Youth Unemployment

Debate between Pat McFadden and John Grady

Tuesday 17th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Pat McFadden]

Obviously, I know the west midlands well and I know the passion that our Mayor, Richard Parker, has for expanding opportunity, offering more skills and more opportunities to young people. I work closely with him on that agenda. I do not believe we should set area against area. Of course I am concerned about youth unemployment in the west midlands. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that his constituents and mine, and those in every other constituency in the west midlands, can benefit from the proposals I have brought forward today.

[John Grady (Glasgow East) (Lab)]

Glasgow has many brilliant young people who just want to work. They have been let down by the Tories and the SNP, with school standards plummeting and the refusal to fund the Rolls-Royce welding centre. In many meetings I have with employers, they emphasise to me how little they see of the apprenticeship levy they pay in. Will my right hon. Friend outline how the package provides opportunities to young people in Glasgow?

[Pat McFadden]

I do not need any convincing about how great a city Glasgow is, and I will be going there very soon. My hon. Friend asks what this announcement will mean to young people in his constituency and the city of Glasgow. The hiring bonuses I have announced today will be available all over the country, as will the subsidised job—25 hours a week at minimum wage rates for six months for young people who have been unemployed for 18 months or more—precisely to give young people not just a wage but the sense of pride and purpose that comes with having a job. I hope that that gives hope to the young people in Glasgow. It is hope that we need to give to young people all around the United Kingdom.

Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill

Debate between Pat McFadden and John Grady

2nd reading & Money resolution
Tuesday 3rd February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Pat McFadden]

The right hon. Gentleman has set out the previous Government’s justification. I am about to explain why that did not stack up at the time, and why it certainly does not stack up after the experience of the policy.

We should begin by considering why no other neighbouring country has this two-child limit. Given that the policy was always primarily about politics, it is no surprise that it did not achieve the objectives that the right hon. Gentleman just tried to set out. The Tories claimed that this would lead to people making different choices about the number of children to have, but that did not happen. The family size premise was itself based on the fundamental misconception that there is a static group of people who are always on universal credit.

[John Grady (Glasgow East) (Lab)]

Will the Secretary of State give way?

[Pat McFadden]

Not at the moment. This is not a static group; people’s circumstances change, marriages break up, spouses die and jobs can be lost. In fact, around half of the families who will benefit from the lifting of the two-child limit were not on universal credit when they had any of their children. This is not a static group of people, which drives directly at the heart of the argument that the right hon. Member for Hertsmere (Sir Oliver Dowden) tried to make.