Kirsty McNeill MP: speeches

76 published records · newest first.

Speeches

2 Jun 2026 · Glasgow City Region Economy · Hansard source
More
It is a real pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Jardine. I warmly congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow North (Martin Rhodes) on securing this vital debate, and on everything he does to represent one of the greatest parts of one of the world’s finest cities. Whether through the revival and modernisation of heavy industries such as shipbuilding on our beloved Clyde, or future-facing industries like satellites and life sciences, this region is truly stepping forward to lead globally. The Glasgow city region’s importance to the Scottish and UK economies cannot be overstated—the region is quite simply a powerhouse. It encompasses some of Scotland’s most vibrant local authorities, thousands of distinct enterprises and more than 1 million workers. With more than £870 million invested into the region by the UK Government over 10 years, its future is looking even brighter, but to empower this region to reach its full potential we simply have to do things differently. To do that, we are actively moving away from the short-term, fragmented funded priorities that have held us back in the past. Instead, we are taking a targeted, long-term approach that puts power back where it belongs: in the hands of communities and regional leaders who know their streets and economies best. I want to share exactly how we are working to supercharge the Glasgow city region, secure high-quality jobs and restore pride in local places. I will begin by highlighting the immense success of the £1 billion Glasgow city region deal, which has delivered foundational benefits through its first decade. That 20-year agreement stands as one of the largest such deals in the whole UK. With more than half a billion pounds of investment from the UK Government, it is set to deliver up to 29,000 jobs over its lifetime. To date, the deal’s infrastructure programme has completely reshaped the local landscape, delivering iconic new connections across the Clyde. It has also breathed life into the city’s most important public spaces, including the Canal and North Gateway project, which has been transformational for communities in my hon. Friend’s constituency, creating better connections to the city centre and upgrading their public spaces. Further, that deal has leveraged over £800 million in additional private and commercial investment since its inception in 2014, showcasing how effective Government investment can unlock wider commitments to build towards a brighter and more ambitious future. However, we will not stop there. We will be building on those foundations with the new £140 million Scottish local growth fund launched in January 2026. It is specifically designed to support areas that contain some of the lowest living standards to boost productivity and improve access to better-paid work. The Glasgow city region economic partnership is set to receive the single largest allocation in Scotland from the local growth fund: £60.9 million over the next three years. The Glasgow city region is an excellent example of a region that knows exactly how to deliver true regional change, as exemplified through the success of the deal programme to date. At the same time, we understand that economic growth cannot be measured just on a balance sheet; as my hon. Friend said, it must be felt on the high street and on the doorstep. That is why we have introduced new hyper-local community funds that will empower local people to shape the future of their neighbourhoods. Through the Pride in Place programme and the Pride in Place impact fund, we are directly supporting the most in-need communities. Through those programmes, the Glasgow city region is receiving a total of £146 million to support communities across the city region to thrive. Funding is going to places in Glasgow city, North Lanarkshire, South Lanarkshire, Inverclyde and West Dunbartonshire. Of course, one of those places is the Springburn and Sighthill neighbourhood, which includes my hon. Friend’s constituents in Cowlairs and Port Dundas, and I cannot wait to see what priorities the community chooses to support in that area. We all know that the most enduring purpose of Labour Governments is to redistribute power. That is why we are putting decisions about such funding back into the hands of local people who know the places they love the best. Moving from the hyper-local to the national ambition, the UK Government are delivering a 10-year industrial strategy that is set to back Scotland’s strengths, unlock investment and deliver lasting economic growth. The Glasgow city region is key to this work, with many of the eight growth sectors in our strategy already forming the backbone of this regional economy—from advanced manufacturing and life sciences to defence and financial services. To back up that transformational strategy with real funding, we are investing up to £500 million across the UK into new local innovation partnerships aimed at growing high-potential innovation clusters. Because of the Glasgow city region’s huge innovation potential, we have allocated £50 million to the region, building directly on the success of the Glasgow innovation accelerator pilot, which this Government backed with another £10 million to the region. We will not stop there when it comes to equipping the region with the tools needed to be a truly modern economy. Its residents must have the skills and opportunities they need to chase the jobs of the future, as AI is put to work to transform communities and livelihoods. That is why Lanarkshire will host a new AI growth zone, backed by £8.2 billion of private investment and £5 million of direct UK Government investment, creating over 3,000 jobs and driving growth in line with the objectives of our industrial strategy. Simultaneously, our investment zone programme is driving regional economic growth and regeneration, targeting the high potential of the Glasgow city region’s advanced manufacturing sector. Working in partnership with the Scottish Government and local leaders, we will provide up to £160 million of funding for this investment zone over the next decade, which is expected to generate around £300 million of initial private sector investment and support up to 10,000 jobs in the region. We must also continue to support the industries that helped to make this region great. That is why this Government have provided bespoke support to Inverclyde in the form of £20 million for the Inchgreen dry dock redevelopment, which will drive new maritime and defence industry opportunities into Inverclyde, and support the people living there to gain the skills they need to do this important work. Of course, we do not just want investment coming in, but Glasgow’s unique strengths to be exported out to the global market. That is why I am delighted to be joining Glasgow chambers of commerce on an upcoming trade mission to China as they return to the Shanghai international technology fair. We are determined to champion this region’s world-renowned strengths in technology, life sciences and advanced manufacturing to encourage export opportunities and create jobs. Closer to home, the strategic partnership between the National Wealth Fund and the Glasgow city region represents a colossal opportunity for the region. In Scotland, the National Wealth Fund has directly invested nearly £2 billion, mobilising over £3.5 billion of private investment into projects that will create or support upwards of 9,000 jobs. The creation of partnerships, both internationally and at home, between the private and public sectors will unlock further private investment and drive growth. Together, that will leave the region best placed to navigate the challenges and financing barriers faced in delivering critical infrastructure improvements and developments. Such UK Government interventions are exactly the kind of long-term commitment that we believe is required to drive true growth. Crucially, building a truly dynamic economy is also about ensuring that the power to spend and to direct investment is with those who know the unique needs and opportunities of their area the best. As my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow North said, for too long we have watched the centralisation of decision making at Holyrood pull powers away from local communities and regional leaders across Scotland. That stands—I am sorry to say—in stark contrast to the UK Government’s ambitious regional devolution agenda south of the border, which seeks to expand the economic success story of Manchester to more parts of the country. The 2025 report on regional economic growth by economist Professor Sir Anton Muscatelli asked whether we should consider a “realignment of powers” for Scotland. Similarly, the leader of Glasgow city council, Susan Aitken, has called for a “rapid devolution of the powers”. I hear the call from my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow North, and from my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow South (Gordon McKee), for devolution, not for the sake of it but because it will drive greater local autonomy that will in turn aid the reduction of inequality, the improvement of health outcomes and the creation of new jobs and opportunities across the region. This is the debate about the future of localism that Scotland needs now.
2 Jun 2026 · Glasgow City Region Economy · Hansard source
More
My hon. Friend will know that that is felt right across the city region, and across other city regions in Scotland. The Scottish Government seem simply addicted to the centralisation of and hoarding of power. We have made an argument to the people of Scotland that has been incredibly well-received: they live in places that they know and love best, and they want the people they elect locally to have greater power. We are in ongoing dialogue with the Scottish Government but their driving political imperative is nation building, not place shaping. That stands in sharp contrast to the approach of this Labour Government, which is to put power in the hands of communities to change the places that they know and love so well. Scotland needs proper devolution inside Scotland, not just to it. My hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow South will find no greater champion of that local power agenda than me. We should at all times be guided by the fundamental principle that powers over local services and projects are often best exercised as close as humanly possible to the people whose daily lives they affect. The Scottish people need all levels of their Government to work together to make their lives and communities better. Strong, effective councils and empowered regional voices are key to a prosperous Scotland. We are fully committed to working alongside our local partners in the months and years ahead to deliver that better future for the Glasgow city region and beyond. Before I close, I want to reassure the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) that I am in ongoing dialogue with Northern Ireland Office Ministers about how we can take lessons from the city deal programme and scale them UK-wide. My hon. Friend the Member for West Dunbartonshire (Douglas McAllister) made a very important point about the strategic sites right along the Clyde. I happily visited one such site in his constituency with him. We are fully appraised of the opportunities right along the river. I thank the hon. Member for Glasgow North for securing this debate and thank all hon. Members who have spoken. The UK Government’s investment of over £870 million into the Glasgow city region over the next 10 years, combined with empowering local spending decisions, has already delivered a truly transformational impact that can be felt in every corner of the region, but this UK Government do not look backwards. Instead we continue to focus on progressing delivery and achieving the economic growth outcomes that will make sure that the Glasgow city region, Scotland, and the UK as a whole can thrive. To deliver more we must seize all opportunities. That includes having a meaningful conversation on the future of regional devolution, because together we still have so much more to gain. Let us seize this moment, look to the future and continue to deliver for the Glasgow city region. Question put and agreed to.
15 Apr 2026 · Cancer Research · Hansard source
More
Tragically, cancer remains one of the leading causes of death in Scotland. I want Scots to benefit from the very best research. The National Institute for Health and Care Research works in partnership with the Scottish Government to support and enhance health and social care research across the UK, even though healthcare is devolved. Researchers in Scotland can now apply for funding, which has, for example, allowed the outstanding researchers at the University of Dundee to identify a newer, simpler type of mammogram that can reliably show how breast cancer responds to chemotherapy before surgery.
15 Apr 2026 · Cancer Research · Hansard source
More
I commend my hon. Friend for his ongoing and dogged advocacy for this cause. As he will know, the UK Government are committed to ensuring a partnership approach between the health services of Scotland and the rest of the UK, and we are focused on ensuring that higher education, and other forms of innovation, are part of our work on cancer.
15 Apr 2026 · Pride in Place: Regeneration · Hansard source
More
Through our ambitious Pride in Place programme, we are empowering local people to shape the future of their neighbourhoods. The Pride in Place impact fund is investing £12 million across Scotland over two years, including £1.5 million in North Ayrshire. We will invest up to £480 million in 24 Scottish communities over the next decade, including £20 million each for the Irvine and Three Towns neighbourhoods in North Ayrshire, and for the Fauldhouse, Whitburn and Blackburn neighbourhood in West Lothian. This locally led funding can be used to directly support regeneration, high streets and heritage. Best of all, decisions will be made by local people—those who know and love the places the most.
15 Apr 2026 · Pride in Place: Regeneration · Hansard source
More
The hon. Member and I have had a chance to discuss this matter previously and, as I have indicated, these are Labour priorities guided by Labour values. We have committed to targeting funding at the places that need it most, based on a double deprivation index, and I am afraid her constituency simply did not qualify.
15 Apr 2026 · Pride in Place: Regeneration · Hansard source
More
The communities of Fauldhouse, Blackburn and Whitburn all face long-standing economic challenges, but as my hon. Friend rightly says, there is also so much pride and passion locally, and she is a great champion of that. Our Pride in Place programme is there to ensure that all local people have a stake and a say, and that they can work together for a future that is truly worthy of their ambitions for the places they love.
15 Apr 2026 · Pride in Place: Regeneration · Hansard source
More
That is precisely one of the focuses of the Pride in Place programme. Our high streets have been neglected for far too long and are at the real heart of community pride. I am delighted that so many of the Pride in Place bids are focused on exactly that.
15 Apr 2026 · Pride in Place: Regeneration · Hansard source
More
Huge congratulations to my hon. Friend and her constituents. These three towns have tremendous untapped potential that has been long neglected and underutilised. Our coastal towns are a huge part of our identity on these islands, and I look forward to working with her to champion the pride that people rightly feel about living in this beautiful part of Ayrshire.
25 Feb 2026 · Northern Ireland Troubles Bill: Scottish Veterans · Hansard source
More
I thank the hon. Member for his consistent and thoughtful engagement on the Bill. The Government are committed to delivering truth and accountability for those who were bereaved or seriously injured during the troubles, which is why we introduced the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill in October. The previous Government’s Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023 delivered no real support to veterans in legacy processes. The troubles Bill will put in place deliverable protections, designed in line with our human rights obligations and in consultation with veterans, including those from Scotland. I can confirm that the Scottish Veterans Commissioner met the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland in December.
25 Feb 2026 · Northern Ireland Troubles Bill: Scottish Veterans · Hansard source
More
I would be delighted to meet the Scottish Veterans Commissioner but, as the hon. Gentleman will appreciate, the Northern Ireland Office leads on such matters. We should put on the record that we owe a huge debt to the quarter of a million Northern Ireland veterans who served with honour to bring about peace in Northern Ireland. It is the Government’s firm view that no veteran who properly carried out their duty should be forced to face an endless cycle of legal uncertainty.
25 Feb 2026 · Northern Ireland Troubles Bill: Scottish Veterans · Hansard source
More
This Government are firmly committed to those who have served receiving the support, respect and recognition that they deserve. Our new veterans strategy, underpinned by our commitment to bring the armed forces covenant fully into law, includes £50 million for Valour—the first ever UK-wide Government approach to veterans support. For veterans in Glasgow and across Scotland, that means clearer pathways to services, better advocacy and a system that understands and recognises their unique experiences.
25 Feb 2026 · Hospitality Sector · Hansard source
More
I do not know if the hon. Gentleman heard me about the Conservatives’ record: 7,000 pubs lost under their watch. A package of support has, of course, been presented by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor for pubs in England, meaning that there is already extra money for the Scottish Government to spend in this area. I encourage Scottish Government Ministers to step up support for the hospitality sector using the Barnett consequentials that this Government have already provided.
25 Feb 2026 · Hospitality Sector · Hansard source
More
Our changes to employer national insurance were part of raising the revenue needed for the changes in public services from which his constituents and mine will benefit due to the record settlement for the Scottish Government. I will just say to the hon. Gentleman, however, that protestations of fealty to the hospitality sector would ring more true had 7,000 pubs not shut under the Conservatives.
25 Feb 2026 · Hospitality Sector · Hansard source
More
My hon. Friend is, as usual, quite right. Scottish businesses are facing eye-watering rate hikes, while the SNP Government tinker around the edges of a fundamentally broken system. Meanwhile, Anas Sarwar has been clear: Scottish Labour would revive our high streets with a fundamental overhaul of business rates. Right now, jobs and businesses are at risk, and we want to reset the balance between our local businesses and the online giants.
25 Feb 2026 · Hospitality Sector · Hansard source
More
Scotland’s hospitality businesses, at the heart of our high streets and communities, are the engines of Scotland’s economy. The UK Government have helped businesses across the country by stabilising public finances, focusing on driving economic growth and putting more money in people’s pockets. In Scotland, of course, key levers such as rates, business development, skills and planning are devolved to the Scottish Government. Perhaps hon. Members on the SNP Benches can explain why the Scottish Government have failed so miserably to support Scotland’s hospitality sector in the way that it deserves.
10 Feb 2026 · Draft Scotland Act 1998 (Modification of Schedule 5) Order 2026 · Hansard source
More
I am here to lay out the Government’s view on the Scotland Act order. I am not the diary secretary for my colleagues—I do not think the hon. Member would expect me to be. We are here to debate this order. The Chair of the Scottish Affairs Committee and indeed other members of this Committee have raised repeatedly a question that I hope I addressed in my opening remarks. But let me reiterate the view about why a section 30 and not a section 104 order is the appropriate way to get done what we need to get done today. This is for two reasons. A section 104 order cannot be invoked until a Bill has had Royal Assent. Likewise, it cannot be used to confer regulatory powers, which is specifically what the Scottish Government asked for in the intergovernmental conversations that we had. The Scottish Government have noted that the details of what a future section 104 order might contain are still being worked through, so it would not be possible for us to say in advance what our response to a request for a section 104 order would be, because no such request has been forthcoming. To clarify for the Committee, in correspondence to the Scottish Parliament, the Scottish Government have stated: “'It is likely that some, if not all, of the relevant provisions will need to be handled through a section 104 Order which, as outlined previously, will mean that they need to be removed from the Bill to be dealt with in that way. However, consideration is being given to whether it might, in some cases, be possible to amend the provisions to limit the scope of the powers so that they can be more clearly understood to be for purposes that are within the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament.”
10 Feb 2026 · Draft Scotland Act 1998 (Modification of Schedule 5) Order 2026 · Hansard source
More
The provisions in this order are incredibly narrow and time-limited. It is appropriate that it is done in a delegated legislation environment. Members are doing all manner of business of the House and, indeed, the business of their constituents.
10 Feb 2026 · Draft Scotland Act 1998 (Modification of Schedule 5) Order 2026 · Hansard source
More
Let me just put on the record my great thanks to the Committee and its Chair, my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow West, for their scrutiny. I hope I will cover all the points that she raised.
10 Feb 2026 · Draft Scotland Act 1998 (Modification of Schedule 5) Order 2026 · Hansard source
More
It is required and desirable because we believe the integrity of the medicines regulatory regime should be maintained across the United Kingdom. We are trying to strike a balance. We want to give the Scottish Parliament the ability to confer the power to Scottish Ministers to identify in this case, and in only this case, that substances and devices that could be used in assisted dying are able to be so used if that is the will of the Scottish Parliament. Of course, that is provided that that is done by way of subordinate legislation made with the agreement of the Secretary of State. The order also provides that the Scottish Parliament may confer powers on the Secretary of State to regulate such substances and devices by subordinate legislation. In our view, they are separate matters and we are trying to find a balance between the two. Turning to the questions raised by the Chair of the Scottish Affairs Committee—
10 Feb 2026 · Draft Scotland Act 1998 (Modification of Schedule 5) Order 2026 · Hansard source
More
I thank hon. Members for their contributions and consideration—I hope to cover all the points raised in turn. I will begin with reflections from the hon. Member for West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine, who asked why this debate was not conducted on the Floor of the Commons. As he will know, because we have sat opposite each other in this space many times, Scotland Act 1998 orders are generally considered in Delegated Legislation Committees and subsequently put to the House by a motion, so that is entirely in keeping with normal practice. The hon. Member for Perth and Kinross-shire asked for clarification of the UK Government’s role in medicines regulation and, indeed, a justification for that. The UK Government’s role in medicines regulation is to set and oversee the UK-wide statutory framework that ensures licensed medicines are safe, effective and of high quality before they can be supplied to patients. In our view, it is critical that regulatory consistency is maintained across the UK. It has been a key priority post the EU exit, and we have prioritised avoiding any divergence between regulatory approaches. The limited nature of that change will ensure that the overall integrity of the UK-wide medicines regime is retained, whether the Scottish Parliament approves the McArthur Bill or not. Staying with that line of questioning, the hon. Member for Perth and Kinross-shire asked why the Secretary of State will continue to have the final say over how that power is used. The draft order’s change to the legislative competence is specifically designed to allow for that to be retained, because we think that the UK Government have an appropriate role in the overarching regulation of medicines across the UK. That is why it is, and will remain, reserved. However, we do want to enable the Scottish Parliament to introduce provisions that could confer power in that way—in a way that simultaneously maintains the integrity of the UK medicines regime and allows the Scottish Parliament to debate that which is legitimately inside their competence.
10 Feb 2026 · Draft Scotland Act 1998 (Modification of Schedule 5) Order 2026 · Hansard source
More
Officials of both Governments are working through a range of scenarios, but what we cannot do is table an order about a Bill that has not been passed. There are ongoing discussions, as we would hope and expect, but we cannot use a section 104 order until a Bill has received Royal Assent. The Chair of the Scottish Affairs Committee has asked for clarification on whether the Scottish Parliament would be able to amend or repeal the Act’s regulation-making powers in a future Scottish parliamentary Session. I am pleased to clarify that if the Bill is passed and contains regulatory-making powers authorised by a section 30 order, it would not be possible for the Scottish Parliament to amend or repeal those regulation-making powers in a future Session. The time limits in this section 30 order mean that it would no longer be within the Scottish Parliament’s legislative competence to do so. Instead, subject to the Secretary of State’s approval, they would be able to revoke or amend the regulations that have been made under those powers. I will take a moment to answer the question that the Chair of the Scottish Affairs Committee raised about receiving a copy of the response to the report in a timely fashion. We have responded, and I am grateful to the Committee for submitting it, but her points about timeliness and courtesy are well taken. I will make sure that courtesies are observed in future. The hon. Member for Perth and Kinross-shire asked about whether the UK Government would consent to a future section 104 order request. As per the correspondence between the Scottish Parliament and Scottish Government, we understand that the Scottish Government will seek the agreement of the UK Government after the Bill passes. That will ensure that practitioners are protected should they choose to opt out of an assisted dying service. We expect to agree in principle to take forward that order, but it will be considered in the usual way, once we have actual legislation to look at. The hon. Member for Perth and Kinross-shire also asked whether, in effect, failure to pass this draft order would have the practical effect of stopping legislation progressing in the Scottish Parliament. That is our view. We must pass this today to give practical expression to whatever choice the Scottish Parliament makes. It is their choice to make, but whatever that is, we believe it is our constitutional responsibility to facilitate the progress of legislation through the Scottish Parliament. A number of questions were asked about the justification for a time limit in the draft order. The time limit reflects two things. First, it reflects that this is not a permanent—perhaps to the displeasure of the hon. Member for Perth and Kinross-shire—alteration to the devolution settlement, and secondly, that it would not be appropriate to pre-empt consideration by any future Scottish Parliament and attempt to bind it in that way. The section 30 order on an independence referendum illustrates that there is a precedent for including a time limit in a section 30 order. We have concluded that it is appropriate to provide for temporary, and temporary only, devolution of legislative competence in a section 30 order, because it is seeking to address a very specific issue. We are considering a very narrow and technical order that provides the Scottish Parliament with a time-limited ability to include powers in the Bill to identify and regulate substances and devices that could be used in an assisted dying regime. It is important to be clear that the draft order enables the Scottish Parliament to do that, if it chooses—it in no way compels it to. The decision on whether to create an assisted dying regime in Scotland remains, as it should be, a decision for Members of the Scottish Parliament. Although the Government remain neutral on assisted dying, we believe that our approach with this draft order is appropriate.
10 Feb 2026 · Draft Scotland Act 1998 (Modification of Schedule 5) Order 2026 · Hansard source
More
I beg to move, That the Committee has considered the draft Scotland Act 1998 (Modification of Schedule 5) Order 2026. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Twigg. The draft order was laid before the House on 17 December 2025. As with all orders made under the Scotland Act 1998 that we have considered since the start of this Parliament, the order is the result of close collaborative working between the UK and Scottish Governments. The order before us is made under section 30 of the Scotland Act, which provides the power for the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament to be altered. Specifically, it enables modifications to be made to schedules 4 or 5 of the Scotland Act. Orders made under that provision are subject to the affirmative procedure in the UK and Scottish Parliaments. The order was considered by the Scottish Parliament, having been considered by the Health and Social Care Committee, and it will be considered in the other place. I now turn to the purpose of the draft order. The Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill is a Member’s Bill introduced by Liam McArthur MSP. It is currently before the Scottish Parliament and seeks to create an assisted dying regime in Scotland. I am acutely aware of the sincerely and strongly held views on the topic, and I emphasise that the UK Government are neutral on the matter of assisted dying. It is a matter for MSPs in the Scottish Parliament to determine whether there should be an assisted dying regime in Scotland. The Scottish Government identified areas of the Bill as being outside legislative competence and, as such, requested a section 30 Scotland Act order from the UK Government in respect of substances and medical devices, as they considered that such provisions are fundamental to the operability of the Bill. The UK Government considered the request carefully and, following engagement with the Scottish Government, concluded that making a narrow, time-limited section 30 order would be the most appropriate action. That approach enables Members of the Scottish Parliament to consider the Bill in the Scottish Parliament with clarity as to how the matter of substances and devices that may be used for an assisted dying regime in Scotland could be dealt with, while protecting reserved matters such as medicines regulation. I emphasise that this is a limited and temporary change to the Scotland Act 1998. To explain the time-limited nature of the draft order further, this section 30 order is time limited so as to reflect the circumstances of the Scottish Parliament Bill and the upcoming Scottish elections in May. The time-limited nature of the order reflects that, first, this is not a fundamental or permanent alteration to the devolution settlement and, secondly, it would not be appropriate to pre-empt consideration by a future Scottish Parliament. The time limit applies to the legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament but will not affect the future exercise of any regulation-making functions conferred by the Bill beyond 7 May 2026, should the Scottish Parliament determine to do so. The draft order has been designed specifically to ensure that the Scottish Parliament can create an overall framework for medicines and devices to be used in an assisted dying regime, should it decide to do so. In particular, I take this opportunity to thank members of the Scottish Affairs Committee for their carefully considered report on the SI. On the question of whether the Scottish Parliament would be able to amend or repeal the regulation-making powers under any Act in a future Scottish parliamentary Session—if the Bill is passed and contains regulation-making powers authorised by section 30 order—it would not be possible for the Scottish Parliament to amend or repeal those regulation-making powers in a future Session. The time limits within the section 30 order mean that that would no longer be within the Scottish Parliament’s legislative competence to do. Subject to the Secretary of State’s approval, it would instead be able to revoke or amend the regulations that had been made under those powers. I am aware that the content of the draft order has prompted queries about the approach that the Government have taken: first, on why the Government have taken forward a section 30 order and not, for example, a section 104 order; secondly, on the scope of the draft order and the matters that are not included; and, thirdly, on the likelihood of other orders being brought forward under the Scotland Act 1998. A Committee scrutinised the draft order and the Scottish Affairs Committee considered it, and they both raised those points. I take this opportunity to thank them for their scrutiny and to provide answers, as follows. The Government consider all requests for Scotland Act orders carefully. They look at what, if any, provisions made under the Scotland Act 1998 may be appropriate. That includes section 104 of the Act. Section 104 is routinely used to make provision in consequence of an Act of the Scottish Parliament—that is to say, once a Bill has Royal Assent. In this instance, it was not considered an appropriate option due to the limitations of the power. Section 104 cannot be used before a Bill achieves Royal Assent. The request was to take action before, because in the Scottish Government’s view, the provisions were fundamental to the operation of the Bill. Moreover, section 104 cannot be used to create regulation-making functions. Section 30 was considered appropriate as it enables the Scottish Parliament to introduce regulation-making powers within the narrow scope of the order. In essence, section 30 was in this instance the only means of achieving both of those outcomes. The Government therefore believe that their approach is appropriate in the circumstances. On the second point, the Government have been asked why the order does not include further subject areas that the Scottish Government have identified as being outside competence. The Government’s view is consistent: it is a matter for the Scottish Parliament to ensure that the legislation is within competence. Although section 30 orders have been used occasionally in the past as Bills have proceeded through the Scottish Parliament, it is not a regular practice nor would be expect it to be. We have agreed to it in those circumstances. Consequential legislation is, however, routinely taken forward and is rightly considered by this House. Such consequential orders cover matters that cannot be legislated for by the Scottish Parliament. The Scottish Government asked the UK Government to consider section 104 orders in relation to professional regulation and opt-in measures, and subsequently, to consider a section 30 order in respect of those provisions. The UK Government position is that consequential legislation is the appropriate means of addressing or considering reserve provisions. Fundamentally, the Government are not seeking to substantially alter the devolution settlement via this order. Therefore, it is appropriate that the order is narrow and addresses the key questions asked of us. Ministerial correspondence confirms that the Scottish Government were seeking agreement to a section 30 order on the narrow scope of substances and devices, with further consideration to be given to section 104 orders. The UK Government have agreed to further requests and consequential legislation, which is a normal occurrence. Of course, the order before the Committee is the order the Government have agreed to take forward with the Scottish Government on the matter of substances and devices. That is the matter that the Government is seeking the approval of the Committee on. Both Governments agree that the specification of substances and devices, as well as their associated regulation, is fundamental to the operation of the Bill before the Scottish Parliament and the workability of the assisted dying regime, which the Bill seeks to introduce. I reiterate that the UK Government maintain their neutral stance on assisted dying and do not endorse any particular outcome of the consideration of the Bill before the Scottish Parliament. I recognise that there is interest in the existence of schemes across the UK in view of the legislation being considered by the Scottish and UK Parliaments. The position is not changed by this order. The order has been specifically designed to ensure that the Scottish Parliament can create an overall framework for medicines and devices to be used in an assisted dying regime, should it choose to do so.
20 Jan 2026 · Draft Social Security (Scotland) Act 2018 (Carer’s Assistance) (Consequential Modifications) Order 2026 · Hansard source
More
I thank Members for their contributions. I not only thank the hon. Member for West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine for his support for the technical nature of the change, but note and share his view that the Scottish Government are indeed incredibly careless with taxpayers’ money. I would go further and say, on behalf of the Labour Government, that they are addicted to wasting money. That point is noted and is a point of agreement between us. I thank the hon. Member for Mid Dunbartonshire for her party’s support for the changes. This instrument demonstrates the UK Government’s continued commitment to work with the Scottish Government to deliver for Scotland. I commend the draft order to the House. Question put and agreed to.
20 Jan 2026 · Draft Social Security (Scotland) Act 2018 (Carer’s Assistance) (Consequential Modifications) Order 2026 · Hansard source
More
I beg to move, That the Committee has considered the draft Social Security (Scotland) Act 2018 (Carer’s Assistance) (Consequential Modifications) Order 2026. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Christopher. The draft order was laid before the House on 8 December, and I am grateful for the opportunity to debate it. As with all the Scotland Act orders we have considered since the start of this Parliament, this one is the result of collaborative working between the UK and Scottish Governments. The order will be made under section 104 of the Scotland Act 1998 which, following an Act of the Scottish Parliament, provides the power for consequential provisions to be made in respect of the law relating to reserved matters or the laws elsewhere in the UK. Scotland Act orders are a demonstration of devolution in action, and I am pleased to say that the Scotland Office has taken through 12 orders since the Government came to power in July 2024. The Scotland Act 2016 devolved responsibility for certain social security benefits, and employment support, to the Scottish Parliament. This included carer’s allowance, which the Scottish Government replaced with the carer support payment in 2023. This order was introduced to make provisions in consequence of further changes that the Scottish Government have made to their carer support payment. The Scottish Government requested the order, and the UK Government worked collaboratively with them on the draft, showcasing devolution in action. The order makes amendments to the relevant UK and Northern Ireland legislation as a consequence of the Carer’s Assistance (Miscellaneous and Consequential Amendments, Revocation, Transitional and Saving Provisions) (Scotland) Regulations 2025, which were made on 6 November 2025 and will come into force, in respect of the provisions relevant to this order, on 15 March 2026. The Scottish Government’s regulations introduce additional support—the carer additional person payment—for those who receive carer support payment and care for more than one person; extend support for carers from eight to 12 weeks after the death of the person they care for; and introduce a new Scottish carer supplement which, for most carers, will replace the carer’s allowance supplement that is currently paid under section 81 of the Social Security (Scotland) Act 2018. The order will ensure that the Scottish Government’s changes to the carer support payment are reflected in reserved benefits. In summary, the order makes consequential amendments to UK legislation to reflect the introduction of changes to the carer support payment in Scotland. It is an example of devolution in action, it is about the UK Government working with the Scottish Government to deliver for the people of Scotland, and it reflects the continued strong co-operation between the Scottish and UK Governments.

Published records only — not a full account of an MP’s work. How we work →