Broadband

Many constituents have copied me into emails sent to the CEO of Ofcom regarding Ofcom’s consultation on the future of internet in the UK. Responsibility of broadband delivery is devolved to the Scottish Government and as such, does not fall under the remit of my office. However, the issue is widespread and has been the subject of concern for many constituents, so I feel it is pertinent I do what I can to hold Openreach to account, and to encourage the development of a better broadband service within the UK.

On 22 October 2015 I asked the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Question number 13006) what the planned date is for the roll-out of fibre broadband in (a) the Chryston area and (b) the constituency of Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill.

Mr Edward Vaizey MP, the then Minister for Culture and the Digital Economy stated in response that UK Government has allocated £122 million for two Scottish Superfast Broadband projects - the Highlands and Islands project and the Digital Scotland project, which covers the rest of Scotland. He stated that following the completion of the current contracted projects, expected by December 2017, superfast broadband coverage will be around 93% within the Digital Scotland project area. This answer was received on 29 Oct 2015.

On 19th January 2016 I co-signed a letter to The Telegraph alongside members of The British Infrastructure Group who released a detailed report on broadband speeds, the role of BT Openreach and what can be done to improve things. This 'Broadbad' report revealed that Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill have an above average number of connections with speeds slower than 10Mb/s.

The SNP Scottish Government are committed to ensuring that 100% of home and business premises in Scotland have access to superfast broadband by 2021. The Scottish Government are also investing in the Digital Scotland Superfast Broadband programme to extend superfast broadband into areas which are not currently reached by the existing market – particularly rural and remote parts of the country. The £410m project has already reached 85% of premises in Scotland, in the last three months alone, broadband has been extended to 35,000 premises. In 2016 people rightly expect access to high-speed internet connections.

Whether at home or at work, fast broadband should be a reality in all our communities. Sadly, this is not yet the case. As mentioned above, the matter is devolved therefore my involvement is somewhat limited however, I plan to continue supporting campaigns with aims to tackle the problem and gain answers where possible.

Office of Electoral Integrity

I have been made aware by campaigners of an EDM relating to the establishment of an Office of Electoral Integrity. I am conscious that this issue will be preeminent in the minds of many people as we come out of the EU referendum campaign, where claims and counter-claims were made and political commitments were made, which were later found to be questionable. I have been disappointed to see those who advocated for a ‘Leave’ vote turn around on so many of the pledges made in the campaign – particularly the misleading claim about how much money could be given to the NHS in the eventuality of a ‘leave’ vote.

I am aware that there are a number of resources which perform a similar function to that suggested for an Office of Electoral Integrity. I am open-minded about how we can ensure that political debate is measured, evidence-based and avoids misleading the public, but I believe that any specific proposals should be very carefully considered. I will follow the progress of these proposals with interest and I look forward to the possibility of them being debated in Parliament in the not too distant future.

Orkambi

NICE has recently  issued a draft recommendation that Orkambi not be recommended for treatment of cystic fibrosis on the NHS.

In coming to this decision NICE, who are an independent body, determined that any increased benefits from Orkambi have not currently been demonstrated to be superior to the currently available treatment. NICE has to balance its assessments of a drug’s efficacy in tandem with the cost to the health service and in those terms determined Orkambi was not a significant improvement over current treatments. 

As you may be aware, the Scottish NHS seeks guidance from the Scottish Medicines Consortium rather than NICE. The SMC are currently reviewing Orkambi and are set to make their recommendation on the 9th of May. While typically SMC recommendations come to similar conclusions as NICE, they have on occasion differed. 

It is my understanding that the procedures that new drugs have to pass through can often seem frustrating. But these processes exist to ensure that the NHS provides the best possible treatment to all patients. Many new drugs offer little additional benefit over and above current treatments and in these cases NICE or the SMC may determine existing treatments remain the preferred option.

Trade Union Bill

I strongly oppose this pernicious piece of legislation and along with my SNP colleagues opposed it at all stages as it progressed through the Commons.

The measures within the Bill seek to challenge employee rights in the work place and that is why I’ve supported my colleagues who have been leading on fighting it on behalf of the SNP in Westminster. Whilst we’ve actively sought to oppose the Bill, the SNP in Westminster have been attempting to limit the impact of the Bill on employees, submitting a number of amendments at both Committee and Report stage which recently concluded in the Commons. It is an outrage that the UK Government has remained content to push through the Bill, rejecting amendments which would protect rights for workers.

I met with Trade Unionists during the recent lobby of parliament and was very happy to discuss the arguments against the Bill, whilst committing my full opposition to it. Trade Unions are key stakeholders and my colleagues and I have been in discussion with Trade Union leaders at a national level to look at how we can mitigate the effects of the Bill. 

I am aware that my colleagues in the Scottish Government are exploring all options to ensure that we can protect Scotland’s distinct approach to industrial relations and I will support them in their efforts.

It is disappointing that following the vote in the Commons the Bill will now progress to the unelected Chamber where the Government will continue to force it through without appropriate opposition.

Investigatory Powers Bill

The Investigatory Powers Bill received its second reading in Parliament on Tuesday 15 March. 

Whilst the SNP support targeted suspicion based surveillance which is properly authorised and overseen, and we welcome the introduction of some judicial oversight of the authorisation of warrants, we have grave concerns about other aspects of the Bill including collection of Internet connection records and bulk powers.

Undoubtedly the law needs a thorough overhaul and the attempt to consolidate a number of statutes in order to have a modern and comprehensive law is to be welcomed.  We recognise that the security services and the police require adequate powers to fight terrorism and serious crime.  However, such powers must always be shown to be necessary, proportionate and in accordance with the law. In particular, they must not impinge unduly on the right to privacy or the security of private data. Many of the powers in the Bill do not pass these tests.

In February, I had the opportunity to question Theresa May regarding this bill. Along with the infringement on privacy within the bill, the cost of complying with the requirements for communications companies as set out by the Snooper's Charter is potentially cripplingly high. Both those in the sector as well as the House of Commons Science and Technology Select Committee have warned that the bill could "undermine" the sector.

While the Home Secretary stated that the Government would provide communications companies with "full cost recovery [for] operational costs" incurred in complying with the bill, there remains substantial uncertainty regarding the cost of compliance. In particular, the definition of "internet connection records", which companies would be required to collect for every customer, remains unclear, making it difficult for businesses to estimate the cost of complying with the draft bill.
The technology sector is critical to a growing economy in this digital age. It is completely unacceptable to see it hindered by this Tory government requiring technology companies to infringe upon our privacy and civil liberties.

The Government has failed to strike the right balance and whilst we are prepared to work with all parties constructively to amend the Bill in order to get the balance right, we cannot support the Bill at this time. 

Many of the powers in the Bill are of questionable legality and in significant respects the powers sought go further than any other government in the west has been prepared to go. The draft bill was given insufficient time for consideration, therefore it is imperative that the Government allows for full scrutiny of the Bill.  In its current form the SNP cannot give this Bill our full support.

The SNP abstained from the vote on Tuesday and said we would work for this Bill to be significantly amended to address our concerns and those of other parliamentarians, civil liberties groups and technology companies. We made it clear that if our concerns are not addressed, we reserve the right to vote against the Bill in the later stages of its passage through Parliament.

UK Government's Local Government and Ethical Procurement Guidance

The UK Government has new guidelines on public procurement, which restrict the ability of local authorities to make ethical decisions about excluding companies from public procurement, and the investing activity of public pension schemes.

These guidelines do not affect Scotland, where the regulation of public procurement and public pension schemes is devolved to the Scottish Government. The Scottish Government regulations on local authority public procurement have taken a much more considerate approach to this matter, with due regard given to the need for prudent financial investments as well as valid social, environmental and ethical considerations.

I am concerned at the UK Government’s guidelines, which amount to a censuring of local authorities in England & Wales. My SNP colleagues will be attending a Westminster Hall debate on this matter next week, and rest assured that we will pursue the UK Government Ministers on why they would wish to restrict the ability of local authorities to choose not to invest in companies that have been involved in human rights abuses, the arms trade, and other ethically questionable activities.

NHS Reinstatement Bill

It is my view, and that of my SNP colleagues, that the current Westminster agenda of austerity, privatisation and patient charging in the NHS in England threatens to harm Scotland's budget, on which our NHS depends.

In Scotland, the SNP Scottish Government is prioritising investment in our public National Health Service. In this year’s Scottish Budget, we have pledged an additional £500 million to be invested in the Scottish NHS, with £250 million invested in the integration of health and social care. This takes total health spending in Scotland to near £13 billion.

My SNP colleague Dr. Philippa Whitford supported the NHS Reinstatement Bill when it was first presented before Parliament, and Dr. Whitford will lead SNP MPs in support of the bill when it is considered for a second time in Parliament.

As the bill is a Private Member’s Bill, its chances of becoming law are slim because of the very little parliamentary time dedicated to considering Private Member’s Bills. However, rest assured that the SNP will support the bill wholeheartedly and its aims of restoring the National Health Service in England to the accountable public service that it was always meant to be.

BBC Consultation & Charter Renewal

The results of the BBC consultation report make for interesting reading. Both I and my SNP colleagues are strongly committed to a vibrant, creative and diverse BBC which is editorially independent and decentralised. I am therefore pleased to see that the consultation has secured responses making suggestions as to how the quality of BBC programming could be improved, and I am also delighted to note that a large proportion of the responses also suggest that the BBC should remain independent from both Parliament and government.

Although I am pleased to see that the consultation makes the suggestion that the licence fee should be retained, both I and my SNP Westminster colleagues believe that the system for paying should be modernised, and should primarily be based on the ability to pay. It is also our opinion that BBC Scotland should receive a fairer share of BBC income, reflecting more accurately the licence fee revenue raised here in Scotland. Correcting the mismatch between the £335 million income for the BBC which is raised in Scotland and the £35 million spent on TV production in Scotland would ensure that creative talent in our country is unlocked.

The consultation does also appear to have raised some questions about how well the BBC serves the specific interests of Scotland. Although the SNP believes that the responsibility for broadcasting in Scotland should transfer from Westminster to the Scottish Parliament, we are supportive of moves to more devolved arrangements for the BBC with greater powers and funding for the different national and regional broadcasting areas, such as BBC Scotland. A federal structure, which devolves full editorial and commissioning control will allow the BBC to properly represent all of the nations and regions in the United Kingdom.

Freedom of Information

Myself and the SNP Westminster Group will resist any changes in the UK Parliament to freedom of information laws. Any change to the laws would affect UK Government organisations operating in Scotland. The UK Government appears to be preparing to weaken the law on Freedom of Information by introducing fees for tribunal appeals against the Information Commissioner’s FOI decisions which would be further barrier to an open democracy. Introducing fees in appeals in other areas such as Employment Tribunals has resulted in a massive decrease their use.  

The SNP is co-chairing a cross party alternative FOI review with Tom Watson MP (depute leader of the Labour Party) to gather evidence in public from leading figures in Government, Whitehall, the media, academics and NGO. 

As you may be aware, the Freedom of Information Act is partly devolved to Scotland in areas where Scottish Ministers have jurisdiction.

The Scottish Government is preparing a response the UK Government’s consultation however; the Scottish Government have already consulted on their plans to extend the remit of Freedom of Information acts in Scotland to include: 

• contractors who run privately-managed prisons 
• providers of secure accommodation for children
• grant-aided schools
• independent special schools

To learn more about what the Scottish Government is doing please click here. http://www.gov.scot/About/Information/FOI/Coverage 

Equalisation of the State Pension Age

Many constituents have contacted me with concerns surrounding the equalisation of the state pension age, and the effect it will have for women born in the 1950s.

Whilst in principle, I am supportive of an equalisation of the pension age for men and women, I cannot agree with the unfair manner in which the UK Government is imposing these changes. More than 2 million women paid their National Insurance contributions throughout their lives on the expectation that they would receive their state pension and receive that at a certain age, only for the goalposts to be moved by the UK Government. 

The effect of this pace of change is that many women who have had their retirement plans shattered are now forced to accept zero hours, temporary and low paid contracts, which offer little financial security. Not only have these women affected felt the deep financial cost, struggling to go back to employment or make ends meet after having little time to prepare for a longer road to their state pension, many of these  women will also bear the human cost of missing out with planned valuable years with their grandchildren or with their partner.

The UK Government has been reticent to act to address this unfairness. In January, my SNP colleagues lead a backbench debate with cross-party support calling on the UK Government to revisit the transitional arrangements. Despite the SNP’s motion winning the vote at the end of this debate, the UK Government shamefully refused to come forward with an alternative.

Nevertheless, please rest assured that my SNP colleagues and I will continue to vigorously pursue fairness for the affected women. My SNP colleague Mhairi Black MP, who sits on Parliament’s Work & Pensions Committee, will be pressing this Committee to recommend that the UK Government revisit its transitional arrangements and I hope that MPs from across other parties will look favourably on supporting the women affected by these unfair changes.

TTIP

The position of the SNP on this proposed trade deal has been clear and consistent, and was reached democratically by the membership of our Party. We support international trade and we recognise the economic benefits of trading with countries in the EU and around the world. Scotland is a proud trading nation, and in the past six years the SNP Scottish Government have delivered a 36% increase in the value of international exports. Supporting Scottish business to export and attracting direct foreign investment is good for Scottish businesses, for our economy, and most important, the people of Scotland. 

Any economic benefits from TTIP, however, cannot be at the expense of vital public services. My SNP colleagues and I have real and legitimate concerns about a number of the proposed provisions in the trade agreement that would threaten the ability of elected governments in Europe to act and regulate in the public interest.

There must be an explicit exemption for the NHS on the face of the agreement and the Prime Minister should veto the agreement if there is no such exemption. The SNP has repeatedly pressed the Government for an explicit exemption from the agreement for the NHS. We have also voiced our concerns about the Investor State Dispute Settlement, and firmly believe that all disputes between investors and states should be settled in domestic courts. 

These are the primary issues related to TTIP that require the UK Government’s action. I hope that the UK Government will pursue these concerns in negotiations on the trade deal, and I hope that this will be done transparently. Rest assured that my SNP colleagues and I will continue to pursue this issue in Parliament when the opportunity to do so arises.