 Mar 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. As a Glasgow MP, I emphasise how important this Bill is for Scotland and Scotland’s economy. We have huge opportunities in the form of offshore wind and floating wind, but those opportunities depend on the development of transmission infrastructure in England. This Bill will help to reduce bills in Scotland by getting us away from expensive gas and on to cheaper fixed-price wind. Delays in England cost my poor constituents a lot of money. The Bill does much more than that. It modernises the regime for connections to the electricity transmission and distribution system, speeding up the connection of vital energy projects for energy security. The UK Government have worked closely with the Scottish Government—delivering on their promise to put country first and Scotland first, and party second—to modernise the regime for consenting overhead power lines and generating stations in Scotland. The Bill also makes provision for long-duration energy storage. The House may wonder what that is. There is all sorts of exciting new technology in this area, but I commend to everyone a visit to Cruachan power station to see the hollow mountain in the glens of Scotland. They will see how important it is and what great opportunities it provides for British engineering, and for the children in our schools to pursue careers in engineering. There are also other reforms that are important to the electricity sector in Scotland. This may be a historic moment of some agreement between the SNP and the Labour party in this Chamber, but I would not want to be too gentle on the SNP Scottish Government, which takes far too long to consent projects in Scotland. Far too many projects sit on Ministers’ desks for far too long, and that is holding back investment. The same applies with the SNP council in Glasgow. We need to get going on some of these consents, and the SNP in Glasgow and Edinburgh need to get a move on with consenting projects that will create jobs and assist my constituents. This is a great Bill. It looks to the future. It will create opportunities for Britain. It is a bill of aspiration and ambition for our country. For too long, we have kept on saying no to great developments that create jobs and create wealth. This Bill says, “Let’s go for it. Let’s create jobs. Let’s create investment.” I support it fully.

• 19 Mar 2025 · Ethnic Minority People: Discrimination · Hansard source

  More

  2. What steps she is taking to help end discrimination against ethnic minority people.

• 19 Mar 2025 · Ethnic Minority People: Discrimination · Hansard source

  More

  Glasgow’s Muslim community is characterised by its kindness and public service. Last weekend, I visited my friends at the Hillview Islamic and education centre in Shettleston, and met the convenor of the Muslim Council of Scotland, Dr Muhammad Adrees. I heard about terrible incidents of anti-Muslim hatred and crimes in Glasgow and the west of Scotland. Does my hon. Friend agree that our Muslim brothers and sisters should not have to live with that hatred, and will she set out the steps that the Government are taking to combat that?

• 18 Mar 2025 · Shipyards: Economic Growth · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Jardine. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Glenrothes and Mid Fife (Richard Baker) on securing this important debate. He spoke very knowledgeably about the topic, and his incredibly successful work to secure the future of the Harland and Wolff yard in Methil demonstrates what a conscientious, hard-working fighter for his community he is. I am proud to call him my friend. Shipbuilding is a growth industry. Between 2019 and 2024, the economic output of the shipyard sector in the UK increased by 72%—I wish we could say that about much more of the British economy. There are almost 39,000 employee jobs in that industry in the UK, with 19% in Scotland, so it is an industry that we must get behind. It is central to Glasgow and the Clyde region. As everyone knows, Glasgow has a proud history of shipbuilding. At one point, more than 100,000 people were working in 38 yards along the Clyde; at the turn of the last century, almost one in four boats sailing in the world was built on the Clyde, so shipbuilding is in Glasgow’s blood. The number is much lower now, but like any Glasgow MP, I have constituents who depend on the shipyards on the Clyde for work, and they make a significant contribution to Glasgow’s economy. We have world-class defence shipyards. We have two shipyards on the upper Clyde and they are operated by BAE Systems. They have a long history of developing first-class ships for defending the United Kingdom, and the new Type 26 frigates at the dockyards will do the same. This creates wealth across Glasgow, including in my seat. We also have a brilliant maritime education sector in Glasgow, and much of this is in my seat, on the Clyde. City of Glasgow college, trains craft apprentices for the BAE Govan and Scotstoun shipyards, and BAE has a brilliant on-site skills academy. City of Glasgow college also trains very many merchant navy officers in the UK, and many of those involved live in my seat, including in the Gorbals, as I find regularly when I knock on doors. We need to keep warship building work in the UK. Make no mistake: this is essential for national security. We may wish for the world to be different, but we have to take it as it is. Skills in military and domestic shipyards are very important as we face this unpredictable world. Civilian shipyards could also provide great opportunities in Glasgow, such as in renewable energy. Of course I would like to see Government support for shipbuilding, but it has to be deployed wisely. Taxpayers and the wider economy expect that money to be deployed wisely. Regretfully, that has not been the case with the SNP Government, who own the Ferguson Marine shipyard in Port Glasgow, just along from my constituency. They have spent more than £500 million on two ferries, which are hundreds of millions of pounds over budget. They nationalised the yard in 2019, but despite it being state-owned, Audit Scotland in December 2024 raised very serious concerns about governance at the yard. It said: “Internal audit has not been able to provide assurance on FMPG’s risk management, control and governance arrangements” and other matters. Yesterday, we learned that Ferguson Marine had lost out to a shipyard in Gdańsk on a £175 million contract to build vessels for the Scottish Government. My hon. Friend the Member for Inverclyde and Renfrewshire West (Martin McCluskey) is entirely correct that the Scottish Government have prioritised opportunities in Poland over those in Port Glasgow. The outcome of six years of SNP control of that shipyard is hundreds of millions of pounds wasted; it is an absolute scandal. The SNP Government have failed the people of Port Glasgow—some of the most deprived communities in our family of nations—while wasting hundreds of millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money. Port Glasgow desperately needs good jobs, as does the whole of the Clyde region and Glasgow, and we should be incredibly angry at that SNP scandal. That is another SNP Government failure: they have failed Glasgow and the Clyde region on shipbuilding, education, health, transport and economic growth. After 18 years of the SNP, Scottish shipbuilding and Scotland need a new direction.