MSP ‘overwhelmed' to become MBE
Pam Duncan-Glancy is recognised in the King's Birthday Honours for years of public and political service.
Speaking to the PA news agency, the Labour Glasgow MSP – the first permanent wheelchair user to be elected to the Scottish Parliament and a tireless disability campaigner – said she had learned about the honour in a text from her husband after she had received an email about it.
'I was overwhelmed, to be honest, and could hardly believe what I was reading,' she said.
'I'm really, really proud to have been given this honour for the work that I've done in the community and for disability rights.
'It's a real honour to do this.
'When I got elected as an MSP, I said I was a wee working class woman in a wheelchair. To think that I could be a wee working class woman in a wheelchair who's also got an MBE, I just thought that was pretty special.'
While receiving such an honour from the Palace requires discretion, Ms Duncan-Glancy admitted she struggled keeping it all a secret.
'I told my sister, obviously my husband knows and I told my team and a couple of friends, but it was really difficult to keep it quiet,' she said.
With just 11 months until the next Holyrood election, the MSP said there is 'loads more' the Scottish Parliament and politics more widely has to do for more disabled people to seek election.
'We need to support people to be active in their communities in the first place,' she said.
'For disabled people, it can often be about giving them help to get out of bed in the morning.
'There's quite a mountain to climb for us to support disabled people to get into politics and it's a mountain we absolutely have to climb, because there should be no space about us, without us.
'We need to do everything we possibly can to get more representation of disabled people, not just in Parliament or councils, but everywhere.'
Elected in 2021, Ms Duncan-Glancy has impressed in her first term as an MSP, being given a spot on the Scottish Labour frontbench before even making it to Holyrood, when she was appointed social security spokeswoman by leader Anas Sarwar in the early weeks of his tenure.
Before entering politics, she worked in communications for the NHS and campaigned for the rights of disabled people.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
31 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
EUAN McCOLM: Harsh reality has failed to penetrate Swinney's armour, but it's time he reconnected with reality over gender turmoil
Anas Sarwar's U-turn on self-ID for trans people was humiliating but entirely necessary. Having whipped his MSPs to support the SNP Government's crackpot plan to dismantle women's rights and allow anyone to enter the single-sex spaces of their choosing, the Scottish Labour leader later came to his senses. Interviewed on the Holyrood Sources podcast in February, Mr Sarwar said that, had he known at the time of the gender reform vote in December 2022 what he later learned, he would not have backed a change in the law. The Labour's boss's volte face coincided with public outcry over the case of nurse Sandie Peggie, who was subjected to a disciplinary procedure by NHS Fife after she complained that she should not have to share a changing room with trans-identifying doctor, Beth Upton. After two weeks of tribunal hearings in February, Ms Peggie's claims of discrimination and harassment against the health board and Dr Upton will resume on July 16. Former Conservative Scottish Secretary, Alister Jack, has already saved MSPs from themselves on the issue of self-ID. In 2023, he blocked reform of the Gender Recognition Act in Scotland on the grounds that such a change in the law would negatively impact with the UK-wide Equality Act of 2010. But First Minister John Swinney remains solidly convinced that the failed law - which would have destroyed women's sex-based rights - was wise. Appearing last week on the Holyrood Sources podcast, Mr Swinney was asked about Mr Sarwar's U-turn. Would the First Minister have supported reform of the Gender Recognition Act in 2022 if he'd known what he does now? Harsh reality cannot penetrate the First Minister's armour. 'Yes, I would,' said Mr Swinney. And then he used a line favoured by weasels who reject the idea that allowing men to identify as women might bring with it come complications. The First Minister told the podcast that he was 'trying to improve the lives of a very small number of people in our society who I think have an incredibly hard time.' Gender activists have long focused on the relatively small number of trans-identifying individuals as if this fact makes their ideology any less dangerous. The fact is the demands of these activists impacts everyone, particularly women. Take women's sport, for example. The entry into a women's race or boxing tournament of a biological male disadvantages every female participant. Likewise, every time someone born male is permitted to take a woman's place on a protected short-list or to enter a single-sex space such as a changing room or a domestic violence shelter, others pay a heavy price. But the pernicious effect of gender ideology is felt far beyond 'flashpoints' such as arguments over single-sex spaces. In fact, it has seeped into every aspect of modern life. Organisations across the public and private sectors have ignored their legal responsibilities in order to permit self-ID, despite the law being quite clear that, when it comes so single-sex safe spaces, biology trumps all else. The publication, today, of a new report into the impact of gender ideology on the world of academia shows just how deeply the 'trans women are women' mantra of gender activists has penetrated universities across the country. Professor Alice Sullivan of University College London was commissioned by the UK Government to examine the effect of gender ideology on academic freedom. Her findings make for deeply disturbing reading. Professor Sullivan's report - 'Barriers to research on sex and gender' - was commissioned by the UK Government's Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. The academic found that the last decade has seen the emergence of a culture of hostility towards anyone who shares so-called 'gender critical' views. Across 17 categories, including 'self-censorship' and 'bullying, harassment and ostracism', Professor Sullivan found academics had been silenced on issues of sex and gender. John Swinney may be able to content himself that to acquiesce to the demands of trans activists is to do no more than offer assistance to a few vulnerable people, but Professor Sullivan's report shatters that idea. In the course of her research, the academic - who previously published a report exposing the damage caused by inaccurate recording of sex by UK institutions - found that vital scientific research, including studies on the effects of medical interventions like puberty blockers, and data collection on sex - has been undermined by universities' failure to address coordinated campaigns to silence academics deemed guilty of such wrong-think as 'a woman is an adult human female.' Professor Sullivan says her research raises 'stark concerns' and highlights cases where researchers investigating vital issues have been subjected to sustained campaigns of intimidation simply for acknowledging the biological and social importance of sex. Among the many academics interviewed by Professor Sullivan was Sarah Pedersen, Professor of Communication and Media at Robert Gordon University, who was targeted by activists after expressing the perfect rational view that biological sex is real. Professor Pedersen says the 'cancellation' of high-profile gender-critical academics has damaged the entire higher education sector. 'My personal experiences of disruption, no-platforming and personal attacks,' she adds, 'have impacted not just my academic career but also my work for third-sector organisations, who were warned away from working with me, meaning they could no longer benefit from my expertise.' Professor Sullivan has made a list of 20 recommendations to the UK Government and to academic institution which she hopes will defend research and protect individual academics from both professional and personal attacks. These include such simple steps as agreeing to prioritise the search from truth over adherence to political agendas and enabling 'genuine' academic debate. The Scottish Government should pay attention. In a fortnight, Sandie Peggie's tribunal will recommence in Dundee. The devastating impact of gender ideology on the lives of ordinary people will, once again, dominate the news agenda. John Swinney is a fool if he thinks voters still buy the line that reforming gender laws will impact a tiny proportion of the population. Ms Peggie's case shows clearly the harms done to women by the removal of long-established boundaries. In workplaces across the country, the demands of trans activists have made the lives of women miserable. Those same campaigners have been allowed to destroy the careers of dedicated academic and wreck important research, all in the name of making life easier for 'a very small number of people.' It's time for John Swinney to reconnect with reality and stop pandering to activists whose demands do nothing but harm.
Daily Mail
40 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Keir Starmer hit by new major rebellion as 49 Labour MPs refuse to back his government's welfare cuts - was YOURS among them?
Sir Keir Starmer has been handed a new major headache by his own MPs tonight as 49 opposed his plan to cut welfare payments despite the bill being gutted to avoid it being thrown out altogether. Ministers had taken drastic action as furious MPs lined up in the Commons to attack the plan to make it harder to claim Personal Independence Payments (Pip) and health-related universal credit. But even after a pledge to remove the Pip elements entirely, pending a review expected to take until next summer, almost 50 refused to back the shell of what was left. The total of 49 was higher than the 44 who had backed a 'reasoned amendment' to the bell - a piece of Commons machinery which would have killed it off completely. Labour MP Clive Efford, who voted against the Bill and co-signed an amendment that would have halted it at second reading, said the Government's late minute U-turn was not a good look to the public. The MP for Eltham and Chislehurst said: 'I've never seen a Bill in front of the House being salami sliced bit-by-bit like this, in order to get it over the line. It's definitely not the way to produce legislation. 'I mean I don't know what disabled people looking on will have made of today's process, but it didn't put the Government in a good light.' He said he was unsurprised the Government won the vote, but said the Government had been sent a message about the strength of opposition. In 12 hours of carnage at Westminster, the PM's carefully-assembled truce with rebels dramatically disintegrated. Who are the Labour rebels who voted against the welfare bill? Here is a full list of the Labour rebels who voted against the Bill at second reading: Rosena Allin-Khan (Tooting) Paula Barker (Liverpool Wavertree) Lee Barron (Corby and East Northamptonshire) Lorraine Beavers (Blackpool North and Fleetwood) Olivia Blake (Sheffield Hallam) Richard Burgon (Leeds East) Ian Byrne (Liverpool West Derby) Irene Campbell (North Ayrshire and Arran) Lizzi Collinge (Morecambe and Lunesdale) Stella Creasy (Walthamstow) Peter Dowd (Bootle) Neil Duncan-Jordan (Poole) Cat Eccles (Stourbridge) Clive Efford (Eltham and Chislehurst) Mary Kelly Foy (City of Durham) Tracy Gilbert (Edinburgh North and Leith) Mary Glindon (Newcastle upon Tyne East and Wallsend) Chris Hinchliff (North East Hertfordshire) Imran Hussain (Bradford East) Terry Jermy (South West Norfolk) Kim Johnson (Liverpool Riverside) Ian Lavery (Blyth and Ashington) Brian Leishman (Alloa and Grangemouth) Emma Lewell (South Shields) Clive Lewis (Norwich South) Rebecca Long Bailey (Salford) Rachael Maskell (York Central) Andy McDonald (Middlesbrough and Thornaby East) Navendu Mishra (Stockport) Abtisam Mohamed (Sheffield Central) Grahame Morris (Easington) Margaret Mullane (Dagenham and Rainham) Simon Opher (Stroud) Kate Osamor (Edmonton and Winchmore Hill) Kate Osborne (Jarrow and Gateshead East) Richard Quigley (Isle of Wight West) Bell Ribeiro-Addy (Clapham and Brixton Hill) Marie Rimmer (St Helens South and Whiston) Cat Smith (Lancaster and Wyre) Euan Stainbank (Falkirk) Graham Stringer (Blackley and Middleton South) Marie Tidball (Penistone and Stocksbridge) Jon Trickett (Normanton and Hemsworth) Derek Twigg (Widnes and Halewood) Chris Webb (Blackpool South) Nadia Whittome (Nottingham East) Steve Witherden (Montgomeryshire and Glyndwr) Marsha De Cordova (Battersea) Diane Abbott (Hackney North and Stoke Newington) 'The Government's got a huge majority, it takes a lot to defeat. It's nonetheless a significant number of us made a stand, which I mean needed to be done.' Those voting against it included the former shadow minister for the disabled, Marsha de Cordova. Vicky Foxcroft, who quit as a whip last week because of concerns about the bill, voted for it in its weakened state. Despite being titled the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill, the legislation now contains no measures relating to Pip. The respected IFS think-tank said that accounted for £2.6billion of the savings the government had hoped for by 2029-30. Curbs to the health element of Universal Credit should have eased spending by £1.7billion, but that was due to be offset by £1.8billion on raising the basic rate. Researcher Tom Waters said that left an additional cost of £100million by 2029-30. Agonisingly for Chancellor Rachel Reeves, the delay almost certainly means the Office for Budget Responsibility cannot 'score' the savings in time for her Budget. As a result the black hole in the government's books is likely to be even bigger than feared. Concerns were already running high that Ms Reeves will have to hike taxes to stabilised the public finances. In 12 hours of carnage at Westminster, the PM's carefully-assembled truce with rebels dramatically disintegrated. Facing the threat of a massive revolt, Sir Keir opted make yet another major concession just 90 minutes before the vote. Ministers pledged that changes to disability handouts will not be finalised until after a review - meaning that the package as it stands will actually make the current system more expensive than before. Sir Keir - who is days away from marking the first anniversary of his election landslide - had already agreed that the benefits curbs would only apply to new claimants. There was mocking laughter in the chamber as Social Security Minister Stephen Timms was asked how much the proposals would save now, and merely replied that the government would 'set out figures in the usual way'. Despite the humiliating manoeuvres, when the vote was held 44 Labour MPs still backed the fatal amendment and others abstained - although it was comfortably defeated by 328 to 149. Shortly afterwards the Bill cleared second reading stage by 335 to 260, majority 75. It will now be scrutinised at committee. A clearly crestfallen Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall tried to put a brave face on the shambles afterwards, acknowledging there were 'lessons to be learned' but the party was '100 per cent' behind the PM. 'I think people are 100 per cent behind a Prime Minister that secured the first Labour Government in 14 years,' she said. But rebel Labour MP Brian Leishman said ministers should still withdraw the Bill despite it passing second reading. The MP for Alloa and Grangemouth had also voted in favour of the cross-party amendment that would have stopped the Bill before second reading. He said: 'Today was a prime example in how not to legislate. 'A shambolic afternoon with policy being made up off the cuff and on the notion of promises to come. 'The Government should do the honourable and decent thing and withdraw this dreadful Bill.' Tory leader Kemi Badenoch accused ministers of 'utter capitulation' and said the legislation was now 'pointless'.
The Independent
41 minutes ago
- The Independent
How Labour welfare vote rebellion compares to previous revolts by MPs
Keir Starmer has suffered a serious blow after dozens of his own MPs voted against his planned welfare reforms in Parliament. The prime minister had been forced into two humiliating U-turns on the legislation in less than a week to head off a revolt that threatened to defeat his government on one of its flagship policies. But how does this compare to previous revolts by politicians? It is the largest rebellion of Sir Keir's premiership According to political scientist Professor Philip Cowley, from Queen Mary University of London, who has done a comparison of previous votes, it was the largest backbench rebellion Starmer has suffered so far. The previous record holder was earlier this month during the passage of the planning and infrastructure bill, when 16 MPs rebelled. A smaller revolt last year, over the controversial two-child benefit cap, saw a number of Labour MPs stripped of the party whip - including Jeremy Corbyn's shadow chancellor John McDonnell. It rivals a rebellion in Tony Blair's first year – but is 'more significant' The number of MPs voting against, 49, is similar to the 47 who were responsible for the largest rebellion in Tony Blair 's first year in power, over a benefit for lone parents. But Prof Cowley said this one was more significant. He told The Independent: "Seen purely in terms of size, the first major rebellion of Keir Starmer's premiership is on a par with the first major rebellion of Tony Blair's. But this is one of those occasions in life when size doesn't matter. This rebellion was much more significant and effective." But it is dwarfed by the revolt over Iraq It is also smaller than the largest rebellion during Blair's first parliament, when 67 MPs rebelled over incapacity benefit. The largest rebellion by Labour MPs at a second reading of their own governments' bill was 72 MPs. This record is shared by two votes - in 1947 on national service and, again under Blair, in 2004, on university tuition fees. 91 MPs revolted during a 1975 vote over the civil list, the system which defines how the royal family are funded, the biggest rebellion in the first year of any government since the war. The same number, 91, hold the record for the largest rebellion by government MPs at the second reading of any bill since 1945, Prof Cowley found. That was over House of Lords reform in 2012. But they are all dwarfed by the largest backbench rebellion of any governing party since the Corn Laws, when 139 MPs voted against the Iraq war in 2003.
