Labour Party MP for Glasgow North East since (elected). An MP continuously since .
Parliament recordVoting recordWritten questionsEarly day motions
Entries on this tracker
47
Each filed under the party they sat for that day
Register entries
1
As currently published
Declared while sitting for Labour
£0
0 of 1 entries state an amount
| Party | Office | Area | Period | Began | Ended | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Labour | MP | Glasgow North East | – 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| date registered | 8. Miscellaneous | Elected Member Glasgow City Council. This is an unpaid role. | — | Labour | Register record |
My constituent recently contacted me after his three-year-old daughter was involved in a terrifying near-miss with a recklessly ridden e-bike. The unsafe use of these vehicles is a growing threat to public safety. In Scotland, enforcement is devolved and regulation is reserved. With that in mind, will the Leader of the House make time available for a debate on how the Scottish and UK Governments can work together to protect our communities from dangerous e-bikes?
<Question HRSContentId="{4A641476-6445-40EC-8326-7F12E9DF7147}">Q5. <QuestionText HRSContentId="{B2C9DF7C-AF0E-437B-8552-37D56B963B41}"></QuestionText>Having lived my whole life in Easterhouse, one of Scotland’s most deprived communities, I know the challenges that our young people face, but also their enormous potential. I was therefore encouraged to hear the Prime Minister commit to the Easterhouse principle, inspired by the work of Ian Montague and the charity FARE Scotland’s “names not numbers” approach. Will the Prime Minister accept my invitation to return to FARE with the Work and Pensions Secretary to discuss making that principle a guide for supporting young people across Britain?</Question>
Royal Mail was once widely respected and trusted, but it is now too often a cause of frustration and anger for our constituents. Year after year, Royal Mail is falling short <span id="101" class="column-number" data-column-number="101"></span>of the targets it must meet by law, and the public’s patience is wearing thin. The danger is that at some point the business can no longer survive. While I have no desire to see that happen, we cannot keep making excuses or dismissing what my constituents are going through. They are missing appointments, receiving important news late, and being let down by a system that cannot be relied on to get the basics right. Just over a year ago, the Scottish Affairs Committee, of which I am a member, held a session with Royal Mail, Ofcom and consumer groups. We were told then that work was under way to improve the service, but it is hard to see any sign of that on the ground. This year again, in most of Royal Mail’s Scottish postcode areas, it has missed its targets, and constituents continue to write to me about the problems they face. A late birthday card can be forgiven, but too often delivery delays affect more important mail. Royal Mail assured our Committee that a new NHS barcode would allow NHS letters to be picked out and given priority, yet NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde has told me that it cannot use the barcode because it does not work with the Royal Mail system that is used for most of its letters. Royal Mail presented the barcode system as an answer, but it is not working in practice. That has real consequences for my constituents. A disabled constituent recently told me that they no longer have the strength to complain. They have already been on to the sorting office and have seen no improvement. Right now, they are waiting on a letter about a home flu jab. Their post is so unreliable that they believe the letter will arrive late. Another constituent told me how they only realised that they had missed an NHS appointment when they spoke with the hospital directly. When they visited the sorting office, their letters were waiting there, still to be delivered, including one telling them about that appointment.
I agree with my hon. Friend and thank him for his contribution. Those are just two dreadful examples that show the heart of the problem. People are losing faith in the Royal Mail because it is letting them down when they need the service most. I know the postal world has changed. We keep in touch differently now, sending fewer letters and more emails around the world. Postal services are changing, but I do not believe that we want to end up in a situation like Denmark, where PostNord has stopped delivering letters altogether. I believe that the public want Royal Mail to have a future, but for that to be possible, management must take responsibility rather than just blame changes in how people use the service, or put the blame on posties. People are being priced out, and Royal Mail is adding to their anger by putting up stamp prices. How can we expect people to use a service when research from Citizens Advice suggests that one in three adults would struggle to afford a book of first-class stamps? Equally, <span id="102" class="column-number" data-column-number="102"></span>it will not be possible for the Royal Mail to meet standards with fewer staff, who feel undervalued, as the Communication Workers Union has said. When the previous board brought in lower wages, longer hours and poorer conditions for new staff, it made Royal Mail a less attractive place to work, with up to half of new staff leaving within the first year. Its owners must show that they understand what went wrong, or risk bringing the service closer to collapse. I would like to sum up by saying this. I wish Royal Mail well and I pay tribute to Britain’s hard-working posties. Royal Mail is an institution and for many of my constituents it is a lifeline. That is why I hope that the promise from management to meet targets by early next year is signed for and delivered on time.
<Question HRSContentId="{B27DB2EA-A261-4175-9EA3-304D3CA774BB}">Q11. <QuestionText HRSContentId="{1BDC55A8-0E0F-4537-877F-98073EFF7AAC}"></QuestionText>A recent BBC “Disclosure” documentary exposed violence, open drug dealing, child exploitation, and a staggering 1,200 sexual offences recorded in Glasgow city centre in the year to March 2026. We must have an honest discussion about the city’s pressures, including addiction, deprivation, immigration and community cohesion. While SNP underfunding has crippled local public services, and Glasgow city council’s response has fallen short, Reform is exploiting public safety fears to stoke racial division in our welcoming city. Will the Prime Minister hear this call for help and support a co-ordinated response to make Glasgow safer?</Question>
<Question HRSContentId="{C36C1D31-B9C4-4301-B05C-1844E4F4E23D}">18. <QuestionText HRSContentId="{33C98FD8-39AA-46A5-B03B-CBE1DCE64688}">What steps he is taking to support young people into employment.</QuestionText> </Question>
The Prime Minister hit the nail on the head when he said that too many young people have been failed by a schools system that focused too much “on the university route, and not enough on technical education.” It is not surprising that the number of young people on benefits has grown so significantly when the education system has failed to equip them with the skills they need for today’s jobs market. When I speak to unemployed young people in my constituency, they tell me that they are desperate to find work not just for the pay, but for a sense of purpose and the independence to shape their own future. The choice before us is clear: invest in young people’s success or create a lifetime of dependency, carrying a huge price for the taxpayer. Does the Secretary of State agree with me that we need to invest in young people’s success rather than leave them to languish on benefits?
<Question HRSContentId="{E258769E-A4D3-45D9-9D4A-A753B15400EE}">1. <QuestionText HRSContentId="{44CFD903-0906-4D41-8638-E1EB8097C124}">What steps he is taking with Cabinet colleagues to support regeneration in Scotland through the Pride in Place programme. </QuestionText></Question>
In my constituency, the Pride in Place programme will be stewarded by Jim Hope BEM. Jim has decades of experience in community engagement, and has been involved in a range of projects that have brought local people together. Does the Minister agree that the key strength of the Pride in Place programme is not only that it is investing £20 million in long-forgotten places, like Springburn, Barmulloch and Balornock, but that it is trusting local leaders like Jim to shape the future of their areas, putting power directly into the hands of those who know their communities best?
Around 59% of children in the most deprived areas reach a good level of development by the time they start primary school compared with 79% in the least deprived areas. Babyzone is a charity set up to level the playing field by providing free-to-access community hubs that offer services to support children’s development. I recently had the privilege of opening Babyzone’s first Scottish hub in Easterhouse, which I know will make a real difference to local families. Will the Leader of the House join me in recognising Babyzone’s work, and will he consider allocating parliamentary time to debate how we can close the development gap between affluent and poorer neighbourhoods so that every child gets a fair start in life?
Held . Recorded result: Lab Gain. Majority 4,637. 34,091 votes cast from an electorate of 72,610. Parties are as each candidate stood at the time.
| Candidate | Party | Votes | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Maureen Burke | Labour | 15,639 | 45.9% |
| Anne McLaughlin | Scottish National Party | 11,002 | 32.3% |
| Ewan Lewis | Scottish Green Party | 2,471 | 7.2% |
| Jonathan Walmsley | Reform UK | 2,272 | 6.7% |
| Robert Connelly | Conservative | 1,182 | 3.5% |
| Sheila Thomson | Liberal Democrat | 592 | 1.7% |
| Catherine McKernan | Alba Party | 551 | 1.6% |
| Chris Sermanni | Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition | 236 | 0.7% |
| Gary Steele | Communist Party of Britain | 146 | 0.4% |
| Seat | Dates |
|---|---|
| Glasgow North EastElected 1 time | – present |
| Committee | Dates |
|---|---|
| Scottish Affairs Committee | – present |
Only the details Parliament publishes for this member. Contact page on Parliament's site
Profile data retrieved from Parliament on .