Labour Party MP for North Ayrshire and Arran since (elected). An MP continuously since .
Parliament recordVoting recordWritten questionsEarly day motions
Entries on this tracker
158
Each filed under the party they sat for that day
Register entries
2
As currently published
Declared while sitting for Labour
£675.25
1 of 2 entries state an amount
| Party | Office | Area | Period | Began | Ended | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Labour | MP | North Ayrshire and Arran | – present | elected | — | Party history |
Parliament's party history for this member: Labour ( – present).
Every entry the member has in the Register of Members' Financial Interests, as Parliament currently publishes it. The wording and values are the member's own declarations; nothing here has been assessed by this site.
Totals add only the entries that declare an amount received: payments for work, donations, gifts, and funded visits (register categories 1.1, 2, 3, 4 and 5). Ongoing employment is listed but not added, because its figure is a rate rather than a sum received. Each entry is dated by when the benefit happened, not when it was registered, and placed under the party the member sat for on that date. A member who changed party therefore has a separate total for each.
| Date | Category | Entry | Declared value | Sitting for | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4. Visits outside the UK | International visit to Netherlands between 18 January 2026 and 19 January 2026The Vegetarian Society | £675.25 | Labour | Register record | |
| date registered | 8. Miscellaneous | Chair of Splash Group. This is an unpaid role. | — | Labour | Register record |
In my constituency, the coastal towns of Largs and Saltcoats were badly flooded by Storm Boelo, with much damage caused to local businesses, as well as damage to constituents’ houses and gardens. Does the First Secretary agree with me that to avoid that happening again, there has to be joined-up working with the Scottish Government and all relevant authorities and agencies to ensure that our vulnerable coastal towns and communities have coastal defence preparedness plans in place?
I beg to move, That this House has considered e-petition 764553 relating to sentence reductions for guilty pleas in controlling or coercive cases. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Mundell. I would like to begin by congratulating the petitioner, Paris Shears, whose petition has now gathered over 105,000 signatures across the UK, which is a great achievement. The petition, which is entitled “Remove sentence reductions for guilty pleas in controlling and coercive cases”, goes on to say: “I want the Government to introduce legislation so that defendants charged with controlling or coercive behaviour cannot receive a sentencing reduction for a guilty plea entered after initially pleading not guilty. This should be known as Paris’s Law. Victims of coercive control often wait months or years for trial, reliving trauma while preparing evidence. Defendants may plead not guilty, then change to guilty at the last moment and still receive a reduced sentence. This can feel like continued abuse, prolonging distress and undermining justice. I believe late guilty pleas in these cases should not receive sentence reductions, as it prolongs suffering, including the suffering I have personally experienced”. I used to be the chair of North Ayrshire Women’s Aid, the local Women’s Aid service in my constituency, and this is an issue that is deeply important to me. Coercive control is an insidious form of abuse that wears down a victim’s self-confidence and freedom over time, leaving the victim exploited and dependent on their abuser. Paris Shears, the petitioner, has told me of her experience. Her ex-partner was charged with controlling and coercive behaviour, alongside other very serious offences. Paris waited over 500 days for the trial, but her ex-partner changed his plea on the day of the trial. He then received a sentence reduction, and the charge of controlling and coercive behaviour was no longer pursued. Since that day, Paris has dedicated her time to beginning and growing this petition, as well as telling her story online and through the media. She should be commended for how much time and effort she has selflessly put into it. Many women, and some men, go through situations such as this; sadly, many never leave. Paris should be very proud of herself not only for getting out, but for raising awareness about coercive control. Hopefully, the work that she has achieved with this petition could save other women from these kinds of dangerous situations. What is most important in this debate and discussion is for survivor impact to remain central. Going through a criminal trial can be a horrific and very difficult experience for victims, who have to relive their trauma in order to get justice. This can be used by abusers as another form of abuse towards the victim. Currently, section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015 sets out that controlling or coercive behaviour in an intimate or family relationship has a maximum penalty of five years’ imprisonment. As under the Sentencing Council guidelines for other offences, guilty pleas can result in a potential sentence reduction. This is in line with section 73 of the Sentencing Act 2020 and the guideline on reduction in sentence for a guilty plea. The principle of reducing a sentence for a guilty plea is long-standing in England and Wales and is now set out in the Sentencing Act. The Sentencing Council has a statutory duty to issue a guilty plea guideline; the most recent such guideline was published in 2017 after a public consultation. A usual reduction is one third for a guilty plea indicated at the first stage of the proceedings, and this goes down to one quarter for guilty pleas issued after the first stage. The maximum reduction is one tenth when the plea is entered on the first day of the trial, and this could be decreased to zero for any pleas entered during the course of the trial. Courts are incentivised to reduce sentences for guilty pleas in order to encourage defendants who know that they are guilty to plead guilty as early as possible. This can save the court time and money, as well as saving the victims from having to attend court and give evidence. However, it is important to note that Sir Brian Leveson conducted an independent review of the criminal courts that recommended that the maximum reduction be increased to 40% when guilty pleas are made at the earliest opportunity.
I agree. The hon. Gentleman raises important points. Controlling or coercive behaviour in an intimate or family relationship has a maximum penalty of five years’ imprisonment. Almost all those convicted for coercive control are men, and most victims are women: in fact, analysis of Merseyside police domestic abuse data found that 95% of coercive control victims were women and 74% of perpetrators were men. This is a crime that clearly affects women disproportionately, and tackling it must be a priority for the Government. There are different strategies that we can consider to improve the experience of victims of coercive control and their time spent in the justice system. One is to look at improved judicial training on coercive control, so that judges and others can better recognise situations in which defendants are toying with their victims. There could be more consideration given to sentencing guidelines and greater awareness of what coercive control is among the public, so that victims feel more comfortable coming forward. The Government responded to the petition on 11 May 2026 and referred to our recent violence against women and girls strategy. It is encouraging to see £13.1 million of funding going towards launching the new national centre for violence against women and girls and public protection. It is also good to see that since 3 February 2025 anyone convicted of controlling or coercive behaviour and sentenced to 12 months or longer is automatically managed under multi-agency public protection arrangements. That requires the police, probation and prison services to work collaboratively on managing the risks that these individuals pose in our society. October is Domestic Violence Awareness Month, so it is important that this debate is being held now and that Paris’s work in bringing attention to the victims of coercive control has been highlighted. One in five people experience domestic abuse, but only a quarter of the crimes are reported. I hope that bringing attention to domestic violence in settings like these can help even just one woman to feel brave enough to leave a dangerous situation. This behaviour is one of the most insidious forms of abuse. Abusers can control all aspects of a victim’s life, creating a world of fear and intimidation. They isolate victims from family and friends and rob them of their independence. It is important to highlight some of the common examples of coercive behaviour, for example financial control, deprivation of basic needs such as food or of support services such as the hospital or GP surgery, monitoring a partner’s online activity and, in some cases, using spyware. It is key that women in these situations know that this behaviour is not usual and that they can get out with the help of others. I have mentioned that I was previously the chair of North Ayrshire Women’s Aid. I encourage anyone who thinks they might need help to get in touch with any relevant local services. It is never too late to leave. I look forward to the Minister’s response on this important issue, and to hearing from other Members.
I thank everyone who took part in today’s debate for their input into such an important issue, and I thank the Minister for his response. Sadly, it is impossible to end all violence against women and girls, although we all wish we could. Instead, we have to do all we can as politicians to raise awareness and never stop tackling this issue, whether through national and local campaigns or through different policy changes and strategies. As I mentioned, in preparing for this debate I met with the petition’s creator Paris Shears, who is in the Gallery. I thank Paris once again for starting the petition, sharing her story and making this debate possible. I also thank the Sentencing Council for England and Wales, Kama Melly KC of the Criminal Bar Association and my hon. Friend the Member for West Dunbartonshire (Douglas McAllister) for meeting me in preparation for this debate. Finally, I thank the staff of the Petitions Committee for all their hard work in organising and facilitating these debates. It is much appreciated. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered e-petition 764553 relating to sentence reductions for guilty pleas in controlling or coercive cases.
I thank my hon. Friend for securing this important Adjournment debate. Does he agree that it is shameful that the Glasgow School of Art has been left in this state, leaving a cultural void in Glasgow’s architectural heritage, and that innovative solutions should be explored to right this wrong?
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stuart. I thank the hon. Member for Mid Dunbartonshire (Susan Murray) for securing and introducing this important debate. Over the years in my constituency, the nuclear power stations at Hunterston provided well-paid, skilled jobs and contributed greatly to the local economy. Hunterston A operated from 1964 to 1990, and Hunterston B from 1976 to 2022. Both contributed greatly to the UK grid. This year, Hunterston B became the first advanced gas-cooled reactor to be relicensed for decommissioning. Even now, during the decommissioning process, there are skilled and unionised jobs. They are not in the same numbers as before, but they are still highly skilled jobs that make a huge difference to the constituency and the local economy. Sadly for us, as we have heard today, in Scotland a “no nuclear” policy stands. We could have so much more with a change in policy. For example, Denmark is currently reviewing its 1985 ban on nuclear power and considering making small modular reactors part of its clean energy grid. Why will the Scottish Government not do the same? Scotland has the most expensive grid in the whole UK and spends £1.5 billion on balancing every year. That is five times more than it spent before Hunterston B was retired. Small modular reactors are advanced nuclear reactors that produce up to 300 MW per unit, which is about one third of the generating capacity of traditional nuclear reactors. SMRs have many advantages linked to their design. They are physically smaller than conventional stations, have a smaller footprint and can be prefabricated and installed on site. Yet the SNP Government still refuse to move towards nuclear power, despite being the only party in the House of Commons with a blanket stance against nuclear. I was interested to read that 90% of the world’s economy supports expanding nuclear capacity as part of the clean energy strategy. The SNP are lagging behind the future of energy security both in the UK and worldwide. Scotland has lost out on nearly 5,000 jobs in the nuclear industry, and many Scottish nuclear industry workers are forced to leave Scotland to work in England or Wales at other nuclear sites. It is quite depressing to think how much talent and skill Scotland is choosing to lose to other parts of the UK. In my constituency, an investment in new nuclear would make a great difference, bringing new, highly skilled jobs to the constituency and beyond, and offering badly needed apprenticeships for local young people. The Hunterston site has so much potential. Scotland is missing out on a great opportunity for good jobs thanks to backward SNP decisions.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Barker. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies) for introducing this important debate. I also congratulate Ash Paul Smith, the petitioner, for all his hard work in creating the petition and gathering over 208,000 signatures. The recent sewage spillages in Saltcoats in my constituency have greatly affected the bathing water quality in the coastal towns of Saltcoats, Ardrossan and Stevenston and have affected many constituents. On 29 June this year, a rising main pipeline near Saltcoats pumping station burst and a high amount of sewage was piped into our waters. That led to temporary repairs, which continued until 10 August, as there was apparently no easy or robust solution. The advisory signage at the beach was not as clear as it could have been. That not only led to complaints, but confused many swimmers about the bathing quality of the water. Dog owners, too, were querying whether it was safe for dogs to go into the water, which of course it was not. Only two weeks after the public were told that they could swim again, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency confirmed on 25 August that the pollution was actually ongoing and further work on the pipe was required. That continued for a few days before the advice against bathing was withdrawn and safe swimming could be resumed. That is just not good enough. For nearly the whole summer, constituents and visitors have been unable to swim at Saltcoats, Stevenston and Ardrossan. That is the height of the holiday season, and coastal communities rely on visits from day trippers, many of whom want to go outdoor swimming and enjoy our beautiful sandy beaches. It is important to highlight that the pipe is owned by Scottish Water, a public Scottish Government organisation. In 2021, Scottish Water oversaw untreated sewage being discharged 12,000 times in a single year. Water bosses are getting paid huge salaries everywhere, it seems—for delivering what, exactly? I think it would be a good thing to take the water industry in England and Wales back into public ownership, but it is important to consider how we will successfully manage it. The sewage situation in Saltcoats serves as a reminder that public ownership does not necessarily mean good service. We need to get any future public ownership structures right, with robust accountability and governance to ensure a better service.
6. What assessment he has made of the potential impact of new nuclear energy projects on economic growth in Scotland.
New nuclear in areas such as my constituency of North Ayrshire and Arran could bring much-needed skilled jobs and investment to the area, but yet again Scotland is losing out. Does the Secretary of State agree with me that the Scottish Government should review and consider their stance on nuclear, given the findings of the report by Great British Energy Nuclear, which show the potential for new developments, including in Hunterston in my constituency?
I would just like to highlight that the Scottish Government do not record or publish any statistics on the number of patients being treated in corridors. However, we know that it happens. The Crosshouse hospital, which serves my constituency, was recorded in January as having one of Scotland’s most under-pressure emergency departments. It exceeded capacity by 50% in December, revealing corridor care conditions in the hospital. Does my hon. Friend agree that it is important to record accurate data so that we can track improvement?
Held . Recorded result: Lab Gain. Majority 3,551. 42,262 votes cast from an electorate of 72,176. Parties are as each candidate stood at the time.
| Candidate | Party | Votes | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Irene Campbell | Labour | 16,821 | 39.8% |
| Patricia Gibson | Scottish National Party | 13,270 | 31.4% |
| Todd Ferguson | Conservative | 5,954 | 14.1% |
| Mike Mann | Reform UK | 3,415 | 8.1% |
| Cara McKee | Scottish Green Party | 1,327 | 3.1% |
| Gillian Cole-Hamilton | Liberal Democrat | 1,005 | 2.4% |
| Ian Gibson | Social Democratic Party | 238 | 0.6% |
| James McDaid | Socialist Labour Party | 232 | 0.5% |
| Seat | Dates |
|---|---|
| North Ayrshire and ArranElected 1 time | – present |
| Committee | Dates |
|---|---|
| Absent Voting (Elections in Scotland and Wales) Bill | – |
| Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Bill | – |
| Finance Committee (Commons) | – present |
| Petitions Committee | – present |
Only the details Parliament publishes for this member. Contact page on Parliament's site
Profile data retrieved from Parliament on .