Oral Answers to Questions

Douglas Lumsden Excerpts

Wednesday 28th October 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mr Alexander]

I can answer with real feeling, having visited the Torness nuclear power plant in my own constituency last week and met a group of young apprentices. Those are brilliantly skilled jobs and talented young people, yet because of the policy of the Scottish National party in Edinburgh, we are forgoing millions of pounds of investment, energy security, and good, well-paid, unionised jobs for decades to come.

[Douglas Lumsden (Aberdeen South) (Con)]

The Labour Government’s answer to energy independence was to create GB Energy, which we were told was going to create 1,000 jobs in Aberdeen. Two years in, it has just 132 employees, and only 86 of them are based in Scotland. The chairman and the chief exec are not based in Aberdeen—the people of Aberdeen were sold a lemon with GB Energy. Does the Secretary of State now accept that the best way to boost employment in Aberdeen is to get Britain drilling again?

[Mr Alexander]

I understand that Conservative Members speak with some authority, given that the Conservatives grew the size of the civil service after Brexit. For us, the measure of the effectiveness of GB Energy was never the number of officials working in the headquarters in Aberdeen; it was how many jobs are created in the north-east, across Scotland, and across the whole of the United Kingdom. We are proud of having a publicly owned energy company that is getting down to work, and proud of the fact that consent has been granted for Jackdaw. I think the Conservatives could do better.

Glasgow School of Art: Mackintosh Building

Douglas Lumsden Excerpts

Monday 19th October 2026 Commons Chamber

[Torcuil Crichton]

I could not agree more. We must remember that the art school itself began as a design school—almost an engineering school for the shipyards and the industrial base of Scotland. There is a plan to make the art school, with a restored Mackintosh building, the anchor of cultural and economic development again.

What my right hon. Friend the Member for Oxford East says is true: the Glasgow School of Art and the Mackintosh building have become a symbol of Glasgow, and Glasgow has a symbiotic relationship with the art school. That is why it is tragic to see it in its current condition. As the right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale (David Mundell) pointed out, the Mack is not simply a national treasure for Scotland; it is a cultural and creative asset for the whole of the UK. It is an emblem of what Scotland has contributed to the global story of design and success over the last century.

It should not just be left to Glasgow School of Art, to Scotland or to the alumni of the art school to take this on. Collectively, we are all custodians of the Mackintosh. It should fall on us as a nation to restore the building to its glory. The Government should be willing and ready to engage with Glasgow School of Art in the project. Let us be clear: this can be done. We need only look across the channel to the example of Notre-Dame, which was burnt down in a fire in 2019. The French Government stepped in with the full muscle of the state to implement a reconstruction programme.

[Douglas Lumsden (Aberdeen South) (Con)]

Would the hon. Member agree that the SNP Government need to play a role in this? So far, they have been silent on the subject.

[Torcuil Crichton]

I would temper my language and invite the Scottish Government, the UK Government and other interested parties to come together, put their hands under the Mack and lift it out of the ashes. There is a case for doing that, as a fully restored Mack, in line with the Glasgow School of Art’s ambitions to deliver a re-energised cultural quarter for Glasgow, can be just as much an economic driver for the city and the country as Notre-Dame is for France.

Nuclear Energy: Scotland

Douglas Lumsden Excerpts

Wednesday 14th October 2026 Westminster Hall

[Susan Murray]

I know that there is new pumped hydro storage coming online from Loch Sloy, and other projects are in the pipeline, but we are considering the situation for nuclear. The SNP refuses even to consider the nuclear solution, even when it is funded by Westminster.

When I speak to my Mid Dunbartonshire constituents about energy, their position is clear: they want to tackle climate change, they want the Government to look after the environment and deliver net zero, and they want cheaper bills. I want the same, as I believe do most people living in Scotland and across the UK. There is a clear solution: small modular reactors producing a predictable cheap, low-carbon energy system. The waste product of nuclear fission is a concern, but nuclear is the only form of energy that prices in decommissioning and waste disposal at the start of the project.

Scotland deserves better than the student politics and political games of the SNP, but I support the stance of the Minister for Energy not to impose unwanted nuclear infrastructure on Scottish communities. The Scottish Parliament should decide, and I am pleased that we now have 10 Liberal Democrat MSPs in Holyrood to influence the debate going forward.

[Douglas Lumsden (Aberdeen South) (Con)]

The hon. Lady made the point that the Scottish Parliament should decide. Does she not agree that it should be the local planning authorities that decide? They should be given proper devolution, which would allow the local communities to decide whether they want nuclear or not.

[Susan Murray]

I agree that on most issues it is for local authorities and planning authorities to make the decisions, but for national infrastructure in Scotland, there is a place for Holyrood to be involved. The plans announced by the shadow Secretary of State, the hon. Member for West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine (Andrew Bowie), to override devolved planning laws, should be roundly rejected.

Nuclear offers Scotland thousands of jobs, millions in tax revenue, billions in investment and an opportunity to revive the communities of remote and rural Scotland, which have far too often been left behind. I am proud to be Scottish, with our own education system, health system and legal system. To protect our Scottish identity, Scotland could once again be a leading energy exporter in a way that protects our environment, grows remote and rural communities by providing housing and jobs, and helps to pay for improved connectivity and for saving the Gaelic language.

Scotland has always worked closely with the rest of the UK, with connected and mobile people and products. Nuclear power can continue that tradition by providing low-carbon energy to contribute to our evolving sustainable energy system, to reduce household bills and to supply industry. With that in mind, I have one final ask of the Minister: to build on their assessment of Scotland’s potential nuclear power plant sites by setting out, before the end of this parliamentary term, the jobs and economic benefit that new nuclear could bring to Scotland. That way, we can see in real terms the cost of the SNP’s approach to nuclear.

--- Later in debate ---

[Douglas Lumsden (Aberdeen South) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stuart, and I welcome the Minister to her place. I thank the hon. Member for Mid Dunbartonshire (Susan Murray) for bringing forward this debate. I also welcome the Scottish Liberal Democrats getting off the fence and finally backing new nuclear.

[Jamie Stone]

I will find out who your mother is! [Laughter.]

[Douglas Lumsden]

The Prime Minister mentioned déjà vu at Prime Minister’s questions, and I must say I am suffering from a bit of the same. I fondly remember many debates in the Scottish Parliament in which I made the case for new nuclear in Scotland, but it was always blocked by the SNP. I have always maintained that we should have an energy mix, and nuclear is vital for our baseload when the sun does not shine and the wind does not blow. Without nuclear, it will be a real struggle for the Scottish Government to get to net zero.

I will refer to some of the contributions today. The hon. Member for Mid Dunbartonshire was right to point out skills and opportunities. This could be a real path for oil and gas workers to make that transition. Another key thing mentioned was grid stability, which I had not thought of. The inertia from the large power stations that we have just now is vital to keeping the grid stable. It would be good to hear from the Minister what plans there are to replace that once Torness closes.

My right hon. Friend the Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale (David Mundell) described the renaissance of nuclear and all the benefits, but Scotland is being left behind just now in relation to jobs, skills and local economies. Instead, the SNP wants to carpet-bomb our countryside with monster pylons and battery storage.

[Graham Leadbitter]

I just want to know how the hon. Member thinks that energy from nuclear power stations the length and breadth of the country would be transported about the country.

[Douglas Lumsden]

That is a brilliant point, because we would probably be building new nuclear power stations where the grid already is. We already have the grid connection at Hunterston and at Torness. It is exactly why we should be backing new nuclear.

It is clear that the SNP’s effective ban on new nuclear power is holding Scotland back, in terms of both our energy transition and our economy. Right now, Scotland has the most expensive and vulnerable grid in the UK, and much of that is down to the fact that the SNP has turned its back on nuclear. When I was an MSP, I was fortunate enough to visit Hunterston B. What a wasted opportunity that is. It has the grid connection and the space—it is all there; it just needs the political will to make it happen so that we can have Hunterston C.

As we progress to sourcing more and more of our energy from renewables such as wind, the problem of intermittency will only get worse. The irony is that the SNP’s irrational opposition to new nuclear means that a future Scotland would be completely reliant on English nuclear power when the wind does not blow and the sun does not shine. Luckily, we have a UK grid, so we share the power with our neighbours, and Scotland will not face blackouts because of SNP failures. But while our shared grid means that Scotland will not miss out on imported nuclear energy, thanks to the SNP’s blind opposition we are missing out on thousands of jobs and billions of pounds of investment.

During my visit to Hunterston, I met the young graduates and apprentices there. It was heartbreaking to hear that, to have a future in nuclear, they were going to have to move away from Scotland—talented young people in highly paid jobs moving away because of the SNP’s dogma. It is interesting to hear that one in 10 people at Hinkley Point C are Scots.

What makes the SNP’s luddite approach totally senseless is that people in Scotland want new nuclear. We have heard it again this afternoon. Sixty per cent of the Scottish public are in favour of building new nuclear power stations to replace those being decommissioned. East Lothian, Dumfries and Galloway and Highland councils have all called for new nuclear development. Many of the jobs and much of the investment that could be generated by new nuclear would go to some of Scotland’s most deprived communities. We are in desperate need of thriving local industries, yet the SNP, which loves to talk about devolution, has overruled those local wishes.

For far too long, the SNP has weaponised devolved powers over planning to block new nuclear, which of course is a reserved issue. The SNP’s bizarre opposition to this clean and consistent energy goes against science, against all common sense and against the wishes of the Scottish public. The clear cross-party consensus from the Scottish MPs in the Chamber—apart from the hon. Member for Alloa and Grangemouth (Brian Leishman) and the SNP, of course—shows just how backward John Swinney’s position really is.

I thank all hon. Members for their contributions to this important debate. I very much hope that nuclear energy will have a bright future in Scotland. If we are to transition beyond fossil fuels in the long term, nuclear will be a vital part of our energy mix. Scotland must not miss out as a result of the SNP luddites.

[Graham Stuart (in the Chair)]

If the Minister wishes to finish at 5.43 pm, she will be able to give the proposer of the debate two minutes to wind up.