Susan Murray MP: speeches

Speeches

• 15 Sept 2026 · Civil Service Pension Scheme · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Member for Liverpool West Derby (Ian Byrne) for securing this debate. I was contacted in February by a constituent who sadly lost her partner in November 2025. She was left caring for two children on one income. When she reached out to access a hardship loan, she was denied. The Government had shut out bereaved families at the time they most needed help. When I asked the Minister how much it would have cost to include them, I did not get an answer. That has been the theme throughout, for myself and my constituents. I have asked what penalties have been applied to Capita—no answer. Given that much of Capita appears to be nothing more than a rebranding of MyCSP, with the same workforce doing the same job, can the Minister tell me what assurances she can provide that we will not see a repeat of the Capita fiasco? The Cabinet Office is responsible for civil service pensions. Unlike other pension providers that are monitored by the Financial Conduct Authority, this issue is not subject to FCA scrutiny.

• 15 Sept 2026 · English Whisky: Single Malt Definition · Hansard source

  More

  Can the Minister tell distillers in Scotland, like those who invested £12 million in the Port of Leith distillery in Edinburgh to achieve the prize Scottish single malt label, which I visited with the Scottish Affairs Committee earlier this year, why English producers will be able to use the same single malt label without playing by the same rules?

• 8 Sept 2026 · Israel and Palestine · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Foreign Secretary for his statement. On behalf of my constituents, I am asking him not to overlook the Palestinian healthcare workers, including Dr Abu Safiya, who are being held in Israeli prisons, and for him to work to secure their release.

• 15 Jul 2026 · Engagements · Hansard source

  More

  Q15. I wish the Prime Minister well in what he does next. The future of communities like mine in Mid Dunbartonshire is uncertain in areas where hyperscale data centres are set to be built. The large data centres in Scotland’s planning system could demand more power than the whole of Scotland needs at its winter peak. Can the Prime Minister assure my constituents that they will not find themselves fighting for electricity during the cold winter days?

• 15 Jul 2026 · Independence Referendum · Hansard source

  More

  Some 54% of Scots now back nuclear power, and the SNP tells them that they cannot have it. In May, over half of Scots—57%—voted for parties committed to the Union. Now, I know that some parties might describe that as nearly 60%, but it is definitely a majority. However, the SNP’s answer, as we are hearing, appears to be another referendum. There is a pattern whereby a majority of Scots disagree with the SNP, and the SNP decides the majority is wrong. Will the Secretary of State back the single transferable vote so that Scots get what Scots vote for?

• 8 Jul 2026 · Societal Impact of AI: Government Policy · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms McVey. I thank the hon. Member for Poole (Neil Duncan-Jordan) for securing a debate on a question that will shape every community in this country, including mine. I will try to focus on topics that have not been covered, including infrastructure. In my Mid Dunbartonshire constituency, AI has recently been brought to the forefront of local debate. At Westerhill, near Bishopbriggs, a developer has proposed a 300 MW AI data centre with 500 MW of battery storage—nationally significant infrastructure on our doorstep. My constituents’ response has rightly been one of caution—not hostility and not blind welcome. They have serious concerns and questions: “What jobs will this bring, and for whom? What happens to the environment, to the grid, to water and to energy bills?” Developments on this scale must be good neighbours and deliver community benefit that people can see, as well as skills, local employment and investment in the places that host them—not just high fences and, as the hon. Member for Dewsbury and Batley (Iqbal Mohamed) said, profits that are disseminated at a distance. That is how they will be judged by the communities who host them. This is an international issue, and it has so far been dominated by US policy. Last month, the United States showed the first sign that it may not see us as being part of its team when it comes to AI access. On 12 June, the US Government ordered one of the US’s leading AI companies to cut off access to its two most advanced models for anyone who is not a US citizen—the first time that export controls have ever been applied to AI models. Access for British businesses and researchers was switched off overnight not because of anything we did, but because Trump decided to cut us off. That is not a partnership; a vital technology that can be withdrawn at another Government’s whim is a chain around Britain’s neck. We cannot build our public services, our security and our economy on systems that can be cut off at a whim. It is clear that the UK must build its sovereign capacity—the data centres, skills and software needed to ensure that we are not locked out of the AI race. Communities such as mine, which are being asked to host the infrastructure of that future, should share fairly in the rewards, and we must build public trust. The Liberal Democrat approach would make that possible, based on a cross-sector, principle-based framework to give innovators certainty and the public confidence, and to give transparency wherever AI is used in the public sector, so that people can understand the impact it is having on their lives.