John Lamont MP: speeches 2025

Speeches

• 18 Dec 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Leader of the House for giving us the business for the start of the new year. I begin by expressing my deepest condolences and sympathies to the victims of the Bondi Beach attack at the weekend. I am sure that we were all horrified to see the events unfold, with innocent Jews murdered as they enjoyed Hanukkah in the evening sunshine. As the Leader of the Opposition said yesterday, we must do much more to tackle antisemitism and Islamic extremism around the world, but also here in the United Kingdom. Mr Speaker, I wish you, the Leader of the House and Members, the Doorkeepers, the catering team and all parliamentary staff a very happy Christmas. Will the Leader of the House be making any new year’s resolutions? I know that he respects this place and the important role of MPs and Parliament in holding Ministers to account. May I suggest that his new year’s resolution should be to ensure that the 2,644 parliamentary questions that have not received a response are answered as soon as possible, please, and that all the many letters and emails from MPs to Ministers that have not received the courtesy of a reply are dealt with as quickly as possible? As we look ahead to 2026, I am reminded that Dickens’s “A Christmas Carol” is a tale not just of redemption but of the perils of ignoring reality. Sadly, after only 18 months of this Labour Government, it is already clear that no amount of festive storytelling can disguise what is happening to our country. If anyone needs a visit from the three ghosts this year, it is those on the Government Benches. Let us start with the ghost of Christmas past. In opposition, Labour promised everything to everyone: lower energy bills, shorter NHS waiting lists, kick-starting economic growth, safer streets, 1.5 million new homes and world-class public services, funded—apparently—without raising taxes. The British people were sold a vision of transformation without the trade-offs. Now that Labour is in government, reality is quickly catching up. The ghost of Christmas present shows us the consequences. Since the election, we have seen rising taxes on working people, a retreat from every major spending pledge, a benefits bill rising higher and higher, a cost of living crisis made in Downing Street and economic growth going in the wrong direction. Labour promised an immediate plan to rescue the NHS; instead, waiting lists have continued to rise and militant doctors remain in dispute, resulting in 93,000 lost appointments and patients being told to expect a long, difficult winter. This Labour Government promised a plan for social care; six months later, there is still none. They promised cheaper energy bills; bills are up again. They promised 1.5 million new homes; yet planning reforms are already being bogged down by internal Labour rows. They promised 6,500 more teachers, but there are now 400 fewer teachers since the election. They promised to smash the gangs, but illegal migration continues to rise, and despite promising to restore trust in our justice system, Labour’s early release scheme has seen offenders let out early while police forces struggle with 1,316 fewer police. This is not the change the public were promised. Now to the ghost of Christmas yet to come: if the first 18 months are a sign of things to come, the future should send a winter chill through us all. Even more tax rises are due to hit working people thanks to the Chancellor’s “Nightmare before Christmas” Budget last month. The family farm tax will take effect, which will decimate our rural economy and undermine food security. We will see Departments told to brace for spending cuts after Labour admitted the money was not there; councils warning of bankruptcy, and investment faltering as businesses grapple with mixed signals on planning, energy and regulation; our liberties under attack, with the introduction of digital ID and the scrapping of trials by jury; and a Prime Minister who talks endlessly about missions but is yet to deliver a single measurable improvement to the lives of ordinary families. The lesson of Dickens’s tale is that it is never too late to change course. For the sake of our country, we on the Opposition Benches urge the Government to do exactly that. We urge them to be honest about what they can fund, to be transparent about what they will cut, to show some backbone and, above all else, to keep their promises. Let us hope that by next Christmas, the Government have changed direction, because the country cannot afford another year like 2025. Happy new year.

• 18 Dec 2025 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Leader of the House give us the forthcoming business?

• 18 Dec 2025 · Christmas Adjournment · Hansard source

  More

  Madam Deputy Speaker, may I start by wishing you and your team a very happy Christmas and a prosperous new year? I feel as if we have had a whistlestop tour of the United Kingdom today, and we have heard from hon. and right hon. Members from all corners of our great nation, but we are yet to hear from the best part of our United Kingdom—the Scottish Borders. Let me take a moment to reflect on a hugely busy year in my constituency, before mentioning some of the excellent contributions we heard today. Local legend Douglas Heatlie from Selkirk has just retired after 40 years of working at the Scottish Borders council. Douglas is truly a fantastic man, and we always chat whenever we bump into each other. He is responsible for keeping streets and public toilets clean, and he makes our area an even better place to live. I take this opportunity to thank him for his incredible service to the Scottish Borders, and wish him a long and happy retirement. It has been a busy time of the year for me as the MP for the Borders; I have been supporting constituents with their issues, campaigning to protect our natural environment from new mega-pylons, fighting for better rail services and much, much more. I know that a highlight for many hon. Members—we heard much about this in business questions earlier today—is the annual Christmas card competition that many of us conduct. I had a bumper year this year, with hundreds of entries coming in from across the Scottish Borders. The eventual winner, decided by public vote, was Rowan from Coldstream primary school; we presented her with her prize last week. Her design will be landing on doormats across the Scottish Borders over the next few days. In the time available, I will mention a couple of the excellent contributions that we have heard. We heard from my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman), who underlined the great work that the Conservatives are doing on Harrow council. Along with my hon. Friend the Member for Romford (Andrew Rosindell), he highlighted the failures of the Labour Mayor of London. We heard from the hon. Member for Newport East (Jessica Morden); I do not know much about her city, but she is undoubtedly a great advocate for it. I enjoyed listening to her talk about some of the important work going on there. We heard from the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon), who is sadly no longer in his place; hopefully he is on a plane heading back home. We heard from my hon. Friend the Member for Brigg and Immingham (Martin Vickers), who, like the hon. Member for Strangford, reminded us of the importance of Christmas, what it is all about and the birth of Christ. We heard from my fantastic constituency neighbour, my right hon. Friend the Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale (David Mundell), who represents a constituency covering a huge area; it is even bigger than mine. He is a very powerful voice for all the 100 or so communities that he represents. We heard from my hon. Friend the Member for Keighley and Ilkley (Robbie Moore) about the energetic campaign for his communities and the important investment that he secured for his constituency, particularly under the last Conservative Government. While much divides us in this Chamber, this debate shows what we all have in common: the honour of representing our constituents, and a belief that our constituency is the best in the country. As Christmas approaches, my thoughts are especially with those who will spend the next few weeks serving others. I express my heartfelt thanks to everyone who will be working or volunteering over Christmas and the new year to support our communities. Our armed forces, both at home and overseas, deserve our deepest appreciation for their ongoing commitment to keeping us safe. I thank the NHS, social care staff, firefighters, police officers, and all the emergency service workers for their dedication. I am also grateful to the small business owners and workers in hospitality, retail and transport who put their plans on hold in order to help us celebrate. Please take time to remember those who face loneliness, loss and financial problems at this time. Those things can be a particularly heavy weight on people at Christmas. If you can, consider reaching out—supporting a food bank, volunteering with a local group, or even just checking in with a neighbour who you worry may be lonely. I wish everyone in the Scottish Borders, as well as every Member of this House—and you again, Madam Deputy Speaker—a very merry Christmas. I look forward to seeing everyone, hopefully well rested, in 2026.

• 16 Dec 2025 · Finance (No. 2) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is making an excellent speech. Is he aware of some research done by the National Farmers’ Union of Scotland, which shows that, under the current inheritance tax rules, farmers in Scotland typically pay a £20,000 inheritance tax bill, whereas under Labour’s current proposals the figure goes up to a staggering £775,000, which will kill off most farming businesses?

• 16 Dec 2025 · Finance (No. 2) Bill · Hansard source

  More

  There are hundreds, if not thousands, of farmers in Parliament Square this afternoon, blasting their horns about the family farm tax. The shadow Chancellor and many other colleagues from the Opposition Benches have been out to meet the farmers to understand their concerns. Has he heard, like I have, their frustration at the Government’s failure to listen and understand the impact that the family farm tax will have on farm viability?

• 9 Dec 2025 · Network Rail Timetable Changes: Rural Communities · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Lady makes an excellent point. Many rural communities depend on train services, bus services and public transport links because there are no alternatives. If the timetables, trains and services do not run on time, they have an even greater impact because there is no alternative compared with what happens in larger towns and big cities where, if one service does not turn up, people can jump on alternatives without too much trouble. For our constituencies—I think my constituency might be marginally bigger than the hon. Lady’s—it has a disproportionate impact.

• 9 Dec 2025 · Network Rail Timetable Changes: Rural Communities · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Lady makes an excellent point. She will know that I am familiar with her part of the world, having been brought up there. I know that beautiful stretch of railway particularly well, with a view of Arran and Millport, up to the west of Scotland. Her key point is the catastrophic failure the SNP is making of Scotland’s railways. ScotRail is run by the Scottish Government and is not doing a good job. When we are trying to encourage people to make that modal shift on to public transport, if the train does not turn up or turns up late, they will not want to make that shift again. The hon. Lady makes an important point and highlights why the SNP is letting Scotland down so badly. To make matters worse, LNER’s punctuality at Berwick-upon-Tweed station is far from outstanding. In the latest performance period, just 65.6% of services there arrived on time. We now face a number of services being dramatically cut, and existing services turning up late a third of the time. I particularly want to raise the impact on those who are disabled or older, as I mentioned in response to an earlier intervention. Having to change trains halfway through a journey can be frustrating for all of us, as we are on edge waiting to see whether we will make our connection. But as one of my constituents, Elizabeth Johnston, said, for disabled passengers direct services are not simply a convenience; they are often the only practical and dignified way to travel long distances. Wheelchair spaces on trains are also extremely limited. These changes will further limit disabled passengers’ choice. They could be forced to wait several hours for the next available service. Just one missed connection can leave a wheelchair user stranded without accessible facilities. I do not find that situation acceptable. A significant number of my constituents travel by train for work.

• 9 Dec 2025 · Network Rail Timetable Changes: Rural Communities · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to all hon. Members for their contributions this afternoon. We have demonstrated the importance of rail services to the rural communities that we collectively represent. I am grateful to the Minister for his response. I have two points of concern. We again heard from the Minister about the importance of the inter-city connection—the London to Edinburgh service. That may well be an admirable aim of the Government, but they need to be clear that the consequence is that the rural communities in between are being left behind. That includes Berwick-upon-Tweed and many other places, which will be sacrificed for that high-speed connection. We can debate the worth of that link between London and Edinburgh and elsewhere, but that is the direct consequence of the policy. Secondly, I think the Minister said that 147,000 passengers used the Berwick station, compared with 250,000 that use Harrogate. We need to remember that Harrogate is a much bigger centre of population than Berwick. It is a bigger town in itself and the catchment area for those who use the station is significantly bigger in population terms. The 147,000 people using Berwick travel much further to get to that station—it is a much bigger catchment area and a focal point for a much wider area. People will travel from Hawick in the south of my constituency all the way to Berwick to use that service. The figure of 147,000 is much more significant than 250,000 in a relatively big place in Yorkshire. I will continue this campaign to persuade the Government and Network Rail that we need to get services back to where they were at Berwick. I am sure I will have the support of others; I certainly will have the support the community. I know how strongly the constituents I represent feel about this issue. I know how strongly people feel in Berwick-upon-Tweed and in North Northumberland. The fight will go on. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered the impact of Network Rail timetable changes on rural communities.

• 9 Dec 2025 · Network Rail Timetable Changes: Rural Communities · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Lady makes a good point. Talk of social mobility often focuses on urban and city areas, but those of us who represent rural constituencies know that social mobility is a big problem. Arguably it is even greater in our areas because, as the hon. Lady highlighted, if the bus or train does not turn up, it is not just a matter of waiting for the next one; it is a matter of not being able to get to work or access an important college course that opens up many other opportunities. One of the strengths of the east coast main line is that it makes travel through our key cities relatively easy and time efficient. Today one can travel from Berwick-upon-Tweed to London in just over three and a half hours. Under the new timetable, services will take longer and be less frequent. Trains will inevitably be busier. In the Borders, we are trying to attract more young families to live in our communities. Regular, reliable train services are an essential part of making the Borders an even more fantastic place to live.

• 9 Dec 2025 · Network Rail Timetable Changes: Rural Communities · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman makes another excellent point. The argument put forward by Network Rail and LNER is that there will be alternative services, but it involves connecting to other trains. As I will go on to describe, if someone is disabled or an older person, the idea of making a connection is in itself sometimes daunting, and if they miss the connection the consequences can be far greater compared with the consequences for those of us who are perhaps more frequent travellers. I use Berwick-upon-Tweed station regularly to travel to Westminster. The trains are well used and busy, so the decision to reduce services and make travel more complex does not make sense. Since the final timetable was published in September, I have been pleased to work cross-party with the hon. Member for North Northumberland (David Smith), whom I am pleased to see in his place. We met with Network Rail and LNER in September, so that they could explain why they had taken the decision to cut the number of services, on which our constituents rely. I would like to thank Councillor Rosemary Mackenzie of Berwick-upon-Tweed town council for her campaigning on this issue, and Councillor Carol Hamilton from the Scottish Borders council and Councillor Richard Wearmouth from Northumberland county council for their work.

• 9 Dec 2025 · Network Rail Timetable Changes: Rural Communities · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered the impact of Network Rail timetable changes on rural communities. It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Mr Stuart. This year marks the 200th anniversary of the first passenger railway services in our country. Railways have transformed transport and trade, connecting towns and cities and accelerating economic and social change in our country. Our railways are often the subject of fierce debate. Of course, the Labour Government have taken the decision to nationalise them. We can debate the rights and wrongs of that decision, but there is one thing that is undoubtedly now true: decisions made about our railways will now be the responsibility of the Labour Government and them alone. They will need to account for their decisions. In five days’ time a new Network Rail timetable comes into force. London North Eastern Railway claims that the timetable will “provide more trains” and “thousands more seats”. I am afraid that for my constituents it does the exact opposite. It will have a terrible impact on our rural communities, such as those I represent. Berwick-upon-Tweed station sits just outside the Scottish Borders, but it serves thousands of the people who live there, as well as those in North Northumberland who rely on train services for work and pleasure. The timetable change means that the number of LNER services from Berwick-upon-Tweed will be dramatically cut to just one every two hours. Services from the station connect the Scottish Borders and North Northumberland to our key cities: Edinburgh, Aberdeen, York, London and many other parts of our United Kingdom. Berwick-upon-Tweed is in the top 30% most used stations, used by thousands of passengers every single day. Many areas will benefit from the change. Newcastle station, for example, has seen a dramatic increase in its number of trains. Peterborough will see its number of trains to London surge, as will York. So what are we witnessing? Rural communities and small towns are losing out for the benefit of large cities. Indeed, it has been a stated aim of the Government that the timetable changes are about securing more high-speed train services between London and Edinburgh. Those cities already have good train services and other public transport options. It is simply not fair or acceptable that my constituents should see a service that they have come to rely on cut in such a way.

• 9 Dec 2025 · Network Rail Timetable Changes: Rural Communities · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to my neighbour for his contribution and for the cross-party, cross-border working we have secured on this issue. He is right that the consultation took place back in 2021. There was great opposition at that point and then there was a further, much smaller, consultation. I think a lot of people assumed the views they had submitted in the earlier discussion about the timetable changes were in some way captured. I do not think many of our respective constituents understood that whole timetable change was possibly going to happen again. There was not much awareness that these changes were back on the table. The night-time economy is an important issue not just for Berwick, but for all our constituents who enjoy going to Edinburgh—and Newcastle—particularly around festival time in Edinburgh. I know that a lot of my constituents enjoy going to Edinburgh in August when the festival and fringe are on, and to be fair to the train companies they often put on additional services for people coming back. However, that should not be a once-a-year occasion. We should recognise that such travel is happening much more often, and people should be encouraged to do that through much more frequent late night services. We currently have a Labour Government that seem totally and utterly obsessed with net zero at all costs. These timetable changes could make people more likely to opt to fly from Edinburgh or Newcastle because that service is more frequent, more reliable and quicker. That makes the changes even more nonsensical at a time when the Government say they want to encourage more people to use our railways. There is also the impact on tourism. People come to the Scottish Borders from far and wide. We have some of the most beautiful parts of the United Kingdom there. The changes will inevitably affect tourism in the Borders. Day trips will become harder. People may choose alternative destinations. That will make it even more difficult for our local tourism and hospitality businesses, which are already suffering thanks to the decisions of this Labour Government. We have seen progress on improving rail connectivity in the Scottish Borders over the last decade. The Borders Railway connecting Tweedbank and Galashiels with Scotland’s capital has been a success, but we need that to go further to connect with Hawick, Newcastleton and on to Carlisle. We have also seen the reopening of Reston station in Berwickshire on the east coast main line, which continues to grow in success. That has all been part of a joined-up approach to improve rail connectivity right across the Borders. The timetable changes stall that progress. In fact, we will go backwards. I was struck by the fact that the Secretary of State said last month that she wants a railway that is fit for the future, “one that rebuilds the trust of… its passengers” and regenerates its communities and restores reliability. These timetable changes will not do anything to achieve the Secretary of State’s ambitions. I will now consider solutions. Last week, I met the Rail Minister Lord Hendy. It was a productive and considered meeting and I thank him for that. He undertook important work on behalf of the last Government in relation to the Union connectivity review, so I know he is a man of great experience and is a good appointment to his role. As he said to me, any timetable is never the final one. We need to see changes to the timetable to get more services to stop at Berwick-upon-Tweed. I will not stop fighting for better rail services for my constituents and for the thousands who cross the border to use Berwick-upon-Tweed station. Working with residents, local councillors and others, we will demonstrate the real-world negative impact that these changes will have and why it matters for local people in our rural communities to have good quality, reliable public transport. I am sure that—as we have already—we will hear examples from hon. Members from across the UK of how their communities will be negatively impacted by timetable changes or unreliable train services. For connectivity, for economic growth, and for our communities, this is bad news for the Borders. It should not have happened in the first place, and we need to focus all our efforts on restoring services so that residents in rural communities have access to the public services that they deserve.

• 9 Dec 2025 · Income Tax and National Insurance Threshold Freeze · Hansard source

  More

  There seems to be only one word that the Chancellor understands: tax. Her decision to continue the freeze on income tax thresholds is a hammer blow to working people. In fact, even one of the Chancellor’s favourite unions, Unison, has said: “Freezing personal income tax thresholds disproportionately impacts lower and middle-income workers.” Does the Chancellor agree with the Labour party’s union paymaster?

• 9 Dec 2025 · Income Tax and National Insurance Threshold Freeze · Hansard source

  More

  3. What assessment she has made of the potential impact of extending the freeze on income tax thresholds on working people.

• 9 Dec 2025 · Grooming Gangs: Independent Inquiry · Hansard source

  More

  The Scottish Government have announced a review of the grooming gangs evidence in Scotland, but that falls short of a full inquiry and disappoints many of the victims. I have asked for this before. Please will this UK Government extend their inquiry to the whole of the UK so that the victims of these appalling crimes get the justice they deserve? Grooming gangs operate in all parts of the UK; so should this inquiry.

• 8 Dec 2025 · Digital ID · Hansard source

  More

  On a point of order, Ms Furniss. Could you clarify how long the Minister has left to speak? By my understanding, he has until 7.29 pm so as to give the proposer of the motion a minute to respond.

• 8 Dec 2025 · Digital ID · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Keighley and Ilkley (Robbie Moore) for magnificently introducing this petition on behalf of the Petitions Committee. I also thank the more than 4,000 local residents in the Scottish Borders who have signed the petition. This issue cuts to the very heart of the relationship between our constituents and the state. I am completely against digital ID. It is expensive, intrusive and will be completely ineffective. It was not in the Labour Party’s 2024 election manifesto, so this is not something that anyone has voted for. Putting that to one side, this Labour Government do not seem to understand why digital ID is needed or what it is for. The Prime Minister initially claimed that it was an essential part of cracking down on illegal migration. Illegal migrants are making long, dangerous crossings over the channel; I hardly think the requirement for a digital identification card is going to deter them. Realising that this argument was not persuading anyone, the Government now claim that it is about simplifying access to Government services. Government services do need to be simplified, but we do not need digital ID to achieve that. Whatever the actual reasons behind the policy, we are inevitably going to see mission creep. I was particularly concerned to hear the Minister for Children and Families, the hon. Member for Whitehaven and Workington (Josh MacAlister), say that the Government are “starting with this issue of right to work check first, but there are loads of other applications for digital ID”. What will be next? Will digital ID be needed to access NHS services, to get a school place for someone’s son or daughter, or even potentially to go to the pub? The policy puts the personal data of all our constituents at risk. It would be a honeypot for cyber criminals and foreign state actors at a time when we are under increasing threat. I implore the Government to, for once, listen to the people and to the genuine and principled concerns of Members across the House. There is no deep need for digital ID. People do not want it and the Government have no mandate to introduce it. It fundamentally changes the relationship between the state and its citizens. We must say no to digital ID. It must be scrapped.

• 8 Dec 2025 · Digital ID · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Minister give way, please?

• 1 Dec 2025 · Office for Budget Responsibility Forecasts · Hansard source

  More

  Andy Haldane, former Bank of England chief economist, has said that the Government’s “repeated mistakes” and misinformation about the public finances have sucked all the energy from the economy. Chief Secretary, the former chief economist is correct, isn’t he?

• 27 Nov 2025 · Budget Resolutions · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The Budget creates no incentives for people to invest and take the risk of setting up and growing a business. It sends out all the wrong messages about what we want in a country that has traditionally been full of entrepreneurs. Because of the doom loop that the Chancellor has created, it will always be hard-working businesses and families who pay the price for her economic failure. The Chancellor could have made much better choices in her Budget. She could have saved £47 billion, including £23 billion from welfare, avoiding the need to increase taxes in this way altogether. She could have introduced a cheap power plan to bring down energy costs for homes and businesses. But the Chancellor has not listened. She has not learned from the mistakes she made in last year’s Budget. This Labour Government promised economic stability, but this Budget does nothing to make that a reality, which is why Conservative Members oppose it so strongly.

• 27 Nov 2025 · Budget Resolutions · Hansard source

  More

  This Labour Government came to power with so many promises. The Chancellor promised to kick-start economic growth, and not to increase the taxes of working people. Now that Labour is in government, I am afraid that it is doing the exact opposite. If it can be taxed, the Chancellor will tax it—an electric car, a holiday, or even a taxi home after a night out. I am afraid that the Chancellor and those on the Government Benches are completely out of touch on how the economy works. The statistics speak for themselves. Unemployment has surged across the United Kingdom: 19% more people are without a job since this Labour Government came to power, and almost 100,000 jobs have been lost in hospitality. The Government inherited inflation that was bang on the Bank of England’s targets; now, it has almost doubled. That is why there is a cost of living crisis out there in the real world. Economic growth is going in the wrong direction; forecasts have been revised downward next year, and are predicted to be lower in every remaining year of this Parliament. That is this Chancellor’s record and her legacy. In advance of this Budget, there was wild speculation about what the Chancellor would present and endless rumours of more tax rises—kite flying by the Treasury. How can we expect any business to plan or invest for the future if the rules of the game continue to shift in this way? Of course, the situation is a whole lot worse in Scotland, where the SNP Government have made us the most highly taxed part of the United Kingdom. I will focus my speech on two choices that this Labour Government made in the Budget. The first is the family farm tax. Yesterday I met farmers from across the United Kingdom who came to protest against this Labour Government’s decision to introduce the family farm tax. I was disappointed that I did not see many, if indeed any, Labour Members taking the time to speak to the farmers outside Parliament. I was utterly disgusted at the last-minute cancellation by the Metropolitan police—perhaps this Government were involved, too—of the farmers’ rally in Whitehall yesterday. Farmers are devastated by the Chancellor’s decision not to reverse this cruel tax. It is not that they do not want to pay their fair share; they already do, and they are a vital part of our economy, protecting our countryside, rural communities and food security. They simply cannot afford to pay it. I entirely agree with the comments of the hon. Member for Gower (Tonia Antoniazzi), who is sadly not in her place just now, but who highlighted very clearly the anguish facing many farmers, not just in her constituency, but in mine and across the United Kingdom. I deeply regret the fact that Ministers have their hands over their ears, and are refusing to listen to the plight of our farmers.

• 27 Nov 2025 · Budget Resolutions · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The intention may have been to force overseas investors, trust funds and others out of the farming sector, and to attack big landowners, but the tax is doing the complete opposite: it is destroying the family farm sector, forcing tenant farmers out, and seriously impacting on our food security ambitions. The family farm tax is yet another promise broken by the Chancellor, who gave no indication before the last election that Labour would introduce it. The supermarkets agree: Tesco, Sainsbury’s, Morrisons, the Co-op, Marks & Spencer and many more have expressed their concern about how the tax will impact farmers and our nation’s capacity to produce our own food. I grew up on a farm, so I understand this. The consequences of the Chancellor’s failure to reverse this cruel tax will be catastrophic for our rural communities. Two weeks ago, I visited dozens of small businesses across the Scottish Borders—corner shops, greengrocers, butchers, manufacturers, gift shops and many more. The same issue came up at almost every single one: the extremely tough business conditions just now. The jobs tax is forcing many of them to delay hiring decisions, or even lay off staff, and the additional red tape is forcing good employers to jump through totally unnecessary hoops. The average cost of a member of staff has surged by almost £1,000 a month, thanks to the jobs tax and the Government’s Employment Rights Bill. To make matters worse, because of the state of the economy, customers have less to spend on goods and services. It is all adding up to be an economic nightmare. The Chancellor’s decisions are pushing our economy into a tax doom loop: higher taxes will fund more spending, which harms our economic growth and— surprise, surprise—means that the Chancellor receives lower revenue, and so once again comes back to ask for more tax rises.

• 26 Nov 2025 · Budget Resolutions · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is making a powerful speech about the flaws in this Labour Government’s Budget. Does he share my concerns about the many farmers who were outside Parliament today to express how strongly they are opposed to the impact of inheritance tax changes on their business? It is very telling. I know he was there as well, but I did not spot any Labour Members listening to the concerns that farmers expressed today. Does he also share my concerns about the ban that the Met police imposed on the rally, which had been planned for weeks? Last night they decided to cancel it.

• 26 Nov 2025 · Budget Resolutions · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Lady is speaking about the measures that she supports in the Budget. I wonder about her views on the council tax surcharge. I had a quick look at the websites of estate agents in her constituency, and I can see that dozens—if not hundreds—of properties will be affected by the council tax surcharge. Does she support the measure and what is her message to her constituents who will have to pay that extra tax?

• 18 Nov 2025 · Northern Ireland Troubles Bill · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend makes an excellent pint. It is the fear—the prospect of being dragged through that process—that is causing so much anxiety. I suspect that is why so many veterans are so strongly opposed to this Bill. We should also be clear about the difference between the actions of soldiers and those of terrorists. When terrorists get up in the morning, they go out with murderous intent—to use violence to attack our democracy and our nation. Soldiers do not; they put themselves in harm’s way to keep people safe and protect our nation. The difference is the intent. Soldiers serving our country, whether in Northern Ireland or in any other conflict, are forced to make instant, life-or-death decisions. They are not lawyers sat behind a desk, able to gather a team and spend days deciding whether or not to act. The legacy Act was by no means perfect, but it is better than the disgraceful spectacle of veterans being dragged through the courts. There are nearly 2 million veterans across our country, and the sad truth is that many feel their service is no longer respected. Veterans are only demanding protection for following orders from high command, and from vexatious, politically charged lawsuits. Our armed forces are made up of extraordinary men and women who keep us safe—who go on difficult missions in dangerous and challenging places. We must defend those who defended us, which is why I oppose this Bill so strongly.