Warm Homes Plan
Ed Miliband Excerpts(1 week, 1 day ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Ed Miliband)
With permission, Mr Speaker, I will make a statement about the warm homes plan, which we publish today. It is a plan focused on the No. 1 issue facing our country, which is the cost of living crisis, and on the scourge of fuel poverty, which affects millions of families across Britain.
At the Budget, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor took an average of £150 off the costs of energy bills from April. This winter, we have expanded the warm home discount to a total of six million families, and today, we allocate £15 billion in our warm homes plan. That represents a more than doubling of public investment in home upgrades compared with the last Parliament—in fact, it is the biggest public investment in home upgrades in British history to cut bills and tackle fuel poverty.
In making this investment, we turn the page on the lost decade of the last Government’s failure, with home insulation levels falling by more than 90% between 2010 and 2024, the promise of minimum energy efficiency standards for renters broken, the cancellation of the zero carbon homes standard, the repeated failures of schemes such as the green deal, the green homes grant and the energy company obligation scheme, and—worst of all—our dependence on fossil fuels leaving us exposed to the worst energy bills crisis in generations. The last Government failed time after time; this Government are doing the work to put it right.
The starting point for this plan is that clean energy is the right choice, not only for energy security and reducing emissions, but for cutting people’s bills. The public agree: they are showing record demand for technologies such as solar, batteries and heat pumps that can save families hundreds of pounds a year. Heat pump sales in Britain have grown by around 50% annually—it is one of the fastest-growing markets in Europe—and last year saw a record number of rooftop solar installations. The driving purpose of this plan is to ensure those benefits are available, not just to the wealthiest, but to families throughout our country at every level of income. The driving purpose of this Labour Government is to stand up for working people and tackle the affordability crisis.
Let me set out the measures we are announcing in our plan today. First, today we announce £5 billion of public investment to directly deliver home upgrades for low-income families. This will help families living in social housing and low-income owner-occupiers to have warmer homes and lower bills. In setting out this plan, we are abolishing the failed ECO scheme and making the principled decision that we should fund support through public investment, not levies on bills. Our plan also pays heed to all the evidence that says that funding is best delivered with local authorities and mayors in the driving seat—with those representing local people delivering for local people.
At the same time, we recognise the challenges facing suppliers who used to deliver the ECO scheme, so we will ensure that this extra money is used to help support them. The Minister for Energy Consumers will convene a working group of contractors, social housing providers and local authorities to oversee this work. Overall, this allocation is the biggest public investment in tackling fuel poverty in our history.
Secondly, it is a scandal that 1.6 million children live in private accommodation are suffering from cold, damp or mould, according to Citizens Advice. We on the Government Benches believe in a simple principle: if someone rents a home, private or social, their landlord has a responsibility to ensure it is safe, warm and affordable to heat. The last Government promised higher standards, and then they ripped up that promise. Today, we deliver. By 2030, private landlords will have to upgrade their properties to meet minimum standards of energy efficiency, and we have consulted on similar rules in the social rented sector, tackling the scourge of poor-quality rented homes and cutting bills for renters. These measures alone will lift more than half a million families out of fuel poverty.
Thirdly, it is right that we target help at those most in need, but we know the affordability crisis stretches well beyond those on low incomes. We want to make it easier for all households to cut their bills by choosing a heat pump, solar or batteries. Building on the steps we took at the Budget to make electricity cheaper, we are expanding the boiler upgrade scheme, increasing investment every year out to 2030. For the first time, we have a universal offer of £2,500 for a heat battery or air-to-air heat pump, as well as £7,500 to install a conventional heat pump, but I want to go further. Currently, just one in 20 homes in Britain has solar panels installed on the roof. We are determined to unleash a rooftop revolution, helping many more families to generate their own energy in order to cut their bills. I can announce that the Government are, for the first time ever, setting aside up to £2 billion to subsidise zero and low-interest loans for solar panels, batteries and other technologies, learning from the successful experience of other countries and meeting demand for this technology. That is just a first step, with a further £3 billion available for loans and investments over the coming years through our warm homes fund.
Fourthly, as we upgrade existing homes, we will ensure that new homes are built cheaper to run, with solar and clean heating as standard. That is just common sense. People cannot understand why we are building new homes with higher bills. The reason is that the previous Government refused to act. We are putting an end to this absurd situation. We will publish the future homes standard shortly. For the first time, solar panels will be fitted as standard in new homes. Alongside the other measures I have set out, this is designed to help treble the number of homes with solar by the end of the decade.
Fifthly, to make these changes happen, we cannot go on with the old system of accountability and delivery that has failed. People have had to navigate a fragmented and confusing system of home upgrades, delivered through a bewildering number of organisations and schemes. We need to face up to the fact that, after the previous Government’s repeated failures to deliver schemes effectively, we need a specialist body with the technical expertise and focus required. By consolidating functions from Ofgem and other organisations and abolishing Salix—there will be no increase in arm’s length bodies—we will establish a new warm homes agency. It will deliver impartial advice and guidance, work with local authorities and businesses and oversee Government schemes, and it will be backed by a reformed system of consumer protection. We will put an end to the scandalous failure of accountability and regulation, and waste of public money, that we saw under the previous Government.
Finally, we are determined to ensure that this roll-out delivers not just for consumers, but for workers. We are the largest producer of gas boilers in Europe, and there is a huge opportunity to harness this expertise to produce heat pumps, too. Manufacturers are already embracing this opportunity, including Ideal Heating in Hull, Vaillant in Derbyshire, which I visited last year, and Copeland in Northern Ireland, but currently less than 40% of heat pumps sold in Britain are made in Britain. We are setting a new aim of at least 70% of heat pumps installed in the UK being made in the UK, backed by a trebling of public investment in heat pump manufacturing, with £90 million set aside today.
Overall, we expect the warm homes plan to support up to 180,000 additional jobs in energy efficiency, heat pumps and heat networks by the end of the decade. That will create opportunities for builders, electricians, plumbers and installers, as well as new workers entering the industry. We will establish a new taskforce with the TUC, working with business, to ensure that those jobs are well paid and highly skilled, with a proper role for trade unions. Because we are a Labour Government, we expect the rights of working people to be at the heart of this industry’s future.
Taken together, these are the elements of a landmark plan that stands in a great reforming tradition of Labour Governments: after 1945, delivering on the promise of “homes for the people”, modernising the nation’s housing stock under Harold Wilson in the 1960s and introducing the decent homes standard for social housing in the 2000s, with each Labour Government meeting the rightful expectations of working people that the next generation can expect higher standards of living than the last. That is what this Government seek to do in our time, with a plan to cut bills for millions, help lift a million families out of fuel poverty, and create good jobs. I commend the statement to the House.
Andrew Bowie (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine) (Con)
I thank the Secretary of State for the advance copy of his statement.
Today’s announcement is long overdue—overdue by an entire year, to be exact. During the general election, the Labour party claimed that it would cut household bills. This announcement should be part of that, but in that time, since the general election and on this Secretary of State’s watch, energy bills have not fallen; they have gone in the opposite direction. Energy bills are up by £200 since the election, partly as a result of the Secretary of State’s own political choices.
We believe that there is a greater role in our energy system for home batteries, we support a more technology-agnostic approach to air-to-air heat pumps, and, of course, we believe that rooftop solar is much better than carpeting the countryside in huge solar farms, but the Secretary of State is ignoring the core problem. We are in an electricity price crisis of his own making. Even if we are as charitable as possible and accept that the Government will reach the 5 million households who they say will benefit from this plan, it will do nothing to cut bills for 83% of the country. However, all those households will pay much higher taxes because of Labour’s Budget, including taxes to fund the Secretary of State’s £15 billion plan, and they are struggling with their energy bills now because of the choices of the Secretary of State.
Let me now turn to the specific measures in the plan. The Department’s own figures show that the public are becoming more sceptical about heat pumps. Between winter 2024 and spring 2025, the proportion of people saying that they were unlikely to install an air source heat pump increased from 38% to 45%, and if you ask anyone why they do not want a heat pump, they will say it is because of the high up-front costs. [Interruption.] Yes, they will—but it is also because of the high ongoing running costs, which often make heat pumps more expensive to run than gas boilers.
There is a serious risk that the Government’s legally binding targets are forcing them to push people into buying heat pumps, but all those families will be locked into sky-high running costs, because the Government have a political target that is pushing up electricity bills at the same time. This plan does nothing to address those high ongoing running costs. Indeed, last week the Government announced that they were locking the country into higher energy prices for decades through their botched wind auction. Just imagine that there was a plan on the table to cut the cost of running a heat pump by 20% instantly: a cheap power plan that would not involve raising taxes on working people to fund handouts; a plan that would axe the carbon tax, and scrap the Secretary of State’s rip-off wind subsidies to cut bills for every family in the country. Would that not be a far better approach to making make heat pumps much more attractive?
What steps will the Department take to ensure that low-interest loans will provide good value for money? How many homes will benefit from the low-interest and zero-interest loans scheme, and how will it be determined who gets a low-interest loan or a zero-interest loan?
As for the changes to the minimum energy efficiency standards for rented homes, the Secretary of State will know that the previous Government did more than any other to improve energy efficiency standards, with half of all homes having an energy performance certificate rating of C or above when we left office, compared to 14% when the Secretary of State left office in 2010. Has his Department carried out any impact assessment of what the 2030 deadline will cost landlords, and how much of the cost will be passed on to renters? His own Government’s data shows that it will cost more than £12,000 to upgrade a home from EPC E to C—£12,000 that will then be passed on to families in increased rents. We cannot ignore all the costs that this Government are imposing on the housing sector, and the impact that they will have on the cost of living for families.
The Government are going to set up a new quango, the warm homes agency, to administer these schemes. Can the Secretary of State tell us how much this quango will cost the taxpayer, how it will be held accountable, and why he decided to spend money on setting up a new quango rather than those functions being delivered by his own Department, which he controls?
The Secretary of State has already been forced, by this House, to ban Great British Energy from spending taxpayers’ money on solar panels when there is evidence of forced labour in the supply chain, and of course we welcome that, but can he assure the House that he will apply that same ban on slave labour to solar panel installations funded by the warm homes plan? When will he publish details of how that mechanism will work, so that it can be scrutinised by the House?
The Government are ignoring the fact that the affordability crisis that the Secretary State talks about is a crisis of his own making. They are ignoring the fact that they are locking the country into paying higher bills for far longer. If they truly want to encourage people to adopt green technology, like heat pumps or electric vehicles, they need to make electricity cheap. They could adopt the Conservatives’ cheap power plan to cut everyone’s electricity bills by 20% and scrap the reckless clean power 2030 target, which is locking everyone into paying higher bills for far longer.
Ed Miliband
It is always a pleasure to be opposite the hon. Member for West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine (Andrew Bowie). Let me make a few points to him, in the gentlest way I can. Let me deal first with his point about the cost of electricity. In her Budget, the Chancellor did more in one decision—namely, to transfer 75% of the renewables obligation to public spending to cut electricity costs—than the last Government did in 14 years in power.
Ed Miliband
The hon. Gentleman is shouting about bills. Let me tell him that the average bill in 2025 was lower in real terms than in 2024, and so was the price cap, as he will know from the figures. I am incredibly proud that this Government, unlike the last Government, are taking £150 of costs off bills thanks to the Chancellor’s decision, funded by taxes on the wealthy—and the Conservatives oppose all those tax measures.
The hon. Gentleman talked about renters. I think that, basically, what I heard—and perhaps it should not surprise me—was that he is actually against the higher standards for renters. He would leave private renters languishing in cold, damp homes, which is what the Conservatives did during their 14 years in power. We are proud of the decision that we are making. Thanks to the brilliant work of the Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, my hon. Friend the Member for Inverclyde and Renfrewshire West (Martin McCluskey), we actually have a supportive quote from the landlords. Even the landlords want more action than the Conservative party when it comes to the renters! To amuse the House briefly, I will read out that quote. Ben Beadle, chief executive of the National Residential Landlords Association, said:
“a clear roadmap for the reform of PRS MEES is welcome.”
Even the landlords are more on the side of renters than the Conservative party.
The hon. Gentleman asked why we were setting up the warm homes agency. I will tell him why. He said, “Wouldn’t it be better to do this within Government?” The Conservatives presided over a scandalous and shocking disaster in the ECO scheme, a mess that we are having to clear up. We are going to reform the system so that we have a proper agency with proper technical expertise to ensure that nothing like what they visited on thousands of families across the country ever happens again.
I like the hon. Gentleman, and I feel a bit of sympathy for him because he has nothing to say about this issue. Let us just be honest about this: the Conservatives failed over 14 years, and we are delivering.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
I call the Chair of the Energy Security and Net Zero Committee.
Bill Esterson (Sefton Central) (Lab)
I congratulate the Secretary of State—very warmly—on the warm homes plan, and not least on the universal nature of the offer: the support for people in fuel poverty, the health co-benefits in addressing cold, damp and mould, and the availability of cheap finance so that everybody can take part in the technical solutions that are available.
The ECO scheme, which failed so badly, has left a legacy. May I encourage the Secretary of State to address the concerns among consumers, industry representatives and the workforce, and also not to lose sight of the benefits in reduced bills through insulation, particularly loft insulation? On the subject of cheaper bills, the Select Committee has heard again and again that if people are to benefit to the maximum extent from the warm homes plan, we have to see reductions in the price of electricity, and a reduction in the gap between the price of electricity and the price of gas. The Secretary of State mentioned some welcome measures in his statement—the £150 off bills in April being a very good start—but can he confirm that more action will be taken to bring down the cost of electricity, so that as many people as possible can benefit from the warm homes plan to the maximum extent?
Ed Miliband
Let me address my hon. Friend’s questions; he speaks with great knowledge on these issues. On the ECO scheme, I think he refers to the installers, and it is important to emphasise the point I made in my statement: we want the extra money—the £1.5 billion allocated at the Budget—to help the installers, because they are going to face a difficult transition. He raises an important issue.
As I said in reply to the shadow Minister, the measures that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor took in the Budget are important in cutting the cost of electricity. All the evidence I have seen says that, with the right tariff, running a heat pump is cheaper than running a boiler. We continue to look at whether there are other ways we can bring down the cost of electricity, and my hon. Friend is right that we should do so.
On my hon. Friend’s point about insulation, my maxim is that the measures that will cut bills the most are what matters to me. I am not ideological about this. Whether it is insulation, heat pumps, batteries or solar, we should go for whatever can give us most bang for our buck in bringing down bills.
Madam Deputy Speaker
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, who has two and a half minutes.
Madam Deputy Speaker
I welcome the hon. Lady’s thanks, but it is not down to me; it is down to the Secretary of State. We must stop using the word “you”.
Ed Miliband
I am always glad to deliver the Liberal Democrats a late Christmas present. I agree with some of the hon. Lady’s points, particularly on our dependence on fossil fuels and on why clean energy is the way to give us energy security and sovereignty in a dangerous world. I want to reassure her on insulation. As I said to my hon. Friend the Member for Sefton Central (Bill Esterson), we continue to see a really important role for insulation, but I hope that she and other Members of the House will agree that what matters when we invest public money is what will do most to tackle the affordability crisis, and that is our test. Insulation is absolutely a key part of that.
On the ECO supply chain, I will expand a little on what I said earlier to my hon. Friend. We recognise, and I know from my own personal conversations, the issues facing organisations in the supply chain. That is why we are going to make sure that the £1.5 billion, which is on top of the £13 billion or so that was previously allocated to the warm homes plan, is spent through the ECO installers to help them make the transition to the new system. My hon. Friend the Member for Inverclyde and Renfrewshire West (Martin McCluskey) is getting to work straight away on a group representing the installers and local authorities, which are obviously going to be responsible for the procurement and the spending, because we want to do everything we can to help the supply chain.
Lizzi Collinge (Morecambe and Lunesdale) (Lab)
I am really pleased to see this warm homes plan, as a warm home for everyone was one of my key election pledges. In my constituency of Morecambe and Lunesdale, Green Rose CIC has been helping people for years with energy efficiency and making their homes warmer. Can the Secretary of State tell me how local experts such as Green Rose CIC will be used to deliver this change for our constituents?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend asks a really important question, and I congratulate Green Rose CIC on its work. We see organisations like that as central to this plan, and we are working with local authorities to give local people advice. I do not know whether this applies to Green Rose CIC, but we are also working on our local power plan, which will come out soon. It will provide opportunities for local community energy schemes, because community ownership is a big part of it. I see organisations like that, which really reflect the enthusiasm on the ground, as crucial to this plan.
Harriet Cross (Gordon and Buchan) (Con)
My hon. Friend the shadow Minister asked whether or not Chinese supply chains—slave labour supply chains—will be allowed in the procurement of any part of the solar panels involved in this scheme, but the Secretary of State did not manage to answer. Can he please confirm that not a single aspect of this project will come off the back of slave labour supply chains?
Ed Miliband
I will get to the question. We inherited the system from them, and we have raised the standards in the solar road map through the solar stewardship initiative with the solar industry, we have raised the standards through GB Energy, and my hon. Friend the Minister for Energy is working with colleagues across Government to ensure that slave labour is not used in the supply chain.
Ms Polly Billington (East Thanet) (Lab)
May I congratulate my right hon. Friend on this warm homes plan? It has been a long time coming—perhaps a little longer than Conservative Members are prepared to admit, given that he and I worked on something very similar before the Tories abandoned the warm homes ambitions that we now see fulfilled. Under the current calculation, one in six households in my constituency lives in fuel poverty, predominantly in places such as Cliftonville and Ramsgate town centre, where incomes are low and buildings are old. Incidentally, such households are predominantly in the private rented sector. Will my right hon. Friend consider revising the fuel poverty calculation to truly reflect how many people struggle to keep their homes warm in winter and cool in summer? As 28% of my residents live in private rented accommodation, will he say a bit more about the information that might be available to support landlords to make this shift? Will he confirm that he will support an energy social tariff to support the transition to a cheaper and cleaner form of energy?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend is right. Working with the private rented sector to raise the standards is incredibly important and, frankly, we cannot let this scandalous situation, which affects so many private tenants, carry on. She makes another important point: upgrading the nation’s housing stock is a big journey. We have been left a long and bad legacy, and we are determined to make a difference.
Mr Alistair Carmichael (Orkney and Shetland) (LD)
Orkney and Shetland are home to some of the worst levels of fuel poverty in the United Kingdom, as well as some of the largest onshore wind farms in the country. Solar panels are of limited usefulness to us, because it is coldest in the winter and we might have as little as five hours of daylight in the depths of winter. What would make a difference to us is meaningful support for community benefit from or even for community ownership of some of the installed wind farms that we have in the isles, or an isles tariff for communities such as ours and the Western Isles. When will we hear something from the Secretary of State on those ideas?
Ed Miliband
I thank the right hon. Member for his really important question. We will shortly publish our local power plan, which is precisely about the community ownership he mentions. We see that as having a central role. It plays much more of a role in countries such as Germany and Denmark than it does here. We want to expand it, and we want his constituents to benefit.
Tom Hayes (Bournemouth East) (Lab)
It was interesting to hear the Liberal Democrats really struggle to say that they admire this policy, given that they seem to be getting everything they want from it, and it is disappointing to see the deserted Conservative Benches for this statement. [Interruption.] Oh, I offer my apologies to the shadow Minister, who is not with allies.
It is disappointing to hear the Conservatives move from being climate change converts to sustainability sceptics yet again. They left our country vulnerable to the energy price spikes that meant the last Government had to spend at least £78 billion to deal with the cost of living crisis, whereas this Government are investing big. We announced Europe’s biggest ever wind auction last week. Now we are seeing clean power from day one—new builds, new power. Does the Secretary of State agree that a major motive for this plan is to cut hundreds of pounds off bills in Bournemouth East by going solar as standard, and that a rooftop revolution will not only bring down bills, but keep bills down in the long term?
Ed Miliband
I thank my hon. Friend for his question. I guess the shadow Minister will be wondering where his hon. Friends have gone, and whether they are going to another political party. Let me say to my hon. Friend that this is absolutely about his constituents and absolutely about cutting bills. We have a long-term affordability crisis, and this is a long-term plan to help tackle it.
Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)
I welcome the additional investment in energy efficiency measures, which is a good thing. I certainly welcome the simplification of the energy efficiency systems that people can bid into, which can only be a good thing for consumers because that has been a veritable maze. However, the biggest barrier for many of my constituents and people across Scotland is price. They cannot invest in their home if they cannot get a decent price for their energy and deal with the cost of living that is affecting them right now, with the bills they are getting on their doorstep right now. The north of Scotland has the highest energy prices in the UK, and the SNP has put forward proposals for a social tariff. Will the Secretary of State seriously consider those measures, and put in place a social tariff to enable people to take advantage of such schemes?
Ed Miliband
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question. It is because we recognise the immediacy of the affordability crisis that we took the action we did in the Budget to take £150 of costs off bills. It is because we recognise the affordability crisis that we significantly increased the numbers eligible for the warm home discount, for which I think hundreds of thousands more people in Scotland are now eligible. I would point out that the Scottish Government have some responsibility here, having cut some of their own schemes, but we want to work with the Scottish Government and do all we can to help his constituents.
Mr Toby Perkins (Chesterfield) (Lab)
My right hon. Friend has once again pulled quite a rabbit out of the Chancellor’s hat, so I congratulate him on that. He is clearly her favourite Secretary of State.
Does my right hon. Friend agree that we know what happens when we do not rely on renewables? The previous Government had to pay £44 billion to subsidise bills, at the same time that our constituents were struggling to pay them. I agree with the Chair of the Energy Security and Net Zero Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Sefton Central (Bill Esterson), that we still need to be driving down electricity costs. What does the Secretary of State think are the key things we can do to address the skills shortages in the heat pump installation sector, and how many heat pumps should we expect to be installed by 2030?
Ed Miliband
The target we are setting in this plan for 2030 is 450,000. Our skills taskforce is designed to do what my hon. Friend set out, which is to meet the skills needs—the very significant skills needs—we are going to have.
On the first part of my hon. Friend’s question, I do think that the Chancellor deserves real credit for this plan, because she has recognised the importance of long-term public investment, which the last Government singularly did not. The easy thing in difficult times is to cut public investment, but she did not do that. She has increased it, and she is investing very significantly in this area.
Luke Taylor (Sutton and Cheam) (LD)
I warmly welcome this plan and the ambition that the Government are showing, and I will try to dispel some of the official Opposition’s misconceptions. I am sure we have all been out knocking on doors in our constituency. When I was doing so in Worcester Park last week, a lady came to the door in a big jacket, and I moved to let her pass, because I thought she was on her way out. However, she was not going out; she was in her home in a jacket because she did not have the heating on. I am sure we have all experienced that.
We know how the cost of living crisis is hitting our residents, whether through their grocery bills, their rent or their energy costs. Can the Secretary of State give a bit more detail on how we will address energy costs and insulation issues in the short term? Are there programmes in the plan that can fund easy wins, so that we get fewer energy leaks from existing gas boilers, while the industry spools up by getting those with the right skills to install heat pumps, and while we are getting production lines ready?
Ed Miliband
What the hon. Gentleman said at the beginning of his question will resonate with every Member of this House, because so many people are facing a chronic and acute cost of living crisis. This has been going on for a very long time, which is what makes it really hard for people.
The hon. Gentleman asked what difference we can make in the short term. That is why the £150 is important: because it is immediate relief. It is also why the warm home discount and its expansion is important. I encourage people watching this—and I ask Members to encourage their constituents—to go to the gov.uk website to see what schemes are available. People can also get that information from their local authority. There is money available, and we want to get as much help to people as possible, as quickly as possible. This money is sometimes underspent by local authorities, but we want them to get this money out to help people.
Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)
I wonder where the Tory MPs are. They cannot all be having cosy chats with Robert Jenrick—
Peter Swallow
Of course, Madam Deputy Speaker. I do apologise.
I welcome the warm homes plan for the support that it will give, not only to the constituents most in need in Bracknell Forest, but to everyone who is making important upgrades to their home, including through low and no-interest loans for solar panel upgrades. What thought has my right hon. Friend given to supporting leaseholders in making these changes, and to ensuring that they are not held back by freeholders turning down common-sense requests?
Ed Miliband
We absolutely see leaseholders as being eligible for this help, and it is very important that they are. My hon. Friend, with his constituency experience, speaks compellingly about this issue. We want as many people as possible to be helped as quickly as possible through this plan.
Sammy Wilson (East Antrim) (DUP)
Despite the fact that the plan will not apply to Northern Ireland, I welcome the aspect that applies to rented accommodation. Could the Secretary of State confirm whether there will be a Barnett consequential for Northern Ireland? Does he recognise that, even with this plan, there will still be an up-front cost, so low-income families will have to borrow, which will be an impediment? Does he also recognise that despite what he has done on electricity prices, running costs will still be higher, because that is offset by the cost of his net zero policies, which cause electricity to be dearer than gas?
Ed Miliband
I thought that for the first time in 20 years, we were going to agree completely, and we nearly got there. However, three-quarters agreement is better than we have done in 20 years. On the first part of what the right hon. Member said, Barnett consequentials have already been allocated for this. It is obviously for the Executive in Northern Ireland to make their own decisions about how they spend the money. We want the warm homes agency to work with the devolved Governments as well. We also want to look at how a zero or low-interest loan scheme could work across the United Kingdom. We want to work as much as possible with the devolved Governments to help people across the UK.
Callum Anderson (Buckingham and Bletchley) (Lab)
I thank the Secretary of State for his statement. I particularly welcome the new requirements placed on private landlords, which will be a huge boost to tenants in the Buckingham and Bletchley constituency. My question concerns rural communities, which often face high energy costs and other practical barriers, such as the limited availability of those who install things like heat pumps. Can he set out in a bit more detail how his Department will work with relevant local authorities and suppliers to ensure that rural communities, such as those in north Buckinghamshire, are not left behind?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend asks a really important question, and I want to tell him a nerdy fact. I like nerdy facts; it is in character. Nearly half the people on the boiler upgrade scheme are in rural areas, and I think am I right in saying that a third are off the gas grid. That tells you something about the appetite, particularly in rural communities and among those who are off the gas grid, to find alternatives. Hopefully, the continuation and expansion of such schemes will help my hon. Friend’s constituents.
Dr Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)
I warmly welcome the publication of the long-awaited warm homes plan. The Green party has tirelessly campaigned for many of the things in it: a more consistent, clearer, straightforward, nationwide system for people to access support; better inspection and accountability of installers; and of course solar panels on roofs as default. However, I have two questions for the Secretary of State. First, this is supposed to be a warm homes plan, but there is a lot of focus on energy supply improvements, and less than I would expect on energy demand management and insulation, which is crucial to reducing bills. Why is that? Secondly, the scale of this plan is still nowhere close to matching the scale of the need. According to the Government’s statistics, there are 2.7 million households in fuel poverty; it is 6 million households, according to other statistics. This plan aims to address only 1 million of those households, and it represents a 25% cut to the amount previously promised for this work. Why is that, and what will the Government do to reach the millions of additional households that will not be covered?
Ed Miliband
I half thank the hon. Lady for her questions. On the second question, by anyone’s reckoning, this is a very substantial investment. It is multiple times more than was invested in the last Parliament, and there needs to be recognition of that. I recognise that there is further to go. This will help 5 million homes; there are a lot more homes that we want to help, but this is, by any measure, making a difference. On her first point, I reassure the hon. Lady that we absolutely see the value of making fabric and insulation part of this agenda, but the focus has to be on what works to cut bills. That is what our constituents want us to focus on.
Rachel Hopkins (Luton South and South Bedfordshire) (Lab)
I, too, warmly welcome the warm homes plan, which will benefit families in Luton South and South Bedfordshire, and especially the measures targeted at helping low-income families out of fuel poverty. Does the Secretary of State agree that, after a decade of failure from the Conservative party, the Labour Government recognise the cost of living crisis, and are taking definitive action, through this record public investment in home upgrades, to help reduce bills for good?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend puts it very well. We are turning the page on a decade of failure. It is really important that the public know that we get the scale of the crisis that they are facing—the long-term crisis that this Government were determined to deal with when we came into office. We are not over-claiming for this plan, but it will make a difference. We are about making a difference to the costs that people face, so that we can help tackle the cost of living crisis.
Helen Morgan (North Shropshire) (LD)
As the Secretary of State has pointed out, in rural areas, we tend to have older housing stock and lots of people off-grid. They are very keen to see upgrades made to their home, and we welcome this announcement. In my constituency, a number of people engaged with the energy company obligation 4 scheme. Unfortunately, they have been let down badly by rogue installers, who have left their bills higher and their homes damaged, and who have taken money from the taxpayer. What is the Secretary of State doing to ensure that does not happen this time, and what remedy might be available for those who have been let down by rogue actors in ECO4?
Ed Miliband
Any cases should be brought to the attention of the Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, my hon. Friend the Member for Inverclyde and Renfrewshire West (Martin McCluskey). I feel a deep sense of sympathy for the people who have been badly affected by ECO4 and its problems. It was brought to our attention when we came into office, and we are determined to have remediation for all the people affected. The fundamental principle must be that those who, through no fault of their own, were badly let down by the system deserve to have that made good.
On the hon. Lady’s point about how we stop the same thing happening in the future, I would say a couple of things. First, our experience is that local authority schemes had many fewer problems and much higher standards of safeguards. Secondly, the point of the warm homes agency is to have a proper system of regulation that Government oversee. That is the fundamental principle here. We had a piecemeal, privatised, fragmented system, and that is partly what led to the problems. We cannot allow that to continue.
Matt Rodda (Reading Central) (Lab)
I wholeheartedly welcome this announcement from the Secretary of State, and his work over many years in this important policy area. This is an enormous issue in my constituency, where there are many older houses, and many people struggling to pay their bills, so I wholeheartedly welcome the plan. Might he say a little bit about the important work that many local authorities are doing? In my area, Labour-run Reading borough council has invested heavily in new council houses, and it will shortly open 300 new council houses, built to a very high standard. Those houses will ensure that people live in warm homes and have secure family finances and lower heating bills.
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend makes a really important point. I was with all the mayors on Monday, talking to them about their role in the warm homes plan. Local authorities and regional mayors have the best sense about what their area needs, and they are the people to help co-ordinate this and make it happen. Lots of people have rightly said that we need to do more—that this is good, but could we go further? This will be a 15 or 20-year project for the country. That is the way to think about it. This is a national mission to transform our housing stock. It is long overdue. We are making a really important start, and there is further to go.
Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)
There is much to welcome in the warm homes plan. Wales has the oldest housing stock in Europe, with around a third of houses built before 1919. Because of that, Wales is rightly a net beneficiary of ECO schemes; it accounts for 6% of all ECO measures and 12% of ECO4. The Secretary of State will recognise that that is higher than the Barnett consequential funding, based on population share. Can he explain how the warm homes funding for Wales will be sufficient to meet the extreme challenges facing Welsh homeowners?
Ed Miliband
This scheme is really important for Wales. It will have a great impact, even if we take just the boiler upgrade scheme. We are determined to work with the Welsh Government to make sure that the scheme makes a difference for people in Wales. That is the work that my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary is doing.
James Naish (Rushcliffe) (Lab)
I welcome this £15 billion investment, which will tackle energy security issues and make sure that family finances are protected from fossil fuel price spikes. In my constituency, there is a fantastic organisation, co-founded by a lady named Jane, called Women in Retrofit, which focuses on getting more women and girls into the retrofit industry. We simply will not be able to meet our targets without using that part of the workforce. What has the Secretary of State considered, when it comes to getting more women and girls into this work?
Ed Miliband
I congratulate Jane and Women in Retrofit. They sound like ideal people for the taskforce led by my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary to talk to. My hon. Friend the Member for Rushcliffe (James Naish) makes such a powerful point about the diversity of opportunities here, and we want as many people as possible to take advantage of them.
Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)
As co-chair of the net zero all-party parliamentary group, I welcome the expansion of the funding for solar and heat pumps. Prior to coming to this place, I spent the better part of a decade riding the solarcoaster, so I know for a fact that the biggest drag on solar expansion is the skills shortage. Would the Secretary of State fill us in on what the Government and other Departments plan to do to ensure that the skills are there for installations to go ahead?
Ed Miliband
The hon. Gentleman makes a really important point. The solar road map set out some of the work that we are doing, but the whole point of the taskforce—this is a much more intentional way of thinking about the workforce challenges than the previous Government’s way—is to make sure that we have the workforce in place. There were more than 200,000 installations last year; that shows the demand for rooftop solar. Some of the eco organisations that are struggling with the transition could be part of this. We want to make sure that happens.
Kevin McKenna (Sittingbourne and Sheppey) (Lab)
I am really pleased to see this plan. It is such a welcome change from the lukewarm gusts of air that came from the Opposition when they were in government. It is practical, pragmatic and deliverable. Lots of people in my constituency will welcome how fair it is, particularly for people on lower incomes, but also for those on middle incomes, houseowners and renters—everyone. The worry for people in my constituency is that we have a local authority in Kent county council that is committed to climate denialism. It is obsessed with it. How can people in my constituency get the advantages for their houses, jobs and employment, including the tradespeople who really want to be part of this?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend makes a really important point. I would say to the council that he talks about, “Leave your dogma at the door and help local people. Work with us to help local people.”
Iqbal Mohamed (Dewsbury and Batley) (Ind)
The Labour-run Kirklees council failed to apply for the first round of Government warm homes local grants last year. In a cost of living crisis, that is an unforgiveable abdication of duty and a total failure by Labour councillors, resulting in a loss of between £1.5 million and £7 million that was secured by neighbouring authorities. I welcome the Government’s warm homes plan, but will the Secretary of State confirm that the cost of the plan will not be added to monthly household bills? Under the previous Government, my constituents were left with incomplete, dangerous and ineffective installations that they had to pay thousands to remove. Will he ensure that they will not be faced with the same issue?
Ed Miliband
First, that sounds like negative propaganda against Kirklees council, which I am sceptical about. Secondly, on the wider issue, the whole point of the plan is that we are doing it through public investment. That is the decision the Chancellor took and I think it is the right decision.
Gareth Snell (Stoke-on-Trent Central) (Lab/Co-op)
I really welcome today’s announcement. Stoke-on-Trent is routinely ranked at No. 1 in the country for fuel poverty. We have old, terraced housing, often with single glazing and small yards, so space for heat pumps and so on is a concern, but I am sure we will work that out. We are very fortunate that Fiona Miller and the Beat the Cold team, who recently met the Minister for energy consumers, my hon. Friend the Member for Inverclyde and Renfrewshire West (Martin McCluskey), do a lot of work on the ground. The Secretary of State says that the plan will be run through local authorities. How can good partnerships in localities already doing the work be involved in the programme?
My right hon. Friend also says that he is aware of the challenges that suppliers of the ECO scheme face, having lost contracts. In my constituency, that is lots of jobs that have now been lost. How soon will the information be available to them, so they can start workforce planning for the delivery of the programme and get people back into work delivering the upgrades we need?
Ed Miliband
On my hon. Friend’s first point, we want to use local partnerships that are already in place. On ECO installers, that is the work that the Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, my hon. Friend the Member for Inverclyde and Renfrewshire West will be cracking on with. We did not want just to say that we will allocate the money and that it needs to go through the ECO installers. We want to make sure that happens and we will work urgently on that.
Several hon. Members rose—
Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)
I thank the Secretary of State for his statement and welcome much of it, including the fact that it recognises the challenge facing suppliers and that it will support 80,000 jobs. Will the Government commit to working with small local businesses to deliver the scheme, which will help the local economy, or will it just be for the big boys?
Luke Murphy (Basingstoke) (Lab)
The cost of living is the No. 1 issue for my constituents, so I welcome this record investment in warmer homes and lower bills. Measures such as zero-interest and low-interest loans for solar batteries and heat pumps, greater protections for renters, and solar on new homes will all make a huge amount of difference. When will my constituents be able to begin applying for those low and zero-interest loans? For many, there is no time to wait.
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend raises an important point. We will be working urgently with the banks and others—indeed, I think a roundtable is being convened next week—to work out how quickly we can get on with this process. We want to do this as soon as possible. It will take time, and if there is one lesson from the past it is that we need to get this right. We do not want a green deal and all of that malarkey happening. We want to get it right, but we want to do it as quickly as we can.
Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)
I particularly welcome the investment in low-cost loans for solar panels, which will really boost jobs. However, the grid is not currently resilient enough to cope when our electric vehicle cars are providing microgeneration and, as the rays become more efficient, hit the target for distribution network operator approval. What assurances will the warm homes plan provide on investment in the grid and the capacity of DNOs, so that the revolution is successful and not a failed bright idea?
Ed Miliband
We are making big investment in the transmission infrastructure and I urge all hon. Members locally to support, not oppose, that. We are also doing a big reordering of the grid queue, which is crucial because we then get the projects in the places where we need them.
Harpreet Uppal (Huddersfield) (Lab)
I welcome this significant investment. My constituents were badly let down by the previous faulty cavity wall insulation scheme. They were then chased for adverse legal costs. Ensuring confidence in future schemes will be really important. How are we supporting the really good suppliers under the ECO scheme and how quickly will the transition be in place to support them?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend makes a really important point about the fragility of consumer confidence. We have to support it. The point of the oversight group that the Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, my hon. Friend the Member for Inverclyde and Renfrewshire West will chair is to make sure that we do as much as we can to support good ECO suppliers.
Carla Denyer (Bristol Central) (Green)
I warmly welcome the new minimum energy efficiency standards for privately rented homes in the long-awaited warm homes plan, but will the Secretary of State lay out how he will ensure that landlords do not simply pass on to renters the costs of meeting those standards? Will he perhaps ask his colleague the Housing Secretary to introduce rent controls to ensure that renters can actually afford to rent these new warm homes?
Ed Miliband
I am not going to do that, but what I will say to the hon. Lady is that lots of landlords already meet the standards. Secondly, we want to provide some help for landlords to make that happen. This is an important point. Some of the schemes we have been talking about will be available to landlords. Through a combination of some landlords already meeting the standards and that help, we are confident that costs will be reduced and it will not lead to higher rents.
Mr Clive Betts (Sheffield South East) (Lab)
I am sure the Secretary of State will agree that it is not just about having the right policy, which I am sure this is; it is also about the right implementation. My constituents Mr and Mrs Henley-Smith had a heat pump installed under a previous Government scheme. The heat pump was so badly installed by Greener Living that the installer had to offer a back-up gas boiler to get their home hot enough. Greener Living went bust. Will the Secretary of State give an assurance that under his schemes any installations will be by competent companies, and that if the installation goes wrong the Government will stand behind people and ensure rectification work is done to a proper standard?
Ed Miliband
Absolutely, yes. I am so sorry to hear about the experience of my hon. Friend’s constituents. We must ensure that we do not let that kind of thing happen.
Manuela Perteghella (Stratford-on-Avon) (LD)
In my constituency, there are hundreds of residential park homes occupied by elderly residents. They are very energy-inefficient homes and very complex to retrofit. Previous home upgrade grants were ineffective and bureaucratic, because of the batching application process to retrofit homes, so they did not reach many park homes. Will the Secretary of State ensure that the warm homes plan will effectively deliver for park home residents?
Ed Miliband
As an MP with park homes in my constituency, I am very sympathetic to the issues facing people who live in park homes. To give the hon. Lady a proper answer, I will take that away and pass it on to the Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, my hon. Friend the Member for Inverclyde and Renfrewshire West.
Abtisam Mohamed (Sheffield Central) (Lab)
I, too, warmly welcome the plan and the investment that is coming with it, and I strongly commend the leadership of the Secretary of State in this area. It is great news that small businesses are the vehicle that will drive home the upgrades in our local communities, but they too have struggled. I have over 5,000 small businesses in Sheffield Central. Will he outline how those small businesses will benefit from this plan?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend is right. Small businesses are eligible for the boiler upgrade scheme and there is a substantial investment in that. We want them to benefit from the solar loans, too. We also want to help them through local authority procurement. She is right that this is a massive job creation opportunity, but we need the SME sector to get its fair share.
Amanda Martin (Portsmouth North) (Lab)
I, too, congratulate my right hon. Friend on a deliverable warm homes plan. On Friday, I am hosting a utility cost of living event with energy and water suppliers and banks, because Portsmouth North residents were let down dramatically by the previous Government. Does the Secretary of State agree that home upgrades are one of the most effective ways to bring down energy bills, particularly for families? In Portsmouth North, we have 5,000 households officially living in fuel poverty, and more struggling with energy costs because prefabs and Victorian and other older buildings are less efficient to heat.
Ed Miliband
I congratulate my hon. Friend on convening people locally on the crucial issue of the cost of living crisis. I am sure that that will be a really effective and important event. She is absolutely right that home upgrades for her constituents in Portsmouth North and elsewhere are absolutely the long-term answer to the cost of living crisis.
Ayoub Khan (Birmingham Perry Barr) (Ind)
I welcome the Secretary of State’s statement. I especially welcome the fact that the plan will now ensure a degree of localisation and devolution when it comes to decision making, and hopefully it will get rid of the problems we saw with the previous Government’s scheme. Thousands of residents in my constituency have fallen victim to substandard work. The Secretary of State mentioned that there will be remediation. Will that remediation allow them to apply for the new scheme?
Ed Miliband
I think that remediation of the previous works should happen whatever, and residents should not be required to apply. There should be a process with TrustMark, which I think is the overseer in the case that the hon. Member is talking about. This is an issue that my Department is very focused on. It would have been much better if the mess had not been created in the first place, but we are determined to clean it up. If he knows of areas where it has not been cleaned up, he should draw them to the attention of my hon. Friend the Minister for energy consumers.
Mr Jonathan Brash (Hartlepool) (Lab)
Some 15% of my constituents live in fuel poverty, and many more go without in order to pay the outrageous energy bills they face. Many vulnerable people, children and elderly people are living in properties that are too cold and too damp. That is not acceptable to me, and I know that it is not acceptable to the Secretary of State. How will we ensure that the welcome measures in this plan reach the most vulnerable people in communities in Hartlepool and beyond?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend speaks eloquently, and I am sure that what he said will resonate with Members across the House when they think of constituents who are poor and vulnerable and face a choice between heating and eating. The key priority is to get the money out to local and combined authorities. They are the best people to deliver the plan. Looking back over previous years, it is the experience of those authorities that means they are the best way to get help to people most urgently.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Secretary of State for his statement. It really is good news, and we all welcome the warm homes plan and help for families. However, I have some concerns. I know that the Barnett consequential for the devolved nations has been confirmed, and that is good news, but the Executive will be the administrative body for the plan in Northern Ireland. Can the Secretary of State outline how they will ensure access to and deliver the scheme, and—I ask this gently—how will the so-called squeezed middle-income families obtain help for insulation? Those squeezed middle-income families are highly taxed due to fiscal drag and struggle to heat their homes and pay their mortgage.
Ed Miliband
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his important question. The Minister for energy consumers met the Minister for Communities yesterday to talk about how we can work together—for example on the Warm Homes Agency, which is UK-wide, and hopefully on the solar loans as well. We want to do everything we can to work with the Northern Ireland Executive to help serve the people of Northern Ireland.
Jonathan Davies (Mid Derbyshire) (Lab)
I very much welcome the publication of this £15 billion warm homes plan, which will get people’s bills down and reduce our impact on the environment. I was particularly interested to hear of the £90 million that has been set aside for the development of heat pumps, because Vaillant—one of the world’s leading manufacturers of heat pumps—is based in Belper in my constituency. What steps is the Secretary of State taking to ensure that the £90 million will be spent well? Will he engage with Vaillant to make sure that we can draw on its experience, and can we use that money to create more good jobs in this very important sector in Derbyshire?
Ed Miliband
We love Vaillant and what it does. The Minister for climate, my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds North West (Katie White), loves it so much that she is going to visit tomorrow. It is part of the £90 million heat pump investment accelerator programme. This plan is about working with companies such as Vaillant so that we can get domestic manufacturing in this country, which I am sure is what Members across the House would like to see.
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
I warmly welcome the statement from the Secretary of State. I had a visit from Citizens Advice Harlow yesterday, and it told me what we probably already know: the No. 1 issue facing residents in Harlow is damp, mould and fuel poverty. The homes in Harlow were not built in 1919, because Harlow did not exist in 1919, but new towns have a unique problem in that they were all built at the same time, sometimes quickly after the war, so they are suffering from these problems at the same time. Will the Secretary of State take the new towns challenge into consideration, and can he detail how this plan will make a huge difference for residents in my constituency?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend speaks about a really important issue, which I am aware of from my experiences of visiting such areas. The Minister for Energy Consumers, my hon. Friend the Member for Inverclyde and Renfrewshire West (Martin McCluskey), has heard his statement, and we do need to think about this, because there are areas such as Harlow and elsewhere that have particular challenges.
Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)
There are 44,000 homes in York that are energy-insecure, so we really welcome today’s announcement. However, scaling the skills is really important. How is the Secretary of State working with the Education Secretary to ensure that further education has the resources it needs to scale the workforce for the future?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend speaks with typical eloquence on this issue, which came up at the mayors meeting on Monday, when we discussed how we will ensure that the FE sector in particular is geared up to train people for these opportunities. We will work on this with Skills England and mayors, and Ministers will be taking it forward.
Baggy Shanker (Derby South) (Lab/Co-op)
The Secretary of State will recall a visit to Derby where he officially opened Vaillant’s heat source cylinder facility. Will he outline what today’s announcement will mean for such facilities and how it will create more clean energy jobs in Derby and across the UK?
Ed Miliband
I very much enjoyed the visit to Vaillant and was incredibly impressed by what it is doing. Programmes such as the heat pump investment accelerator are designed to help companies such as Vaillant capitalise on this growing market.
Mrs Sureena Brackenridge (Wolverhampton North East) (Lab)
I, too, welcome the warm homes plan, which will lower constituents’ heating bills and provide for the biggest home upgrade in British history. How will the Secretary of State ensure that clean energy is the right choice not only for clean emissions but for cutting bills, while avoiding past Conservative failures on insulation that left tens of thousands of homes with severe damp, mould and structural damage?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend speaks with very good sense on this issue. This plan is a huge opportunity for people. We are seeing record demand, and the question for this House and for all of us is whether we want that to be just for the wealthiest or for everyone. The point of the public investment is to bring opportunities within the reach of ordinary families. That is what is at the heart of this plan.
Amanda Hack (North West Leicestershire) (Lab)
I thank the Secretary of State for his statement and his commitment to improve energy efficiency in people’s homes and reduce bills for constituents like mine. As the chair of the future homes, skills and innovations all-party parliamentary group, I would welcome more details on the taskforce identified in the plan, to ensure that we have the skills and innovation to meet the ambition, so that my constituents can benefit from warmer homes as well as the good jobs that the sector can provide.
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend puts it very well. I am sure that the Minister for Energy Consumers will be happy to talk to her about how we can make sure that the taskforce does what she thinks is necessary to get the workforce we need.
Anna Dixon (Shipley) (Lab)
I would like to thank the Secretary of State on behalf of the over 5,000 households in my constituency that experience fuel poverty. Constituents have also benefited from Saltaire Retrofit Reimagined, a community initiative focused on improving energy efficiency within the Saltaire world heritage site. Will the Secretary of State assure residents of listed properties, such as those in Saltaire, that they too can benefit from the upgrades?
Ed Miliband
Absolutely, and I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for her work on this issue. We want the benefits to be spread as widely as possible. The Minister for Energy Consumers tells me that he will shortly visit that project with my hon. Friend.
As this is the final question, Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to say one final thing. I want to thank the civil service team that have worked on this plan. They have worked on it tirelessly over many months, so I really want to put on record my thanks and the thanks of other Members. We look forward to engaging with Members across the House on implementing the plan.
Offshore Wind
Ed Miliband Excerpts(2 weeks, 1 day ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Ed Miliband)
With permission, I would like to make a statement about the seventh contracts for difference allocation round and the results for offshore wind. Eighteen months ago, the Government set out on our mission to make Britain a clean energy superpower. That was a mission rooted in a simple argument: if we want to take back control of our energy from the petrostates and dictators, if we want to bring down bills for good and if we want to create a new generation of secure, well-paid jobs, the right choice is to get off the rollercoaster of international fossil fuel markets, which caused the worst cost of living crisis in memory. For a year and a half, that mission has faced determined opposition from a well-funded band of doomsters and defeatists. Today, we publish the results of our latest offshore wind auction and with it we prove those doubters and naysayers wrong. Let me set out the results to the House.
On coming to office, we inherited the fiasco of the fifth allocation round—a failure of the Conservatives’ making that trashed the crown jewels of our energy system—in which not a single offshore wind project was secured. That is their legacy; that is the legacy of the right hon. Member for East Surrey (Claire Coutinho).
Our last auction round, allocation round 6, got the industry on its feet again. Today it roars back stronger than ever. We have secured 8.4 GW of offshore wind, enough to power the equivalent of more than 12 million homes. There are winning fixed offshore wind projects in every part of Great Britain: Dogger Bank South off the coast of Yorkshire and Vanguard off the coast of East Anglia, two of the largest offshore wind farms in the world; Berwick Bank in the North sea, the first new Scottish project since 2022; and Awel y Môr, the first Welsh project to win a contract in more than a decade. On floating wind, the emerging technology of the future, we have successful projects in Wales and Scotland—the Erebus project in the Celtic sea and Pentland in Scotland—backed by pioneering investment from Great British Energy and the National Wealth Fund.
Taken together, that is a record-breaking amount of offshore wind capacity procured in a single auction. It is the most successful offshore wind auction in British history and the most successful ever to be carried out anywhere in Europe. That is what it means to deliver on the promise we made to the British people. Against the backdrop of the global headwinds facing the industry, this is a huge vote of confidence in Britain’s drive for energy sovereignty and abundance.
Let me explain why these results are so important for the country. First, they are a major step forward for our clean energy mission. Alongside our work driving ahead on onshore wind, solar, batteries and nuclear, they put us firmly on track to take back control of our energy and deliver clean power by 2030. We have only to look at events around the world to see that we live in increasingly unstable and uncertain times. Fossil fuel shocks have caused half of the UK’s recessions since 1970. Last year, wholesale gas prices spiked by 15% in a single week after global instability in the middle east. We must also never forget the impact of Russia invading Ukraine; family finances, business finances and the public finances were wrecked as a result of our being left exposed to fossil fuels. This exposure leaves us incredibly vulnerable as a country, and we do not have a moment to waste in ending it. That is why our mission is so important.
Our record-breaking results show that our approach to building things again in this country is working. We are more secure in our energy system today than we were yesterday thanks to these results, and we look forward to building on this momentum as we look ahead to AR8, which we are on track to open later this year.
Secondly, on cost, the results show that offshore wind is cheaper to build and operate than new gas. Today we publish updated estimates of the levelised cost of electricity, the standard industry metric, which includes the cost of building and operating new gas-fired power stations—the same metric as was published under the last Energy Secretary. These estimates show that the cost of building and operating a new gas-fired power station is £147 per megawatt-hour. By contrast, I can inform the House that the average price for fixed offshore wind in today’s auction was £90.91 per megawatt-hour. In other words, it is 40% cheaper than the cost of building and operating new gas, but do not take my word for it. This is what the head of Energy UK, which represents gas, nuclear and renewable generators, said of renewables this morning:
“We need to invest in new power generation, and this is the cheapest form.”
I know that some people want to pull the wool over our eyes on this, but they can only do so by comparing the cost of building and operating new renewables with the cost of operating but not building new gas.
Here is the reality: faced with years of under-investment in our energy system under the previous Government, and with power demand set to increase by at least 50% by 2035 and to more than double by 2050, there is no alternative to building new energy infrastructure in this country. We can choose to stop building renewables and just build new gas plants, as the Conservatives want to, but it is clear that offshore wind remains significantly cheaper to build and operate. Credible, independent research confirms that the renewables that we have already built are bearing down on wholesale electricity costs, having reduced wholesale prices by a quarter in 2024. Our mission is right: clean power is the route to bringing down energy bills for good.
Thirdly, today’s auction cements the offshore wind industry’s position as a jobs and growth engine for Britain. It is at the heart of our industrial strategy. These projects will unlock £22 billion in private investment and support at least 7,000 good jobs across the country, from the Scottish highlands to the Suffolk coast. Members across the House know that so many people in our country ask where the good jobs of the future, for themselves and their children, will come from. Clean energy is central to the answer. The previous Government failed to act to ensure that offshore wind generated jobs and supply chains in this country. By contrast, we will use every tool at our disposal to ensure that turbines, foundations and cables are made and built in Britain, creating good, well-paid jobs with strong trade unions. That is why this auction, for the first time, included a clean industry bonus to reward investment in ports and factories in the areas that need it most.
I can inform the House that in this auction, the industry has responded with ambition. The clean industry bonus will crowd in billions of pounds of private investment and support thousands of jobs in supply chains across the country. We look forward to setting out the full results in due course, as we drive forward on the 100,000 offshore wind jobs that our mission will support by 2030.
Let me close by saying that Britain faces a choice over the coming years. We can seize the opportunities of clean, home-grown energy to cut bills and create jobs, or we can double down on our exposure to fossil fuels. In calling for us to cancel this auction, our opponents made their choice: they are setting their face against cheaper, clean, home-grown power, against 7,000 jobs supported today and thousands more to come, against taking back control of our energy sovereignty, and against action on the climate crisis to protect our children and grandchildren. This Government have made our choice: we choose energy security, lower bills, good jobs and the climate. I commend this statement to the House.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
I call the shadow Secretary of State.
Ed Miliband
That was a lot, as they say. Let me deal with what the right hon. Lady said point by point. First, we will take no lectures from her on energy bills. She presided over the worst cost of living crisis in history, and not once have we heard a word of apology. This Government are taking £150 of costs off bills. How are we doing that? By raising taxes on the wealthy. She opposes every one of the measures that we are taking.
Secondly, I know this is painful for the right hon. Lady, but I am using the same metric that she endorsed in November 2023, when she was Energy Secretary. She published the document, and she knows the truth about that metric: offshore renewables today are 40% cheaper to build and operate than new gas. However much she tries to struggle or flail around, those are the facts, I am afraid. She asks about carbon pricing. It is very interesting that even when we take off carbon pricing, gas is still more expensive, on the figures we published today. Her sums simply do not add up.
What is really rich is that the right hon. Lady asked about constraint payments. Why do we have constraint payments? [Interruption.] I am answering the question. We have constraint payments because the Conservatives failed to build the grid when she was the Secretary of State. Get this, Madam Deputy Speaker: now she comes along, complains about constraint payments, and opposes every piece of energy infrastructure that we try to build in order to bring down the constraint payments. It is extraordinary. Here is the right hon. Lady’s big problem. She is making a massive gamble on fossil fuels, which is exactly what the Conservatives did when they were in office, and we know where that led: the worst cost of living crisis in memory, leaving us at the mercy of petrostates and dictators, and leaving the British people to pay the price.
We were elected with an historic mandate to end the Conservatives’ record of failure, and that is what we are doing. We are ending the sell-out of our energy security, cutting bills, creating hundreds of thousands of clean energy jobs and protecting future generations. Let me sum it up: the right hon. Lady failed, and we are delivering.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
Before I call the first Back-Bench Member, may I remind Members that we have an important debate on Ukraine later this afternoon? We will look to finish this statement at about 4 pm, which leaves us with around 30 minutes. Please keep questions and answers short.
Bill Esterson (Sefton Central) (Lab)
The Energy Secretary deserves enormous congratulations on moving from the “botched” auction round 5, to use the words of the right hon. Member for East Surrey (Claire Coutinho), to the record success of auction round 7. The strike price will see no increase in consumer bills—indeed, Aurora says that it is likely to see a reduction in bills—and it is 40% cheaper. The Secretary of State set out in great detail how this will be cheaper than gas. Does he agree that demonstrates once and for all that renewable energy is good for bills?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. People can have incredibly short memories in this House, particularly the Opposition. We are only five years on from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. We know—
Ed Miliband
The right hon. Lady says from a sedentary position that gas is falling, but she is just making a gamble. At the time of the greatest geopolitical instability in a generation, she is gambling on stability. I am not going to make that gamble. We will have home-grown clean power, and we are going to take back control.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
Edward Morello
It is a source none the less.
That places even greater importance on AR8. I hope that the Government will commit to their timetable to open AR8 by the summer and to announce the results by the end of the year. Meanwhile, there is still work to be done to bring down bills for working families and businesses, which is why I urge the Secretary of State to look at Liberal Democrat proposals to phase out the outdated renewable energy certificate scheme and replace it fully with a contracts for difference scheme.
We must also be honest about the impact of Brexit on energy bills. [Interruption.] We cannot get through this without mentioning it. Will the Government commit to accelerating negotiations to re-engage with the EU’s internal energy market to ensure access to cheap electricity when we need a guaranteed energy source and an export market for when we over-produce? [Interruption.] Despite the noise from the science-denying, fossil fuel lobbyists on my right and the Putin apologists behind me, this is good for Great Britain and the right decision for consumers, and it promises a better and cleaner future.
Ed Miliband
Good lines.
Let me deal with that question briefly, following your injunction, Madam Deputy Speaker. First, AR8 is important, and we absolutely want to stick to the timetable—the hon. Gentleman is right—and we are rebuilding confidence in the industry. Secondly, we continue to look at proposals from him and others on doing everything we can to cut the cost of electricity, which he is right about. His broader point is also right. This is about how we make the right long-term decisions for the country, and I am grateful for his support.
Melanie Onn (Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes) (Lab)
I am old enough to remember when a Conservative Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, said that he wanted Grimsby to be the Riyadh of offshore wind. I also remember the shadow Energy Secretary, the right hon. Member for East Surrey (Claire Coutinho), attending offshore wind conferences and championing the sector, so where she stands now is in direct opposition to where she was just a few years ago.
I, for one, am pleased to see the east coast offshore wind industry strengthened through today’s announcement. It will help to deliver energy independence for the UK and secure existing jobs in the sector—there are 12,000 jobs related to clean energy in Lincolnshire. How does the Secretary of State see today’s announcement benefiting growth in the supply chain and delivering new industrial investment in places such as Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend is right—bandwagon-jumping is basically the Conservatives’ policy, and they have jumped on the anti-net zero bandwagon. She makes serious and important points about the future. Indeed, she is a brilliant champion for this industry and for her area, because there are huge opportunities for Grimsby as a result of this auction. She will know that RWE was particularly successful in the auction, and we look forward to working with her and RWE to ensure that we deliver for her constituents.
Sir Christopher Chope (Christchurch) (Con)
How are the figures that the Secretary of State has announced today compatible with the Climate Change Committee’s seventh carbon budget last year, which said that the cost of offshore wind at 2023 prices would be £37.80 per megawatt-hour in 2035? He has just announced £90.91 per megawatt-hour, so how can that be a bargain basement price? Is this not a rip-off of the consumer, who will now face extortionate energy prices for at least 20 further years?
Ed Miliband
No, I do not agree. The hon. Gentleman, in all seriousness, should look at the need to build new energy generation in this country—we are going to have a 50% rise in electricity demand by 2035, and we have to build something. If he wants to build a whole fleet of new gas-fired power stations, he can decide to do that, but the figures we have published today show the costs of that, and those power stations would be more expensive to build and operate than the offshore wind that we have announced today.
Graeme Downie (Dunfermline and Dollar) (Lab)
I welcome the Secretary of State’s statement. In particular, the Government are delivering for Scotland once again with more renewable energy investment. He also talked, rightly, about Vladimir Putin’s actions in Ukraine and why they have had a direct impact on ordinary people in this country, who we must protect now and in the future. We must protect both these new projects and existing infrastructure from outside attacks, so can the Secretary of State say a little bit more about how he is ensuring that as much as possible of the technology for these excellent projects will be made in the UK, and how he will protect them, as well as existing infrastructure, from foreign actors?
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
We have about 20 minutes left. Questions need to be shorter, and answers need to be just as short.
Ed Miliband
That is why the clean industry bonus is so important. We will be announcing more about this tomorrow, because it is going to lever in massive amounts of private investment, including in supply chains.
Harriet Cross (Gordon and Buchan) (Con)
The Secretary of State mentioned the rollercoaster of prices. We obviously understand that gas prices go up and down, but they do come down. We are now stuck at the top of the rollercoaster he has talked about for 20 years. How is that going to reduce bills?
Ed Miliband
I just disagree with the hon. Lady. She is making a massive gamble on the future—she is gambling that gas prices will fall. We are giving this country the assurance that we can have clean, home-grown power and lower bills for good.
Ms Polly Billington (East Thanet) (Lab)
I congratulate my right hon. Friend on structuring the auction to drive down the strike price and reduce consumer energy bills. It is worth reiterating that this means renewable energy will be 40% cheaper than gas. Importantly, though, this is also about creating jobs, specifically in coastal industries. Could he elaborate a little on the clean industry bonus and, in particular, how he might be able to support supply chain jobs in our coastal communities?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend speaks very well on these issues, and she is absolutely right to ask that question. The great thing about the clean industry bonus is that for the first time we are rewarding manufacturers for investing in Britain. It is going to leverage in multiple amounts more private investment compared with public investment, and I believe it can be of massive benefit to our coastal communities.
Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)
I welcome the Secretary of State’s statement, but it is important that my constituents can feel the effect in their pockets. Does he accept that the biggest reason why people are not benefiting from cheap renewables is that electricity prices are still set by gas most of the time, and what steps is he taking to break that link, beyond simply building more renewables?
Ed Miliband
That is an incredibly important point, and the great thing about clean power 2030 is that it will mean gas sets the price much less of the time. With contracts for difference, the reduction in prices feeds through to bills.
Mike Reader (Northampton South) (Lab)
This is a fantastic announcement for the UK, and it is also fantastic to hear that the Secretary of State is already preparing for AR8. Can he assure the House that his Department is going to focus as much on the mid-term and long-term storage that we need to support all this growth in generation?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend makes an important point. Battery storage and long-duration storage, for example, are things that we are working on as a Department, as is Ofgem—they are crucial parts of the jigsaw.
Sir Ashley Fox (Bridgwater) (Con)
The Secretary of State is going to pay a floating wind farm £216 per megawatt-hour. Can he explain how that will lower fuel prices for my constituents?
Ed Miliband
This is about an innovative technology. The hon. Member is right that it is expensive at the moment, but the experience we had with offshore wind, onshore wind and solar was that by investing in it at the front end, we then lowered the price through deployment, and that is what has meant it is a cheaper technology. We are supporting floating wind, and we think that is the right thing to do. It is a crucial next frontier when it comes to the offshore wind industry.
Leigh Ingham (Stafford) (Lab)
Despite representing an entirely landlocked constituency, offshore wind matters greatly to me, as the largest employer in Stafford, GE Vernova, produces critical components for the sector. Can the Secretary of State assure me that any and all future manufacturing requirements for this sector will recognise those companies that are investing in the UK, building skills and providing good jobs? Can I again ask him to join me in Stafford?
Ed Miliband
I have a long-standing promise, which I will fulfil—[Interruption.] Everyone seems to know about that promise to visit my hon. Friend’s constituency to see what GE Vernova is doing. She makes an important point about ensuring that procurement, in which I know GE Vernova has a particular interest, should as much as possible be from the UK. My Department is working on that through not just the clean industry bonus, but many other things that we are doing.
Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)
Although the news on Berwick Bank and Pentland is hugely welcome, it risks masking serious jeopardy for Scotland’s offshore wind sector. There is great worry that today’s news represents a longer-term shift in the renewables industry from north to south, due to the unfair and disproportionate transmission charges regime. If Scotland’s offshore wind sector is to have a future, we need to see reform of transmission charges before auction round 8—will we?
Ed Miliband
Even by the standards of the UK all-comers record for SNP miserabilism, that question takes some beating. I think the hon. Member gets the award. This is a great news story for Scotland, and not just in terms of Berwick Bank but in relation to floating wind. We want to carry on with that progress in AR8.
Henry Tufnell (Mid and South Pembrokeshire) (Lab)
This is a fantastic announcement for Mid and South Pembrokeshire, as it enables Wales’s first floating offshore wind farm. How will the Secretary of State work with developers to maximise their use of local supply chains, so that communities such as mine can see the real benefits in jobs and local economic growth?
Ed Miliband
I congratulate my hon. Friend, because he has been a brilliant champion of this industry, and I am so glad about today’s announcement. He is absolutely right. I want developers and all of the businesses involved to hear his message and his question loud and clear: we want to see this development built in Britain, and it is incredibly important that we work with those businesses, and we will, to ensure that it happens.
Richard Tice (Boston and Skegness) (Reform)
The Secretary of State has inadvertently misled the House. I have gas-fired power plant developers willing to build and operate at last year’s price of £79 per megawatt-hour. Will the Secretary of State admit that, with inflation, the bids today are some 25% higher than that £79? By the time that capacity is built, the cost will be almost 50% higher than £79 per megawatt-hour.
Ed Miliband
With the greatest respect, I trust our analysts in my Department more than I do the hon. Gentleman when it comes to arithmetic. As he is somebody who I think has had an interest in the past in solar panels—
Ed Miliband
Ah, so it is all right for him, but just not for anyone else. That tells us a lot.
Jayne Kirkham (Truro and Falmouth) (Lab/Co-op)
As co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group for the Celtic sea, I welcome the floating offshore wind test and demo model awarded a contract for difference in the Celtic sea. It will open up the Celtics sea to investment. There are other test and demo models in the Celtic sea. What can the Secretary of State say about the role of GB Energy to kick-start these test and demo models, as well as supply chains?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend makes an important point. GB Energy has invested in the Pentland project in Scotland. GB Energy is operationally independent from us, so it makes its own decisions, but it shows that combined with the CfD, GB Energy can play a nurturing role for this technology, and that is incredibly important. It is what other countries have done for a long time, and it is now starting to happen here.
Stuart Anderson (South Shropshire) (Con)
The price that has been fixed today is higher than gas with the reduction of carbon tax and higher than the average for gas for all of last year. South Shropshire residents’ energy bills have been going up since the Secretary of State has been in post. Can he promise when energy bills will come down for my constituents?
Ed Miliband
We will be taking £150 off bills in April, but let me refer the hon. Gentleman to a report produced by the Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit, which explains that having renewables on the system means that we do not pay for expensive gas whose price is much higher than the average wholesale price. According to the report, by not procuring that expensive gas we have brought down the wholesale price by at least £25 per megawatt-hour. It is an important report, and the hon. Gentleman should read it.
Dame Nia Griffith (Llanelli) (Lab)
I congratulate my right hon. Friend on securing this huge offshore wind investment, which will bring good jobs and opportunities for businesses to south-west Wales, as well as reducing bills and increasing energy security. Will he liaise with appropriate colleagues to ensure that the necessary investment is made in the port of Port Talbot, and can he give any indication of the construction time in the Celtic sea and the proposed time for the delivery of electricity to the grid?
Ed Miliband
I assure my hon. Friend, who is a fantastic champion on these issues, that we are very much engaged with Port Talbot and the port on this issue, and with Associated British Ports, because it is important that we make those investments in the port. She should watch this space.
Carla Denyer (Bristol Central) (Green)
As a former offshore wind engineer, I am delighted that the Government have secured record offshore wind capacity, and I say, genuinely, “Well done.” However, what is even cheaper than renewable energy is the energy that we do not need to use because our homes are more energy-efficient, so the Government’s scrapping of an energy efficiency programme last year without announcing what would replace it was less welcome. Can the Secretary of State assure my constituents that when the long-delayed warm homes plan does emerge, it will ensure that everyone can have a comfortable, warm, energy-efficient, affordable home?
Ed Miliband
I am grateful for the tone of the hon. Lady’s question. I will return the compliment, and thank her for her kind words about this auction round. She is entirely right about the importance of our warm homes plan and investing in energy efficiency; the plan will be coming very soon, and that is what it will do.
Perran Moon (Camborne and Redruth) (Lab)
This news is very welcome to those of us who believe in a swift transition away from fossil fuels. Can the Secretary of State confirm that as a result of today’s auction round, supply chain jobs, including those in places such as Hayle and Falmouth in Cornwall, will remain at the top of the Government’s agenda?
Ed Miliband
Yes. My hon. Friend, who speaks so well on these issues, is absolutely right. There are huge opportunities for Cornwall in this area of offshore wind. One thing that I have been doing with my Department is transforming it from simply an energy policy Department to an energy and industrial policy Department, because this Government believe in industrial policy.
Blake Stephenson (Mid Bedfordshire) (Con)
Can the Secretary of State give a clear assurance that not a single offshore wind project procured in this round will be built with technology made by Chinese slaves?
Ed Miliband
We will certainly not be doing that. We want as much as possible of this to be built in Britain.
Tracy Gilbert (Edinburgh North and Leith) (Lab)
I strongly welcome my right hon. Friend’s statement. The port of Leith in my constituency is well placed to support logistics and manufacturing for Berwick Bank, which has been successful today. Will my right hon. Friend meet me to discuss ensuring that every job possible is secured as a result of this investment?
Ed Miliband
I look forward to having conversations with my hon. Friend. I think that there are huge opportunities for Scotland, and the Government intend to maximise them.
Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)
Of course we welcome the new offshore wind projects in Wales and all the anticipated jobs, but if only we could guarantee that profits would stay in our communities and the use of local supply chains were contractually hardwired! Will the Government ensure that time is secured for a debate on the Crown Estate Act 2025, so that we can discuss how the people of Wales will receive their fair share of offshore wind profits?
Ed Miliband
I fear that securing time in the House is way above my pay grade. [Interruption.] I promise that it is. Let me say more generally to the right hon. Lady that I agree with her, and that we are looking at the Procurement Act 2023 and how it works. Ensuring that we procure as much of this as we can in the UK is incredibly important, and it is taken seriously throughout Government.
Dame Meg Hillier (Hackney South and Shoreditch) (Lab/Co-op)
I congratulate my right hon. Friend on securing this investment. We are hearing some real chutzpah from the Opposition, who seem to have forgotten that it was they who imposed the ban on onshore wind. We need to remember who is in favour of tackling the issue of green energy and bringing down bills. The other side of this, however, is getting the electricity to constituencies such as mine. What progress is being made on upgrading the grid, and what timeline has my right hon. Friend for conveying the electricity to people who need it?
Ed Miliband
I agree with my hon. Friend. I am old enough to remember Boris Johnson, and he used to trumpet the potential of this. He used to talk about it as the future and how it was going to build future jobs, but the Conservatives have abandoned all that. They are miserable pessimists about our country.
As for my hon. Friend’s question, I think she is absolutely right. She will welcome the fact that NESO has undertaken the biggest overhaul of the grid we have seen in a long time, reordering the queue to ensure that we procure the power we need in the right places and that we give priority to the projects we need.
Rachel Hopkins (Luton South and South Bedfordshire) (Lab)
Today’s announcement of a record-breaking auction securing over 8 GW of wind power—enough electricity to power over 12 million homes—is clear evidence of this Labour Government delivering on our clean power mission, and it will help my constituents have lower bills in the future. Does the Secretary of State agree that this is good for jobs, good for growth and good for energy security?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend is absolutely right, and I think the point about energy security is crucial because we live in an uncertain world. We need our own home-grown clean energy, and that is what we are doing.
Luke Myer (Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland) (Lab)
The Energy Secretary has talked about the clean industry bonus and supply chain opportunities. What commitment will he make that, for every tower and turbine that goes up, British steel is being used and Teesside jobs are being created?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend, with whom I have discussed this, is absolutely right. We want to do everything we can to ensure we use steel from Britain in this process. Part of this is about what we legislate for, and part of it is about the conversations we have with the developers to ensure they do that. I am setting a very clear expectation on this, and I expect developers to do everything they can to meet it.
Gill German (Clwyd North) (Lab)
I warmly welcome the not just one, but two offshore wind projects in Wales, with billions of pounds in investment and thousands of new jobs putting Wales firmly on the map as a clean energy producer. We are delighted to see Awel y Môr in north Wales, and the benefits for Clwyd North are clear—skilled, well-paid local jobs and a huge boost for local supply chains. Along with new nuclear at Wylfa, north Wales is finally getting the clean energy investment it deserves under this Labour Government. May I thank the Secretary of State for this investment in north Wales, and will he join me in meeting the apprentices at Coleg Llandrillo who are already training for these jobs of the future?
Ed Miliband
I would really like to do that. The Prime Minister and I, with the Chancellor and indeed the First Minister of Wales, had a fantastic visit to north Wales when we announced our small modular reactors there, and the excitement among the students at the college about the future we are building was so palpable to see. I must say that that is the difference between the Government and the Opposition. We are embracing that future and building that future for those young people; they, frankly, are selling those young people down the river.
Alice Macdonald (Norwich North) (Lab/Co-op)
I welcome the investment for the Norfolk Vanguard project, which will play an enormous role after being awarded over a third of total capacity under these contracts. The Secretary of State has spoken about the benefits for jobs. Can he speak specifically about how we will ensure young people now at school and in college will benefit with apprenticeships and training in these industries?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend makes a really important point. We will be setting up five technical excellence colleges in clean energy, and they will be incredibly important in training young people for this clean energy future. There is a huge number of opportunities out there. Part of this is about the training, but another part is about young people getting to know about these opportunities. I was at an amazing jobs fair in the north-east—organised by Kim McGuinness, the mayor of the north-east—which brought together some of the developers with young people, and the excitement among those young people about this future was so palpable. We need to do more of that.
Alex Sobel (Leeds Central and Headingley) (Lab/Co-op)
I congratulate my right hon. Friend on proving that contracts for difference for offshore wind really do work. I am particularly pleased to hear how much floating wind is in this contract. I know he is always looking to the future, so could he update the House on what his Department is doing about emerging offshore technologies such as offshore thermal, offshore wave and offshore tidal?
Ed Miliband
Those are incredibly important technologies, and we need to do more to help bring down their cost. Tidal schemes will be in the next auction pot, and we are continuing to look at how we can deploy more of them in our country.
Luke Murphy (Basingstoke) (Lab)
I congratulate the Secretary of State and his team on today’s announcement, not least because it draws such a stark contrast. He has announced the largest ever offshore wind auction in history, whereas one of his predecessors came to this House to announce the largest ever Government energy subsidy to households in history—those were the words from the previous Government’s press release. That £40 billion was necessary, but it was the result of the previous Government’s failure to secure our energy supply. That cost our households thousands and taxpayers billions. Can my right hon. Friend confirm that this announcement will secure our energy future and ensure that such a catastrophic failure can never happen again?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend speaks so well on these issues and he is so right. This is about energy sovereignty and our security as a country. When the Conservatives were in government, at least under Boris Johnson, they seemed to understand that. That is why it is so regrettable. Of course, this is about the climate crisis, good jobs and lower bills, but it is also about security in an uncertain and dangerous world. The Opposition are, frankly, surrendering our security and what they are proposing is incredibly dangerous.
Alistair Strathern (Hitchin) (Lab)
I thank the Energy Secretary for the leadership he has shown with this record-breaking step forward for renewable power, which underlines our commitment to delivering the clean, secure energy our country is crying out for. It is important to note that the scale of energy secured—at a 40% lower cost than new gas—was only possible because of reforms to the auction market design. We did not tolerate the mechanisms that failed under the previous Government; we innovated to deliver better value. Will the Energy Secretary ensure that we do not rest on our laurels, but continue to innovate in auction design to ensure that we get the best possible value for money and the biggest possible capacity outcomes from future auctions, too?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend speaks very knowledgeably on these issues and he is absolutely right. We changed the auction design not just to be able to see the so-called bid stack, which they could not under the previous regime, but to allow more projects in to increase competitive tension to get a better deal for the bill payer and the taxpayer. He is absolutely right: we should keep innovating for both fixed technology and other technologies to maximise value for money and deployment.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
I call Dr Jeevun Sandher—I hope it has been worth the wait.
Dr Jeevun Sandher (Loughborough) (Lab)
Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker. Affordability is the biggest issue facing our country and climate change is the biggest issue facing our planet. That is why today’s announcement is such, such good news: wind power 40% cheaper than natural gas. Bizarrely, Reform called that lunacy. The shadow Secretary of State used to agree with us and she used to support the Climate Change Act 2008, but now she agrees with Reform. Does the Secretary of State believe that the shadow Secretary of State may be planning to join the best and the brightest of her former colleagues and become defector No. 21?
Ed Miliband
It was worth waiting for. I will let the right hon. Member for East Surrey (Claire Coutinho) speculate on her own future and whether she is going to join another political party. In all seriousness, I do think it is sad. The truth is that we used to pride ourselves as a country on competing, between political parties, to succeed when it came to building our clean energy future. It is deeply regrettable. There are many sensible voices on the Conservative side who shake their heads when I talk to them about the direction their party has taken. Fundamentally, my hon. Friend is right: this is central to tackling the affordability crisis, central to tackling the climate crisis in our country, and central to giving us energy security.
Madam Deputy Speaker
We got through that in 48 minutes, which is much faster than we hoped. Well done to everybody.
Oral Answers to Questions
Ed Miliband Excerpts(3 weeks, 2 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Ms Polly Billington (East Thanet) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Ed Miliband)
The 2023 generation costs report published under the previous Government shows the levelised cost of electricity to build and operate a new gas-fired power station to be significantly higher than the cost of onshore wind, solar and offshore wind in the most recent renewables auction round. Renewables are a cheaper technology to build and operate than new gas-fired power stations.
Tom Collins
The National Energy System Operator’s clean power 2030 plan relies on unabated gas power stations, without a clear plan for their decarbonisation after 2030. The forthcoming hydrogen strategy presents a natural opportunity to set long-term goals for the wider integrated energy system, including hydrogen-fired combined cycle gas turbine generation, and long-term salt cavern energy storage at scale. Will that strategy include a quantified pathway with delivery milestones for transitioning dispatchable power, and will NESO be required to incorporate that pathway into its planning?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend asks an important question. In our 2030 clean power plan, we talk precisely about the importance of low-carbon dispatchable power as a way forward. I am really proud of what is happening with our carbon capture and storage plans and Net Zero Teesside. Additionally, it will be an important part of our forthcoming hydrogen strategy, as he says.
Ms Billington
Current global instability, from Ukraine to Venezuela, has shown the vital importance of having domestic energy security. Does the Secretary of State agree that investing in renewables will help with both security and cost, particularly because they are cheaper to build and operate, as well as providing us with vital energy security in an uncertain world?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend is right. The figures that came out from NESO over Christmas show that we had extra renewable power in 2025 equivalent to powering 2 million homes; that is 2 million homes that will not be powered by imported gas. That gives us the price stability that we never had under the previous Government. The fundamental lesson at a time of geopolitical instability is that home-grown clean power is what gives us the certainty we need.
Wera Hobhouse (Bath) (LD)
According to Government figures, output from new solar projects costs around £41 per megawatt-hour compared with roughly £140 per megawatt-hour for the lifespan costs of new gas power. I know the Secretary of State agrees with me and RenewableUK that clean energy remains the energy with the lowest cost, but how do we ensure that the British public agree with us?
Ed Miliband
The hon. Lady has just done a good job of highlighting the importance of this matter, and she gets to the crucial point. The Opposition parties that reject solar, onshore wind and offshore wind are rejecting cheap, clean, home-grown power for the British people, which we on the Government Benches are in favour of.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Secretary of State very much for his answers. Not only is cost important when it comes to looking at gas-fired power stations; it is also important to ensure that communities have an input into the planning process. Has that been central to the formation of any policy on gas-fired power stations? Has he had the opportunity to share those thoughts and that information with the Northern Ireland Assembly, which wishes to look at the possibilities for Northern Ireland?
Ed Miliband
We have regular discussions with the Northern Ireland Assembly and the Executive on a range of issues. On the hon. Gentleman’s point about nationally significant projects, it is absolutely right that communities have input into these questions. Certainly in the case of home-grown low-carbon power, we want communities to see the benefit, because by hosting infrastructure, including low-carbon infrastructure, communities are doing a service to the country.
Claire Coutinho (East Surrey) (Con)
Happy new year, Mr Speaker.
This is just nonsense on stilts from the Secretary of State, and we know this because the biggest AI company in the world has said that it will need gas power to succeed in Britain. If a company wants to build its own gas plant here, at no cost to the British taxpayer, the warped green ideology of this Secretary of State, who is obsessed with domestic emissions above everything else, will block it. Those emissions will still exist, as that company will start somewhere, just not here in Britain. Does he agree that that is a completely mad reason to block the growth we need in Britain?
Ed Miliband
I do not really understand what the question was about, but we are in favour of AI and we are working with our colleagues on AI. I have to say that I am glad the right hon. Lady rose to speak on this question, because she has been rumbled by the figures I produced; they came out when she was the Energy Secretary. She goes around saying how much more expensive renewable power is, but the figures that she produced show that renewable power is cheaper to build and operate than gas-fired power stations. She used to believe that, until she jumped on the latest passing bandwagon to suddenly be a net zero sceptic.
Freddie van Mierlo (Henley and Thame) (LD)
The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Ed Miliband)
The decision by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor to take an average £150 of costs off people’s energy bills from April is a reflection of this Government’s commitment to tackling the cost of living crisis. It will make a difference to families across the country and is estimated to reduce by over 1 million the number of people paying more than 10% of their income in energy costs.
Perran Moon
Kensa, based in my Camborne, Redruth and Hayle constituency, is the largest manufacturer of ground source heat pumps to neighbourhoods and council flats, and I know that the Secretary of State and the Chancellor have both visited that company. This technology delivers low energy bills for family finances, but the sector requires policy certainty and a plan to grow. Ministers have been very generous with their time to date, but will the Secretary of State meet me again to discuss how we can provide the certainty and commitment to public funding that will support this technology?
Ed Miliband
I really enjoyed my visit to Kensa—I would recommend that all Members go—which is a really innovative company that is leading in heat pump manufacture. As my hon. Friend knows, we will shortly be publishing our warm homes plan, which will be really important in driving forward heat pump uptake and helping companies such as Kensa, because there is also a massive jobs story that is part of this.
Dr Caroline Johnson (Sleaford and North Hykeham) (Con)
Socialists do have a habit of taking money from people and then asking them to be grateful for getting some of it back, so could the Secretary of State tell us how much the £150 reduction in fees will actually cost taxpayers?
Ed Miliband
I will tell the hon. Lady. We are proud of the fact that in the Budget we raised taxes on the wealthy so that we could cut bills for millions of families across this country. I am so grateful to her for her question, because it illustrates the difference between our parties. This was not an easy thing to do; it was a decision made by this Government, because for too long this country has been run for the wealthy and powerful by the Conservative party. We are changing that and cutting bills for millions of families across Britain.
Bradley Thomas (Bromsgrove) (Con)
This Government’s promise to cut energy bills by £300 is dead in the water, as bills are now £190 higher than when they took office. Now their big idea is to pull the wool over the eyes of the British public by moving some of the costs of net zero from people’s energy bill to their tax bill. Can the Secretary of State answer a very simple question: after the Government’s supposed bill cut takes place in April, will the average energy bill be higher or lower than when Labour came to power?
Ed Miliband
I can tell the hon. Gentleman that bills are going to be lower. [Interruption.] If he just listens, I will tell him. If we compare 2025 to 2024, energy bills are lower in real terms than they were in 2024, and the price cap is also lower. Because bills are still too high, we will make that situation better by taking £150 off bills. The Conservatives opposed every measure in my right hon. Friend the Chancellor’s Budget, yet they also say that they want £150 off bills—they cannot have both. It is this Government who are delivering on the cost of living crisis.
Mr Speaker
I am intrigued, because question 6 has been transferred. It has even got on to the Order Paper. Why did the Department suddenly find out so late that it has been transferred? I do not think it is good practice, and I hope it will not happen again.
Peter Lamb (Crawley) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Ed Miliband)
The Government inherited a legacy of huge under-investment in the grid, which piled up constraint costs and created a chaotic system for grid connection, which left crucial projects facing decade-long delays. We are tackling this with a programme of investment and reform, include sweeping changes to the grid connections process, which saw the National Energy System Operator last month set out a massive overhaul of the queue, cutting its size by two thirds and giving priority to the generation projects that we need.
Peter Lamb
Despite its rural setting, Crawley’s travel-to-work area has a larger economy than many of the UK’s core cities. Despite that, it has been held back over recent years due to a lack of grid capacity at its major connection point with the national grid, resulting in the loss of several major investments under the previous Government. Will the Secretary of State look into what can be done to upgrade the connection point and unleash that restrained economic growth?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend makes a crucial point. There was this terrible backlog, where the queue had something like five times as much capacity as was required and the wrong priorities. We also had massive problems for demand connection. Our significant reform to overhaul the queue, which had not been done for years and years, will free up demand projects to connect, and I very much hope that projects in his constituency can benefit.
John Milne (Horsham) (LD)
Access to the grid for new energy suppliers is patchy across the country, and it leads to an overconcentration of solar farm and battery energy farm applications in unexpected places, such as the village of Cowfold in my constituency. What action will the Government take to ensure a fair distribution of renewable energy developments?
Ed Miliband
I know that my hon. Friend the Minister for Energy has had discussions with the hon. Member for Horsham (John Milne), and it is important that we have those discussions with Members. One of the important things for this year—it is slightly for the trainspotters, or energy-spotters—is the strategic spatial energy plan, which will set out a pathway for where we need power in the coming years well beyond 2030. As part of that, we should definitely be looking at where in the country are the right places to put the power we need.
Noah Law (St Austell and Newquay) (Lab)
Mr Luke Charters (York Outer) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Ed Miliband)
Our clean energy mission offers a transformative opportunity to deliver thousands of high-quality jobs and drive prosperity across the country. In Yorkshire and the Humber, we estimate that there will be up to 20,000 additional jobs by 2030. There are opportunities in offshore wind, hydrogen and nuclear, as well as in many other areas.
Mr Charters
Happy new year, Mr Speaker.
I am proud of York College in my constituency, where talented students are mastering apprenticeships that will power our clean energy future. York College is considering becoming a clean energy technical excellence college under the outstanding leadership of Ken Merry. Will the Secretary of State welcome that and visit the college to see how it leads the way in further education in preparing for the clean energy jobs of the future?
Ed Miliband
I congratulate York College on its work. I know from my constituency in Doncaster, where we are to get a second university technical college specialising in green skills, the importance of that and the excitement of young people about this future. By turning their backs on clean energy, the Opposition turn their backs on young people. Clean energy is the future—it is one of the fastest growing sectors. We want it for Britain, we want it for York and we want it for Doncaster, and we will make it happen.
Martin Vickers (Brigg and Immingham) (Con)
Sadly, it is not job creation that faces many of my constituents, particularly those who work at the Lindsey oil refinery. The Secretary of State knows that Axiom and others submitted bids that would have continued production at the refinery. Instead, we now have a deal with Phillips 66 that transfers the assets but not the business. Will he undertake to make a statement to the House and to answer the many unanswered questions that surround the deal?
Ed Miliband
First of all, what happened at Lindsey—we should be clear that the responsibility lies with the owner, which ran the business into the ground—is tragic for the workers and their families, and I have talked to those workers. The hon. Gentleman will know—my hon. Friend the Energy Minister has spoken to him about this—that the process involved the official receiver, who looked for the best and most viable bid, but there was no viable bid to keep refining going at Lindsey. That is why P66 was chosen, and we are determined to work with the company to maximise the number of jobs that it can deliver for the local community.
Christine Jardine (Edinburgh West) (LD)
Carla Denyer (Bristol Central) (Green)
The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Ed Miliband)
The affordability crisis is the No. 1 issue facing families across our country. That is why we have acted to take £150 of costs off bills for all families, with an additional £150 through the warm home discount for 6 million households this winter. Thanks to our decisions, last year was a record year for wind and solar power, and we have embarked on the biggest nuclear building programme for half a century. That is what it means to deliver on lower bills, good jobs and energy security.
Carla Denyer
Climate change made 2025 the UK’s hottest year on record and fuelled deadly extreme weather events across the globe. We know that every drop of oil and gas used makes those events more likely, so will the Secretary of State confirm how much more new oil and gas could be extracted via the tiebacks that the Government have decided to allow, despite the new oil and gas ban? When developers apply for permission for those tiebacks, will they be required to include scope 3 emissions in their environmental impact assessments?
Ed Miliband
I wish the hon. Lady a happy new year, but I find that question a bit churlish. We have produced a world-leading plan for the North sea, which combines the just transition—the just and prosperous transition—with environmental leadership, while keeping to our manifesto commitment not to issue new licences to explore new fields. It is absolutely right that we have tiebacks to ensure that existing oil and gas fields are kept open for their lifetime. Obviously, the North Sea Transition Authority will consult on the details of how that will work, but it is absolutely the right thing to do for jobs and the environment.
Dame Meg Hillier (Hackney South and Shoreditch) (Lab/Co-op)
Ed Miliband
I congratulate Hackney council—Labour-led Hackney council—on the brilliant job it is doing on green energy. Unlike some who just talk about it, the council is actually delivering, and I congratulate it. I see Hackney as being at the forefront of our local power plan, which will be coming out in the coming months.
Claire Coutinho (East Surrey) (Con)
It is freezing cold outside, and people are worried about their energy bills, yet on top of all the other costs the Secretary of State has lumped on to people’s bills, it is reported that he is about to tax people with gas boilers to pay for people having heat pumps. Can he definitively rule this out for the rest of this Parliament: no new taxes on people heating their homes?
Ed Miliband
I can absolutely rule out that we are going to introduce new levies to the energy system in the warm homes plan. Those reports are complete nonsense. I can tell the shadow Secretary of State that the warm homes plan is going to turn the page on a decade of the Conservatives’ failure, because we are going to invest where they did not, we have a plan where they did not, we will have proper oversight and regulation where they did not, and we will tackle the cost of living crisis they caused—
Mr Speaker
Order. Secretary of State, we are on topicals. I know you want to get carried away, but, please, the new year does not allow for it.
Claire Coutinho
The rumours are that the Secretary of State is pitching himself to be the next Chancellor. He did not rule out taxes on people heating their homes for this Parliament, he is shutting down the North sea, there is a disastrous EU energy deal and a secret deal with China, the industry is fleeing in its droves and energy bills have risen five times on his watch. Does this not show that he has to be the only person in the country who could do a worse job than the current Chancellor?
Ed Miliband
Don’t tempt me, Mr Speaker—don’t tempt me!
I want to briefly make one point. In the warm homes plan, which will come soon, we will be making £15 billion of public investment to help people cut their bills. The Conservatives can oppose that if they like, but I think it will be supported across the country, because they were an absolute failure on energy efficiency and all of that, and we are going to succeed.
Luke Murphy (Basingstoke) (Lab)
Pippa Heylings (South Cambridgeshire) (LD)
Brexit excluded us from the EU’s internal energy market, costing the UK a huge £350 million annually. Will the Secretary of State confirm how he will accelerate progress towards the UK-EU internal electricity trading agreement to bring down costs and ensure energy security in these volatile times?
Ed Miliband
The hon. Lady makes an important point, which is that we need to make sure we take advantage of co-operating with our European neighbours. One way we can do that is the internal electricity market, and we will be negotiating on that basis. We will obviously look at the costs and benefits for the UK, but anything we can do to lower costs, lower bills and co-operate with our European neighbours to our advantage is what we should be doing.
Michelle Scrogham (Barrow and Furness) (Lab)
Ed Miliband
It sounds like a really interesting project. My hon. Friend is absolutely right that there are huge opportunities. Opportunities abound when it comes to co-operation with our near neighbours and across the world to help our energy security, deliver clean power and bring down bills.
Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)
Ed Miliband
The hon. Lady asks an important question. As part of the warm homes plan, we are putting in an additional £1.5 billion of public investment and replacing the ECO scheme, which I am afraid had failed in a number of different ways—no disrespect to some of the installers. That will be designed to help bridge the transition for companies like the one that Andrew runs.
Mr Peter Bedford (Mid Leicestershire) (Con)
Ed Miliband
The hon. Gentleman is wrong, if he listened to my answer earlier, because actually bills across 2025 were lower than in 2024. He should welcome our measures to cut bills by £150, but I am afraid that those on his Front Bench do not support us.
Alex Mayer (Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard) (Lab)
Chris Webb (Blackpool South) (Lab)
Blackpool and The Fylde college has excellent courses that are training young people in the area in use of the vital renewable energy equipment that we need to go forward, but there are no jobs for those young people locally. Will the Secretary of State meet me to discuss how we can create those jobs? He is welcome any time to come to a sunny and slightly chilly Blackpool to see those students and the excellent work that they are doing.
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend is a brilliant advocate for his constituency, and indeed for Blackpool. I would be very happy to meet him to talk about how we can ensure that the jobs that those young people want come to Blackpool.
Ed Miliband
Yes; my hon. Friend is entirely right. Home-grown clean power is what will give us energy security.
Helen Maguire (Epsom and Ewell) (LD)
An estimated 50,000 diesel-powered transport refrigeration units operate across the UK, consuming around 235 million litres of fuel annually. These generators emit up to 400 times as many particles as truck exhausts do. High-emitting diesel engines face no real regulation and create a significant burden on the NHS and the environment, but there is a solution. Zero-emission renewable transport refrigeration technologies are commercially available and being manufactured in the UK today. Government intervention would help. Will the Secretary of State come and see the fantastic work of Sunswap, which is championing this technology in my constituency, and can he—
Lee Anderson (Ashfield) (Reform)
In November last year, the Energy Secretary and his entourage attended COP30 in Brazil. That was an event where a rainforest was chopped down so that the Energy Secretary could talk about saving rainforests. Does he understand the hypocrisy of it all?
Ed Miliband
I do not understand the hon. Gentleman, if I am honest. The truth is that he would give up on young people. He would sell them down the river, as he would today’s generation, the future generation, and all generations to come. I do not think that is a very good platform to stand on.
Tim Farron (Westmorland and Lonsdale) (LD)
Some 25% of the houses in my constituency were built before 1900. They are expensive to heat and very difficult to insulate. When will there be a bespoke plan for insulating those properties, using the right materials, and, crucially, for the insulation to be installed by specialists?
Andrew Lewin (Welwyn Hatfield) (Lab)
Happy new year to you and your team, Mr Speaker. It was a happy start to the new year, because we learned that in 2025, more renewable energy was generated in this country than at any time on record. That was driven by growth in solar in particular. Will my right hon. Friend make it a new year’s resolution that the Government will continue to drive that growth forward, and will surpass that amount in 2026?
Ed Miliband
Absolutely. This is about delivering what we promised when we were elected: home-grown clean power, so that we can get bills down, create jobs, get energy security and, crucially, do the right thing for future generations.
Darren Paffey (Southampton Itchen) (Lab)
Southampton is Europe’s leading cruise port and the second-biggest container terminal in the country. Our industry stands ready to invest millions in decarbonisation, but that is being held up by grid constraints at the Nursling supply point. Will the Minister meet me and local industry leaders to see how we can unlock the obvious environmental and economic benefits that this change would bring?
Ed Miliband
Our team would be happy to meet my hon. Friend. That question, and so many others, shows the huge opportunities arising from home-grown, clean power, including in fantastic Southampton.
Bradley Thomas (Bromsgrove) (Con)
On a point of order, Mr Speaker. In response to my question about whether bills in April 2026 will be lower than in July 2024, the Secretary of State claimed that they would be. However, the price cap would suggest otherwise: it was £1,568 in July 2024 and is projected to be £1,620 in April 2026. Can you advise on how the House can seek a correction of the record?
Mr Speaker
You have certainly put that on the record. We are not going to continue the debate unless the Secretary of State wants to respond, which I doubt.
Ed Miliband
Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. I am happy to respond, because we are going to deal in the facts. Bills were lower in 2025 than in 2024 in real terms, and the price cap was lower—and, of course, making a seasonal comparison makes no sense. We are going to trade in the facts.
Sarah Olney
On a point of order, Mr Speaker. I asked the Secretary of State a direct question about his former statements and how they conflict with current Government policy. Would you agree that the Secretary of State should have directly answered me?
Budget Resolutions
Ed Miliband Excerpts(1 month, 4 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Ed Miliband)
It is a privilege to open this Budget debate on a theme of paramount importance to our country: the cost of living crisis facing Britain’s families. Whatever our party, we should take a step back and think about the history of the last two decades since the financial crisis, during which we have seen: the stagnation of real wages, only this year getting back to their 2008 levels; the worst progress on living standards in the last Parliament since records began in the 1950s; an epidemic of in-work poverty such that, according to the Resolution Foundation, seven out of 10 families with children who live in poverty now have someone in work; home ownership falling from two thirds of young people in the early 1990s to less than half today; and the biggest rise in energy bills in generations earlier this decade when Russia invaded Ukraine, on top of public services facing strains as never before.
Each of those on their own would cause people to doubt whether this country really works for them. Together, they represent a perfect storm that makes people question their basic assumptions about our economy, society and country. This is the condition-of-Britain question of our time, and it is the backdrop against which this Government were elected 17 months ago. The mission—the driving purpose of this Government and this Budget—is to tackle that crisis. That starts from an understanding that this crisis is due to not accidental circumstances but a governing ideology, and that our response must be to change course in three ways.
First, we need to make fair choices that favour ordinary working people, not the rich and powerful, who have been favoured for too long. Secondly, we must invest in and rebuild our public services and infrastructure so that we never return to austerity, which was such a disaster for the social and economic fabric on which so many people rely. Thirdly, we must endeavour to change our economy so that it produces more good jobs at good wages that sustain a decent living for people, ending the hollowing out of our economy and our communities. That is what this Government are about; that is what this Budget seeks to deliver.
First, then, I want to talk about fair choices. An illuminating chart—I love charts—on page 33 of the Budget Red Book shows the impact of decisions since the 2024 autumn Budget. It shows the progressive approach of my right hon. Friend the Chancellor. It shows that every decile will be better off as a result of her measures, except the richest 10%, with the greatest gains as a percentage of income to lower and middle-income families. That includes raising the national living wage and the national minimum wage, freezing rail fares for the first time in 30 years and freezing prescription charges, as well as two measures I want to focus on.
The first measure is lifting the two-child limit in universal credit, which goes to the heart of the affordability crisis that so many face. I think we need to have a debate about this issue. According to a Department for Work and Pensions document published on the day of the Budget, since its introduction in 2017, the two-child cap has put 300,000 children into relative poverty. That is the equivalent, as the document says, of 100 children every single day—more than three primary school classes each day being pushed into poverty. It is also part of a wider picture. According to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, 7.1 million low-income households—one in four across the UK—have gone without essentials in the last six months, in one of the richest countries in the world. That is why we have acted on the two-child limit. Two million children will be helped, and 450,000 fewer children will be in poverty by the end of the Parliament.
As I understand it, the Conservatives oppose the policy change because they claim it is about helping people out of work who are undeserving. We need to unpack this false claim. The inescapable fact that the Opposition want to run away from is that around 60% of families impacted by this policy are in work, not out of work. These are people for whom work simply does not pay, like in the case—highlighted by the Child Poverty Action Group—of Shauna and her husband, who have three children. Shauna’s husband works full time and she says,
“This will make a big difference because we’ve had to incur debts. Hopefully it will mean I can cover the last bills that come in each month instead of being in the red. I could buy a new mattress for two of my children. They can feel the springs on the mattresses they’ve got that they’ve had for many years.”
That is the condition-of-Britain question.
How does the Leader of the Opposition describe Shauna and her husband? She calls them “Benefits Street”. These are people working all the hours God sends, working hard, trying to do the right thing: the very people the Conservatives claim to stand up for. How dare she!
Dr Luke Evans (Hinckley and Bosworth) (Con)
When it comes to making decisions about poverty, it is difficult, so I would be grateful to understand the Secretary of State decision to change the winter fuel payments, which the Government’s own analysis said put 100,000 people into relative poverty and 50,000 people immediately into absolute poverty. Those are decisions that he and his Government made because they were concerned about the finances of the country. The Opposition now have similar concerns with regard to the child benefit cap changes, and yet the Government have made a different decision. Could he explain the reasons why there is a difference?
Ed Miliband
Well, the hon. Gentleman’s question is out of date, because, in case he had not noticed, we changed the policy on winter fuel payments. Let me just say this to him: he will have to answer to his constituents. Some 1,500 children in his constituency will be helped by our changes to the two-child cap, and he is saying, “Rip that help away.” Let us have the argument about this.
Ed Miliband
I will in a moment.
On the one hand, 60% of these people are working—and the Conservatives do not really want to explain why they want to cut help for those people. But let us discuss the 40% of households that are not working and will be impacted. What we are seeing here—I am old enough to remember—is a re-run of the last Tory Government and their attempt to blame the poor for their poverty. Leaving that aside, however, what the Conservatives are actually saying is, in truth, that they believe in punishing the children of people who are out of work and on benefits—
Ed Miliband
The hon. Gentleman says from a sedentary position that that is absurd, but it is not. The Conservatives believe in punishing children—
Wendy Morton (Aldridge-Brownhills) (Con)
Will the Secretary of State give way?
Ed Miliband
I will give way in a moment—let me make my point.
The Conservatives believe in punishing children for having another brother or sister. Children with only one sibling—two children in total—get the full amount, but if they have two siblings, they do not. How is that fair? How is that right? As the Chancellor said very powerfully in her Budget speech, is that good for our economy and our society? Of course it is not.
Wendy Morton
If the policy is so good, how will the Secretary of State explain to working people that they will be £18,000 worse off than those on benefits? How can that be fair?
Ed Miliband
This is all about working people, as I tried to explain earlier in my speech. Sixty per cent of people—[Interruption.] Please listen for a second. Sixty per cent of families who will benefit from the measure are in work. If the right hon. Lady wants to ask about the Chancellor’s wider Budget strategy, let me say that I absolutely fully support it, because it was a fair Budget. Yes, it did raise taxes on those with expensive homes—a policy that I advocated for 10 years ago, as a matter of interest—as well as on gambling companies and on landlords. [Interruption.] Members should read the Red Book. The measure is part of a fair Budget. By the way, the Conservatives will have to explain to people up and down the country why they want to leave hundreds of thousands of children in poverty. That is not fair or right, and it is bad for our country.
Several hon. Members rose—
Ed Miliband
I will make a bit more progress.
The second policy I wish to focus on is the Chancellor’s decision to take £150 off the cost of energy bills—that will be important for families across the country. It has been possible only thanks to a principled decision that she made to shift the cost of some levies into public spending, which is itself possible only thanks to her Budget decisions, including raising taxes on the wealthiest, moving into public spending 75% of the cost to households of the renewables obligation, and abolishing the energy company obligation, with £1.5 billion extra allocated for the warm homes plan.
I notice that the Conservatives now seem to claim that that was their idea in the first place, but there is a crucial—
Harriet Cross (Gordon and Buchan) (Con)
Will the Secretary of State give way?
Ed Miliband
I will in a moment—let me develop my argument.
The Conservatives say that this was their idea in the first place, but there is a crucial difference: they proposed abolishing the renewables obligation—
Ed Miliband
But they had with no way of paying for it. “Yes”, says the hon. Gentleman. This is quite extraordinary—all the sins of opposition combined into one. The Conservatives had 14 years to do it, but they never did, and suddenly it is such a great idea to just abolish the renewables obligation.
Ed Miliband
“Yes”, says the hon. Gentleman—although, of course, he was an Energy Minister and he never did it. [Interruption.] He looks a bit sheepish now, doesn’t he? That is rare for him. Basically, I think the Conservatives’ argument is that they would just rip up all the contracts that the Government have signed—including lots of contracts that the Conservatives themselves signed—sending a message to every investor in Britain that the British Government will not honour the contracts that they sign. If it had been a remotely serious policy, they would have carried it out when in government, but it was not a remotely serious policy, because they are not a remotely serious party; that is the truth. In fact, it is all more Liz Truss. They will the ends; they want the cut in energy bills, which is good, but they do not have the foggiest idea of how to pay for it. Taken together, the choices made in the Budget, including on energy, will make life more affordable for people, and will begin to tackle the problems that I have outlined.
Harriet Cross
We are talking about £150 off energy bills that are already £200 higher than when the right hon. Gentleman came into government, and £300 was meant to come off those bills. Will bills be higher or lower than when he came into government last year?
Ed Miliband
If we look at the average of bills in 2025 versus 2024, they are lower. I hope that the hon. Lady will support our cuts to energy bills in April, when they come in.
Dr Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)
Will the right hon. Gentleman give way?
Ed Miliband
Let me make a bit more progress. My second point is about public spending. In the spending review and the Budget, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor made the crucial decision not to return to austerity. She could have made a different choice and cut public services—I think that is what Conservative Members would go back to doing—but we know the impact of that approach from the last 14 years. This is about the living standards of millions of people across our country who cannot buy their way into private health care or private schools. This can be hidden by the smokescreen that Conservative Members want to put up, but the Chancellor has made the incredibly important decision to invest in the future. That has enabled the Government to cut NHS waiting lists by more than 200,000, roll out free breakfast clubs in schools, expand free school meals, fund the expansion of free childcare, and announce the biggest boost to investment in social and affordable housing in a generation. Conservative Members are back to austerity.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Secretary of State very much for what he is saying, but on the £150 energy dividend for people across the United Kingdom, the Red Book lacks detail about how the policy will work in Northern Ireland. Perhaps he could indicate whether the support will be £150 in Northern Ireland, as it will in England. We must ensure that people receive the same in Northern Ireland as they do on the mainland.
Ed Miliband
The hon. Gentleman asks an important question; let me write to him with the detail on his point. We want as many people as possible across our country to benefit from this policy. By making different choices from those made in the past, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor is able to invest in the long term. She is delivering the highest levels of public investment that this country has seen in four decades.
Jerome Mayhew (Broadland and Fakenham) (Con)
At the last general election, the Secretary of State and all his colleagues said that they would raise taxes by £7 billion, and that their plans were fully funded and costed. What democratic mandate does he claim to have for increasing taxes by £66 billion, and debt by a further £70 billion?
Ed Miliband
The mandate that the British people voted for was a mandate to change this country, given the problems that we inherited from the last Government.
Several hon. Members rose—
Ed Miliband
Let me develop my argument, because this point is crucial: we can tackle the affordability crisis that people face only by investing in the future. Our vision of what makes an economy succeed is different from that of Conservative Members. We believe that public investment crowds in and does not crowd out private investment; that the only route to economic success is a Government who support industry and workers with a proper industrial strategy; and that rights at work and strong trade unions are not an impediment to a good economy but an essential ingredient of it. Nowhere is that more apparent than in clean energy. Since the election, we have seen the largest public investment in home-grown clean energy in our history, leveraging private sector investment—that is the point—of more than £60 billion. We have the largest nuclear building programme in half a century, with Sizewell C, small modular reactors, and fusion at West Burton, which the Conservatives failed to deliver. There is funding for carbon capture in Teesside, Humberside, Scotland and the north-west, which the Conservatives failed to deliver, and we have the first new publicly owned energy company in more than 70 years in Great British Energy, which they opposed.
Pam Cox (Colchester) (Lab)
In the east of England, we welcome the Government and private sector investment in Sizewell C, and a clean energy supply chain that will stretch from Suffolk through to Essex. Does my right hon. Friend agree that the Budget offers tax incentives to start-ups and scale-ups in that sector, which will help that supply chain to flourish and bring energy bills down even further?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. When we recently announced the small modular reactor fleet at Wylfa in north Wales, we saw the huge opportunities, not just for the areas where nuclear power stations are being built, but rippling across the supply chain. That is why I am so proud of the investments that we have been able to make. What is the result?
Ed Miliband
I will not, for a few minutes. The result is new jobs building wind turbines at Siemens Gamesa in Hull, new jobs making transformers in Stafford, new jobs making heat pumps in Derby, and new jobs at Sumitomo’s new factory at the Port of Nigg—some of the 400,000 additional clean energy jobs that we expect our mission to support by 2030. That is the difference.
What is the Conservatives’ policy? They want to rip up the Climate Change Act 2008 and abandon net zero by 2050, which was their legacy. As a result, they have been roundly condemned by British business. Energy UK says that abandoning that target will scare off investors. The Confederation of British Industry says that it is a “backwards step”, because the Climate Change Act is
“the bedrock for investment flowing into the UK”.
Baroness May—they do not like to talk about her—called it a “catastrophic mistake”. And get this: even Boris Johnson —rarely have I quoted Boris Johnson—says that
“in my party, it’s all about bashing the green agenda, and personally I don’t think we’ll get elected on…saying what rubbish net zero is.”
Normally—I have experience of this—Oppositions stick by what they did right in government, and trash what they did wrong. The right hon. Member for East Surrey (Claire Coutinho) is pursuing a novel approach to opposition: trash anything that they did right, and double down on everything that they did wrong. Nowhere is that more true than in our dependence on fossil fuels.
At this point, I express my sincere thanks to the right hon. Lady’s colleague on the Front Bench, the hon. Member for South Suffolk (James Cartlidge), who sadly is not here. Last week, I was talking about the causes of the energy bills crisis of 2021. He shouted out—I checked Hansard—“Because Putin invaded Ukraine!”. Obviously, he is one of the finest minds on the Opposition Front Bench, and he is right about that, but he has given the game away. This relates to affordability and this Budget debate. The lesson from the worst cost of living crisis in generations is this: it came about because Putin invaded Ukraine. What was the cause of higher bills? Why were we worse hit than many others? Because we were so exposed to fossil fuels. It was not the price of renewables that soared; it was the price of gas, including from the North sea, priced and sold on the international market. That is what happens when we do not have clean, home-grown power, and when we are at the mercy of petro states and dictators. What is the strategy of right hon. Member for East Surrey now? To double down on the Conservatives’ failure. She literally says that we should cancel the allocation round 7 auction.
Ed Miliband
Yes, the right hon. Lady says. The Conservatives are the people who lost it all in the fossil fuel casino, and now they say, “Let me just have one more go at the roulette wheel. This time it will be different. Cross your fingers and hope for the best.” Let us think about this. What are they betting on? In today’s world, at this moment of all moments, with the world at its most perilous for generations, their policy is to cross their fingers and hope for everlasting peace in the world and no geopolitical instability.
Ed Miliband
I have already given way to the hon. Gentleman. With Russia still at war in Ukraine, with deep tensions in the middle east, and with NATO being tested, this is ridiculous irresponsibility from the Conservatives. [Interruption.] The hon. Member for West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine (Andrew Bowie) should listen to this. We know that half our recessions since the 1970s have been caused by fossil fuel shocks, and the world is so much more unstable. Here is the worst thing of all: it was not the Conservatives’ energy bills that they were betting with; it was the British people’s. Families, business and the public finances are still paying the price of their failure, and there has not been a word of apology or contrition.
The right hon. Member for East Surrey now has to pretend that black is white, ignore the dangers, and claim that fossil fuels are cheaper, when actually strike prices for solar and onshore wind in last year’s auction were nearly 50% cheaper than the levelised cost estimate of building and operating a new gas plant. The truth is that the Conservatives have learned nothing and must never be let near the levers of power again. The difference between us is that we make fair choices; they would double down on unfair choices. We invest in the future; they would return us to austerity. We are building an economic future for the country; they would destroy the economic opportunities and security of the clean energy economy.
To conclude, this is a Budget that, despite the challenges, provides a clear direction of travel on the biggest issue of our time: the affordability crisis. This is a Budget that shows a Government who are acting on the No. 1 issue facing the British people. This is a Budget for fair choices, for investing in public services, and for creating a better economy. That is why this Budget deserves support in the Lobby tomorrow night.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
I call the shadow Secretary of State.
COP30
Ed Miliband Excerpts(2 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Ed Miliband)
With permission, I would like to make a statement about the COP30 climate summit.
The climate crisis represents the greatest long-term threat we face as a world, but the transition also represents the greatest economic opportunity of our time. At home, we are driving for clean energy and climate action, because it is right for energy security, lower bills, good jobs and growth for the British people, as well as for protecting future generations. We went to COP because, with the UK representing just 1% of annual global emissions, working with other countries to tackle the climate crisis is the only way to protect our home and way of life, and because there are huge investment and export opportunities for our country by accelerating the transition globally.
More than 190 countries participated in this COP to build on the progress made over more than three decades of global co-operation, which has seen us move from a world heading for 4°C or more of warming to one where national commitments put us on course for around 2.3° to 2.5°; from a world where no major economy had a net zero target to one where 80% of global GDP is covered, thanks in no small part to the leadership of the UK at COP26 in Glasgow; and from a world where a majority of energy investment was in fossil fuels to one where twice as much is invested in clean energy. The energy transition is happening, the world is moving and multilateralism is working. The forces around the world—including here in Britain—who want to deny that the climate crisis exists, or to delay the action we need to address it, are losing. But at the same time, we were conscious in Belém of the further progress that needs to be made. Our Brazilian hosts were determined to make this an “implementation COP”, and the negotiations served as a focal point for action. This was the first COP to be held in the Amazon, and therefore a significant focus was on protecting forests. The UK was proud to work with Brazil to help it develop the pioneering Tropical Forest Forever Facility, and work on this was moved forward at COP.
The UK was also proud to work alongside the Brazilian presidency on the global climate action agenda, which is about building coalitions of Governments, businesses, cities and civil society groups to accelerate action on issues including reducing methane emissions, phasing out coal and driving investment in clean energy. Thousands of British businesses, as well as our researchers, universities, mayors and others, were involved. The agenda is part of the unstoppable transition that is happening in the real economy, including here in Britain, where our net zero sectors are growing three times faster than the economy as a whole, and where £52 billion of private investment has been announced in clean energy since July 2024.
Turning to the negotiations themselves, I want to put on record my thanks to the UK’s brilliant COP negotiating team, led by our chief negotiator Kate Hughes. I saw once again in Belém the huge admiration there is around the world for the talent, expertise and dedication of our civil service, as well as the recognition of British climate leadership, which has built up over many decades under Governments of different political parties—the foundation of our ability to stand up for Britain on the world stage.
Of course, there is a truth that we must acknowledge: these summits are hard and complex. More than 190 countries negotiating how to transform their economies and societies is never going to be easy. We did not get everything we wanted from the talks, and there were times when it appeared that there would be no agreement, but in the end an agreement was reached, and the outcome represented progress on three critical issues.
The first is about redoubling our efforts to keep global warming to 1.5°. Last year, the Prime Minister announced the UK’s target to reduce emissions by at least 81% by 2035, based on the previous Government’s carbon budget. Many other countries have announced commitments over the last 12 months, including China pledging to cut its emissions for the first time, alongside the EU, Brazil and a total of 120 countries, covering three quarters of global emissions.
However, we must do more to close the gap to 1.5°. Recognising the urgency of action, it was agreed in the final COP30 text that all countries had to play a part to keep 1.5° within reach, that this required us to meet net zero as a world by or around the middle of the century, and that all countries should be encouraged to raise their targets. There will now be a forward process into COP31 next year, so we remain focused on the urgency of this issue.
Secondly, ambition on reducing emissions goes hand in hand with finance. This is in our interests, because there is no route to global stability, growth and development without supporting developing countries to take the low-carbon path and to better protect their populations from the impacts of the climate crisis. At COP29 in Baku last year, countries agreed that we needed to mobilise at least $300 billion per year for developing countries by 2035, and to scale up towards $1.3 trillion from all sources. COP30 agreed to target a share of the global resources agreed last year towards a trebling of adaptation finance by 2035, to make sure that developing countries have the resilience they need.
Thirdly, we know that there is no solution to the climate crisis without action on the transition away from fossil fuels. The need for this transition was agreed by all countries at COP28 in Dubai, including by the UK under the last Conservative Government. The Brazilian presidency put forward the idea of agreeing to a road map so that we could grapple with the difficult issues facing fossil fuel-producing countries, as well as the need for a just and fair transition.
At COP30, we saw the emergence of a broad coalition of 83 countries from the global north and global south, backed by more than 140 global businesses and civil society groups that endorsed the idea of a road map. This turned out to be the hardest sticking point in the talks, and it could not be agreed in the final text because some countries objected, yet as a result of the momentum built, the Brazilian presidency announced at the conclusion of the COP that it would launch such a road map on fossil fuels, as well as a road map to halt and reverse global deforestation. These coalitions of the willing are important when we cannot reach universal agreement, as we have seen with the Powering Past Coal Alliance, initiated by Britain and Canada, which is now supported by 65 national Governments.
The COP30 agreement also took important steps forward on building carbon markets, the just transition, technology transfer, and transparency on implementing commitments so that countries are properly held to account. Taken together, this package represents incremental but important progress and extends the arc of the progress we have seen over 30 years of COPs. That was particularly important this year, because the summit was a test of whether countries would continue to work together on the collective threat we face or whether, with the US stepping out of the Paris agreement, there would be a domino effect of others departing. That has not happened. At COP30, more than 190 countries reaffirmed their faith in the Paris agreement, their faith in working together to keep global warming to 1.5°, and their faith in multilateralism.
The message coming out of Belém was clear: whatever the challenges, clean energy and climate action are the foundations on which the global economy is being remade and rebuilt. That is good for Britain because of the economic opportunities that clean energy represents. It is good for Britain because it is the route to energy security and lower bills.
And it is good for Britain because it is the only way we can keep future generations safe from the threat of climate breakdown. I commend this statement to the House.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
I call the shadow Secretary of State.
Claire Coutinho (East Surrey) (Con)
I thank the Secretary of State for advance sight of his statement.
Let us be clear: when this Secretary of State resumed office, he decided to impose the most punishing climate policies at home, because according to his argument, if we lead, others will follow. That is why we are the only country in the world to be shutting down our domestic energy supply in the North sea, and why he is forcing us into ever higher energy bills. He has taken the most hair-shirt, ideological approach to climate policy, with thousands of jobs lost and high bills for decades. We are not setting an example to the rest of the world; what he has created is a warning.
It is now the renewables advocates at home who are raising the alarm about the folly of the Secretary of State’s plans to shut down the North sea. [Hon. Members: “Who?”] They say, “Who?” Let me name them. Scottish Renewables, Octopus Energy and—they may have heard of this one—the chair of his very own Great British Energy have all said that we have to continue to drill in the North sea, because they know that there is no just transition by pulling the plug as thoughtlessly as the Government are doing. This is student politics, yet thousands of Britons—[Interruption.] Labour Members laugh. I might remind them that it was their Minister who got booed when we went to Aberdeen, because thousands of Britons are paying the price with their jobs.
Secondly, while the Secretary of State has been gone, it has become even clearer that his plans are raising energy bills at home. Martin Lewis and all our country’s biggest energy suppliers have publicly made it clear that the Secretary of State’s costs are now raising bills. The truth is that he promised the public lower bills and more jobs, when in fact his policies are destroying jobs and signing us up to higher bills for decades. That is not what the public were promised.
The real path to lower emissions is cheaper electricity. If we want people to choose electric cars or electric heating, we need to make electricity cheap, and our cheap power plan would cut the cost of electricity for everyone by 20%. We have some of the cleanest but most expensive electricity in the world. Our plan would address that, and even the Chair of the Energy Security and Net Zero Committee, the hon. Member for Sefton Central (Bill Esterson), has said that it merits consideration.
Let me return to COP to see what the Secretary of State did achieve. How many countries joined his new Global Clean Power Alliance? We did not hear about that in the statement because the answer is, “Not a single one.”. Perhaps the terrible outcomes that he is achieving at home have put them off. Worst of all, despite this conference cutting down acres of the Amazon rainforest, the Secretary of State chose not to support this conference’s flagship forest fund. Every Conservative Government since 2021 have supported global funds on deforestation, but he made sure that Britain, for the first time in four years, did not contribute. Is this not the height of hypocrisy? When people say they support environmental policy, first and foremost they mean protecting the natural world that we all cherish. Does this not show up his green ideology for what it is— bureaucratic, punitive and ultimately ineffective?
The Secretary of State’s plans are completely counterproductive, so he should answer these fundamental questions. First, what do his plans mean for electricity bills, when everyone from Martin Lewis to Ofgem have made it clear that his policies are raising bills? What assessment has he made of how damaging those higher electricity bills are for electrification? Here is the rub: he is making electricity more expensive, and expecting people to use it for their heating. As a plan, it is simply absurd.
Secondly, how many more emissions will the UK account for if it is increasing its imports of liquefied natural gas, which has four times the emissions of North sea? The Secretary of State is driving away British jobs to import gas with higher emissions, and he should explain to the House what the environmental benefit of that is. Thirdly, how will it help climate change if AI firms that want to use gas power set up shop in some other country rather than Britain? Those data centres will still exist, just not here in Britain, thanks to his policies. Fourthly, what does he say to Martin Lewis, who has made it very clear that the problem pushing up bills is not gas, but his plans?
Here is the problem: from our electricity price to the North sea and AI, the Secretary of State is impoverishing Britain for no benefit to global emissions. This is student politics. We have become a warning, not an example, to the rest of the world. Here is what he should remember: no country is going to be convinced by a moral lecture from this Secretary of State. They are persuaded by prosperity, and his hair-shirt approach is the biggest blocker to British prosperity.
Ed Miliband
Oh dear, oh dear! I remember a time when the Conservative party was serious about the COP negotiations. The shadow Secretary of State had advance sight of the statement, but she did not ask any questions about it. I have to say that there is a fundamental issue here: do we engage internationally on how we drive forward the clean energy transition, or do we have a series of really pretty useless talking points, which is what she chose to do?
Let me get to the right hon. Lady’s questions, such as they were. She talks about jobs, so let me tell her some of the things that have happened on jobs in the last couple of weeks: 3,000 new jobs with the small modular reactors in north Wales, which is the biggest investment in north Wales in a generation—promised multiple times by the Conservatives, but never delivered—and 600 jobs in Great Yarmouth, Belfast and the north-west, all thanks to our clean power plans, while SSE has announced thousands more jobs as part of its £33 billion investment in the UK.
Let us not forget that all of this would be put at risk by the Conservatives’ plan to rip up the Climate Change Act 2008. Do not take it from me; in the words of Rain Newton-Smith, the director general of the CBI, that would be
“a backwards step in achieving our shared objectives of reaching economic growth, boosting energy security, protecting our environment and making life healthier for future generations.”
It has been roundly condemned by British business, and of course the proof is what we have seen in the last 15 months. The shadow Secretary of State talks about the record, but more than £50 billion of investment in clean energy in Britain has been pledged because of our plans.
The right hon. Lady talks about bills, but her problem is that she has learned nothing from the disaster the Conservatives imposed on the country with the worst cost of living crisis in generations in this country—
Ed Miliband
Oh! The hon. Member says it was because Putin invaded Ukraine—excellent, excellent! I congratulate him on his sedentary intervention—exactly, exactly! Why did prices go through the roof and why were we so exposed? Because of our exposure to fossil fuels. And what do the Conservatives want to do? Double down on our exposure to fossil fuels. As the shadow Secretary of State knows, the truth, as the Conservatives used to believe before they went a bit more wacky than they were before, is that there is only one route to energy security in the modern world, which is clean home-grown power that we control. Despite everything they say, the truth is that they have learned nothing from what happened.
Let me turn to the questions, such as they were, on the COP. By the way, the shadow Secretary of State complains about the COP being held in the Amazon. I have to say to her that, with the greatest of respect, I will take President Lula’s judgment about where the COP should be held rather than hers. For goodness’ sake, have a bit of respect for the Brazilian presidency! It decided that the right thing to do was to hold the COP in the Amazon to draw attention to the issue of deforestation, and she is complaining about its decisions to make the COP possible—for goodness’ sake!
On the point about the TFFF, we are supportive of it, and we will keep under review whether we can make a contribution. It was because of fiscal circumstances that we did not, but we are investing more than £1 billion over five years in countering deforestation. I am proud of what we are doing on that and the Congo basin.
On the point about British leadership, the right hon. Lady could not be more wrong about the role of Britain on these things. What people are seeing is an ambitious Government who are leading on these issues, so there is actually some respect for what Britain is suggesting others should do. There is a record under both parties that we need to learn from here, and I say this as politely as I can to the Conservative party: ambition at home is what makes possible leadership abroad. We passed the Climate Change Act in 2008, which she now wants to rip up, and 60 countries followed us. We put net zero into law by 2050, and she wants to rip it up. I praise Theresa May for that, but is it not extraordinary that I can praise Theresa May, but the Conservative party cannot do so? She put net zero by 2050 into law, which the Conservatives want to rip up, and 80% of global GDP has followed us.
I will end by saying that there is a truth here, which is that the Conservatives used to aspire to global Britain. Now, they have simply become the party of little Britain, and it really does not look good.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
I call the Chair of the Energy Security and Net Zero Committee.
Bill Esterson (Sefton Central) (Lab)
My right hon. Friend rightly reminded us of the progress that was made at COP. The recommitment to limiting global warming to no more than 1.5° is hugely important. He was honest in saying that we did not get everything we wanted, and that is sensible. However, he also reminded us of the absolute seriousness of climate breakdown, and that we must take every action possible. That goes beyond COP, and I hope he agrees that that work should continue whether or not it is in relation to a COP.
The Secretary of State started to talk about energy security, and I want to link this subject to that, because there is a worrying tendency towards a loss of support for the transition. Does he agree that it is really important, especially in the light of the ongoing aggression from Russia—and we have just had a statement, including on Ukraine, demonstrating it—that we make it clear to people that energy security and climate breakdown are very strongly linked, and that the answer to both of them is the energy transition?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend makes a really important point. The reason we have seen a movement of support for the transition away from fossil fuels is not simply climate-related, but energy security-related. Lots of countries, including Britain, recognise—unwittingly helpfully, the hon. Member for South Suffolk (James Cartlidge) said this from a sedentary position—that Putin’s invasion of Ukraine showed our vulnerability due to our reliance on fossil fuels. At a very striking roundtable hosted by Marina Silva, the Environment Minister in Brazil, many countries from the global north and the global south said the same thing, which is that, for them, the move away from fossil fuels towards home-grown clean energy is the route to energy security, so he makes a very important point.
The only other point I would make is that my hon. Friend is right that these negotiations are hard and painstaking. We have to look at the progress that has been made over the course of the 30 years. It is tough, and different countries are in different positions, but that is what these talks are all about.
Pippa Heylings (South Cambridgeshire) (LD)
COP30 was the first climate summit since the world experienced a full year of global warming above 1.5°C. That is a stark reminder of the urgency we collectively face. At home, due to extreme weather, our farmers faced their worst harvest on record and lost billions in income from arable crops, while we saw devastating wildfires, doubling records, that wiped out national parks and local environments that are precious to everyone. These are the costs of inaction and climate breakdown here in the UK.
I was proud to be part of a cross-party group of MPs who attended this COP and to carry with me the hopes of young people in South Cambridgeshire who sent me pictures, videos and poems. Freya, aged 11, wrote:
“I don’t want to just inherit my future. I want to be able to shape the decisions and actions that others are taking on my behalf, because I am afraid.”
I want to commend Brazil, the Secretary of State, the UK negotiating team and all those who worked tirelessly to keep the COP process alive, despite relentless attacks from climate denialism, delay and deception. The multilateral system is far from perfect, but it is the best alternative we have for global co-operation on climate change. There were positives: the pledges to cut methane; the recognition of the links between climate, nature and public health; the commitment to triple adaptation finance, which we know from Hurricane Melissa in Jamaica is absolutely critical; and the demonstration by business that the transition is an economic imperative and opportunity.
The global climate action agenda is just so inspiring and has a massive impact, but we know that hope was not matched by delivery: there is still no credible plan to reduce the gap between current national commitments and the reductions needed to stay below 1.5°C; the refusal to reference fossil fuels and the transition away in the final text, despite it being the root cause of the crisis, was a staggering failure; and the Prime Minister’s unexpected and inexplicable decision not to support the Tropical Forests Forever Facility was really, really disturbing. This was what Brazil launched: an innovative investment facility to save tropical forests and give them a value while standing.
Ed Miliband
I agreed with much—not all—of what the hon. Lady said. On her overall point about the fact that we have so many countries driving forward with action, she is absolutely right. On her point about the gap to achieving 1.5°C, she is also absolutely right. In a sense, part of what the future of these COPs will be about is each country driving others towards greater ambition, because we know we need greater ambition. It is also important to look at where the world has come from. The multilateral process has all kinds of maddening aspects to it, but it has definitely made progress. On the point about business, she is absolutely right and that is really striking. The fact of the agreement and the fact of this staying on track is an important signal to business, just as the Climate Change Act 2008 is an important signal to business here at home.
On the hon. Lady’s point about the TFFF, let me say candidly that we have a very difficult fiscal situation in this country. We have not ruled out contributing to investing in the TFFF in future. It is, as the Prime Minister said, something that we will keep under review. Overall, I thank her for her support, because we want to keep as much of the cross-party consensus as we possibly can on this really important matter.
Sarah Coombes (West Bromwich) (Lab)
I was part of that same cross-party delegation to COP in Belém. We were proud to meet parliamentarians from all over the world who are absolutely invested in the COP process and still absolutely believe in its importance. I was struck by how many conversations we had about the UK’s enduring global leadership on climate change, from our landmark Climate Change Act in 2008 under the last Labour Government to our clean energy policies today. It is not just about driving down carbon emissions and climate change; it is also about Britain’s role in the world. Will the Secretary of State commit Britain to continuing to lead the way on driving down carbon emissions and saving our planet, and continuing to make the case that this action is making life in Britain for British people safer and cheaper?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend is entirely right about that. With the UK at 1% of global emissions, as I said in my statement, engaging with the world is incredibly important. There is huge respect for Britain on these issues. I give credit to some of the actions taken under the previous Government by Lord Sharma and Theresa May, because the different actions we have taken have built a legacy of British leadership and it is incredibly important to build on that.
Blake Stephenson (Mid Bedfordshire) (Con)
I, too, would like to ask the Secretary of State some questions on the TFFF. I am glad that he is proud of the previous Government’s actions and innovation in setting up that facility. He has explained that there is a tough fiscal situation and that is why the Government are currently not committing to that fund, but it is disappointing that in the statement there is only sentence on the TFFF. It concludes that
“work on this was moved forward at COP”.
Will he please update the House on what specifically was “moved forward” at COP in relation to the TFFF? When will decisions be made in the future about a financial commitment to that facility?
Ed Miliband
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question and I am very happy to expand on what I said in my statement. We have worked—under the previous Government and under this Government, particularly in the last year—with the Brazilian Government on the design of the TFFF. Work was moved forward because a number of countries pledged investment in the TFFF. There were lots of discussions, at the side and indeed at the world leaders’ summit, on the TFFF and the innovative idea. We pledged both to keep under review our potential public financial contribution and to continue the work with the City of London on the TFFF. Obviously, that is a decision on the financial contribution. I know better than to speculate about these things, because they rely on the Treasury and other matters, but it is something we are going to look at over the coming months.
Uma Kumaran (Stratford and Bow) (Lab)
I, too, was on the cross-party delegation that attended COP, alongside my hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich (Sarah Coombes)—I take this opportunity to wish her a happy birthday. I welcome the Prime Minister’s global leadership on climate and his attendance at COP30 in Belém, and indeed the leading role played by the British cross-party contingent of MPs, Ministers, non-governmental organisations and our world-class scientists. My constituents sent me hundreds of messages ahead of my travel to COP30. Among them were asks about our plans for our clean energy transition. Will the Secretary of State outline to the House what Labour’s plans are for clean power by 2030, alongside our world-leading nationally determined contribution, and how we are encouraging other countries to act on the climate crisis?
Ed Miliband
I welcome the fact—I should have done so earlier—that my hon. Friend and other Members from all parties were at COP30. British Government representation is important, but so is British parliamentary representation and the more cross-party it is, as far as I am concerned, the better. My hon. Friend’s point about the NDCs is important. Our NDC, our 81% reduction, is based on the carbon budget passed by Boris Johnson in the run-up to COP26. We have taken that target, in good cross-party tradition, and put it forward as part of the UN framework. On clean power by 2030, we are driving ahead with our plans on clean energy, with more than £50 billion-worth of investment in clean energy pledged. All of that is a crucial contribution. Britain’s leadership on these issues is recognised and gives us more power in these discussions and negotiations.
Sir Christopher Chope (Christchurch) (Con)
Is it not a cruel confidence trick to suggest that 1.5°C is still achievable, when it manifestly is not? Earlier this month, the International Energy Agency confirmed 2.9°C by 2100 as its central scenario and that a 2.5°C increase by 2050 was totally unrealistic and unachievable. Would the Government not be better off spending our taxpayers’ money on adapting to the realities—increasing resilience and ensuring we improve our flood defences and so on—and preparing for the inevitable, instead of continuing to punish the British people?
Ed Miliband
I have had this exchange with the hon. Gentleman before—he is too pessimistic. If we had taken that approach before, we would be heading for 4°C or 5°C of global warming. Yes, it is true that the central scenario is somewhere between 2.3°C and 2.5°C depending on which figures one looks at, but the whole point is to bring the numbers down. People talk about negative tipping points, and we are right to be worried about those, which is why, I am afraid, we cannot just let it happen—it would be a disaster. We should also think about positive tipping points. On solar energy in the past decade, for example, we have exceeded the forecasts that the IEA and others had. We need to move towards those positive tipping points.
I am not giving up on 1.5°C, but I make this point to the hon. Gentleman: every fraction of a degree that we reduce warming will save many lives across the globe, prevent many disasters and reduce the costs that future generations face. I agree with him about investing in adaptation, but we have got to do both.
Rosie Wrighting (Kettering) (Lab)
For a long time there has been a consensus on the need to take action against climate change in this House, so it is disappointing and saddening to see the Secretary of State, Members on the Government Benches and the Lib Dems having to come to this House to defend a position that used to be shared. I was proud to be at COP with my hon. Friend the Member for Stratford and Bow (Uma Kumaran) and with my hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich (Sarah Coombes), who I wish a happy birthday, to see UK negotiators and Ministers taking a leading role in action to protect my generation and generations to come. Does the Secretary of State agree that Reform UK’s dangerous anti-climate politics show that with them our future is at risk?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend speaks incredibly well about this issue, and it is worth pausing and recognising what she has said. Since I have been involved in this issue, all the way back to David Cameron—I call him my nemesis—there has been a competition in this House for climate ambition. That was good, and it was recognised across the world—that was when the Conservative party won elections. My hon. Friend has said something really important; the sooner we can get back to that, the better. I do not think the British people want a culture war on climate. They do not want an imported US-style culture war, and the sooner the Conservative party recognises that, the better.
Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)
Increasing the sustainability of agriculture is a vital part of action on climate change, and it was particularly relevant at a COP held in the rainforest, which is under pressure from farming. Can the Secretary of State outline the discussions he had at COP on agriculture, and will he work with his colleagues in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to reverse this Government’s mistakes and provide UK farmers with the financial support they need to play their part?
Ed Miliband
We are making big investments in farming and agriculture. In answering the hon. Lady’s question, I will take the opportunity to pay tribute to the Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my hon. Friend the hon. Member for Coventry East (Mary Creagh), and the Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, my hon. Friend the hon. Member for Leeds North West (Katie White), who are both with me on the Front Bench. They were part of the negotiations and discussions, including on agriculture and the question of methane. The UK produced its methane action plan in the run-up to COP; methane reduction is an area where we can make quick progress that can have real benefit in bridging the gap to 1.5°C. There were definitely extensive discussions on that; the world made progress on methane and it is something that we will keep working on in the months ahead.
Ms Polly Billington (East Thanet) (Lab)
I am sure the Secretary of State would not necessarily like me to remind him that it is 16 years since the first COP he attended with me, which was significantly less successful than the one this year. I commend him for his great effort over that time in managing to demonstrate the UK’s leadership on climate change. That cannot be underestimated, and despite what some on the Opposition Benches think, we make a difference by demonstrating what is possible in climate actions here at home. Where we lead, others follow.
For that reason, the Secretary of State also knows how important nature is in contributing to tackling climate change, and how much our constituents value nature at home and abroad. In that light, financing is important, especially maintaining the amount of funding in the new international climate finance budget for nature projects. Will he confirm that a third of the new budget will be spent on nature projects, with half of that spent on protecting forests?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend reminds me how old I am, for which I am grateful! At various points in the middle of the night, Friday into Saturday, I could not help feeling a slight sense of Copenhagen post-traumatic stress disorder as I thought we were heading for no agreement. One of the things I consoled myself with was that the world is actually much further forward than it was when the Copenhagen summit foundered. On my hon. Friend’s important points about international finance and nature finance, despite the difficult fiscal circumstances, we have maintained funding of £11.6 billion over five years in the ICF. We will be making new announcements in the coming months, but the points that she makes about protecting nature and tackling the climate crisis going together are very well taken.
Esther McVey (Tatton) (Con)
What commitments were secured at COP30 from the countries responsible for the highest carbon emissions—China, the US and India—to reduce their emissions, given that their leaders, Xi, Trump and Modi, could not even be bothered to attend? Or did those countries fail to commit to reducing their carbon emissions and to phasing out their use of fossil fuels, instead allowing the Secretary of State to walk his ideological path of net zero, which is destroying the UK’s industrial and manufacturing base and pushing our population into poverty with ever-higher energy bills?
Ed Miliband
I definitely disagree with the last part of the right hon. Lady’s question, because net zero is actually the greatest economic opportunity that we have, which is why we are going to create 400,000 new clean energy jobs by 2030. On the first part of her question, which is really important, let me answer her directly: I would like China to go further, but for the first time it has announced an absolute reduction in its emissions. It is really important to understand that. I think it could go further, but this is a very significant moment. When I was at COP 15 years ago, the notion that China would have had an absolute emissions target—never mind that it would be cutting its emissions—was frankly fanciful.
I did an event with the Indian Minister. Again, India could go further, but it has reached its target to have 50% of its electricity supplied by non-fossil fuel sources five years early—[Interruption.] The right hon. Member is shaking her head. She asked a question, and I am answering it. The notion that no other country is acting is frankly wrong.
Lizzi Collinge (Morecambe and Lunesdale) (Lab)
The objections to global and national action on climate change frankly baffle me, not least because of the climate emergency, but also because of the opportunity it brings to our country. My constituency has had good clean energy jobs for decades through Heysham 1 and 2 nuclear power stations—I keep pushing for Heysham 3. Does the Secretary of State agree that the agreements at COP30 and the Government’s actions on climate change are an opportunity to not only fight climate change and create good jobs, but improve living standards in our country and across the globe?
Ed Miliband
I agree 100%. For all that the Opposition say, according to the Confederation of British Industry the net zero economy is growing three times faster than the economy as a whole. There is a reason why China, India and all those other countries are driving into clean energy: they see it as a massive economic opportunity. The Opposition would say, “Let’s just rip up that economic opportunity.” Frankly, that would be a betrayal of not just young people, who will look at them and think, “What about our future?” but people today who want those good jobs.
Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)
Right across the world, people’s day-to-day lives are being destroyed by the impacts of climate change and associated industrial activity, from the indigenous tribes of the Amazon seeing their rainforest home destroyed around them, to island peoples in the Pacific, whose nations will literally cease to exist as water levels rise. To many people looking at COP30, it feels like developed nations are taking a somewhat protectionist view at the expense of millions of people. In years to come, when the Secretary of State looks back at this COP, will he be able to say that he did absolutely everything he could for those people? From here, it does not look good for so many people who are on the brink.
Ed Miliband
That is an absolutely fair question; it is one I ask myself a lot. Are we doing everything we can despite the global pressures and how difficult it is? I will tell the House this: as it looked like we were going to end up with no deal, I thought a lot about what signal that would send. At the same time, though, we wanted to have as robust an agreement as possible. My answer to the hon. Gentleman’s very legitimate question is yes; we are trying to do absolutely everything we can, but it is hard because 190-something countries are all wrestling with their own dilemmas and constraints. However, he is right to push us to do as much as we can, because we are the generation that both knows the scale of the crisis that confronts us and has the chance to do something about it. Future generations will have less opportunity to do anything about it because the pathway will be more set. He is absolutely right to push us.
Mr Toby Perkins (Chesterfield) (Lab)
Meeting international colleagues at COP30, the extent to which the UK’s track record and the policy of this Government are hugely respected was absolutely clear. In fact, while many of the steps this Government have taken received huge support, there was also great respect for the steps that the previous Government had taken. I share my right hon. Friend’s despair that the current version of the Conservative party not only opposes his policies, but trashes its own history, which—in this area at least—should be a proud one.
While I absolutely believe that we would not have got the statement that we did get without his work and the work of his colleagues over there, does the Secretary of State agree that it is disappointing that the road map towards the eradication of fossil fuels was not agreed? On that basis, what more will he be doing to try to bring that coalition together to get greater agreement when we get to Turkey next year, or even before that?
Ed Miliband
First, I thank my hon. Friend, who is the Chair of the Environmental Audit Committee, and my hon. Friend the Member for Sefton Central (Bill Esterson), the Chair of the Energy Security and Net Zero Committee, for the really outstanding job they do. I think the observations from my hon. Friend the Member for Chesterfield (Mr Perkins) on the Conservative party are right; I will not add to them because he put them well.
The transition away is the hardest part of the negotiations, as I said, and that is not surprising, because some countries are extremely reliant on fossil fuels and are very reluctant—I think, in retrospect, they are quite reluctant about what was agreed at COP28, which is part of the difficulties we have. I agree with my hon. Friend about continuing to push for this to be part of the negotiations, but I think we also have to accept, as I said in my statement, that part of what we did on coal—and, to be fair, what the previous Government did on coal—is work with others. We have to work as much as we can both inside and outside the formal negotiations with others to drive these issues forward. The lesson of COP history is that we keep pushing forward on these issues; it might be slightly three steps forward, two steps back, but we do make progress.
Sir Andrew Mitchell (Sutton Coldfield) (Con)
If I may, I will focus on the international rather than domestic aspects. I welcome the Secretary of State’s ecumenical approach in respect of the work of the former Government. I have been going to COPs since Copenhagen in 2009, with the last one being COP28 in the UAE, and I do wonder whether, at least in their current form, they are worth continuing. They are hugely expensive jamborees; hydrocarbon interests are distorting the original aim of COP; the wealthy countries are increasingly in the dock, but have decreasing money available. On the wider aspect, it is the poorest people in the world who suffer first and hardest from climate change. There is no doubt that the appalling humanitarian crisis in Darfur is exacerbated by climate change, yet we are doing very little about that.
Ed Miliband
I have huge respect for the right hon. Gentleman and his work under the previous Government on a whole range of development and climate issues, and I thank him for his question. I think my view of COP is a bit like the Churchill view of democracy: it is the least-worst system we have. For all the complaints and all the problems with it, we are bringing together 193 or 194 countries and, as he will know from his experience of COPs, there is an element of accountability: the smallest island states can confront the big emitters.
This is hard, and it is painful, but I know that the right hon. Gentleman cares passionately about these issues. We skated over it in these discussions, but I would just say to him that the agreement to treble adaptation finance within the new collective quantified goal that was agreed last year, which the hon. Member for South Cambridgeshire (Pippa Heylings) drew attention to, is a significant development. It is not as much as many of the developing countries want, and looking at the scale of need—Hurricane Melissa, and so on—we can see the difficulties. I was involved in the £100 billion overall finance that Gordon Brown produced around the Copenhagen summit; again, it was hard, and developing countries complained about it being late, but it did set a bar of accountability for the developed world. I agree with the right hon. Gentleman that I am sure the process could be better, but I do think it is an important mechanism of accountability and driving progress.
Alex Sobel (Leeds Central and Headingley) (Lab/Co-op)
It is great to see my right hon. Friend back at the Dispatch Box once more after taking a global leading role at COP. We could have no better Secretary of State in this area. Whatever the Opposition say, the Secretary of State in the global mainstream of climate leadership. As he knows, article 6 was operationalised at last at COP29 last year. The UK, and particularly the City of London, could have a global leading role in utilising article 6 to preserve nature to afforest and restore wetlands, peat bogs and marine environments. We know that countries around the world—not just in the global south, but countries including Ukraine—are putting article 6 into domestic law. What more could we do in the UK to ensure that our City of London, and our global finance money, is creating that natural capital through article 6 around the world?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend draws attention to something that is relatively obscure in the big scheme of things that we talk about in this House, but which is incredibly important none the less. Article 6 on carbon markets was agreed last year after, I think, a decade of effort. I want to pay tribute, by the way, to Rachel Kyte, our climate envoy, who was very much part of that, and indeed Ruth Davis, our nature envoy. Two things are interesting about this. The first is that the Brazilians launched what they call the open coalition on compliance carbon markets to drive work on carbon markets forward. I was part of those discussions. The second interesting thing that has happened is that the idea of the carbon border adjustment mechanism, or CBAM, which has been called for by lots of Members of this House, has actually pushed forward some of the work on carbon markets. I think I am right in saying that 7% of the world was covered by carbon markets 15 years ago, and now it is 28%, so progress is moving forward. My hon. Friend is absolutely right about the potential role of the City of London in this.
Dr Roz Savage (South Cotswolds) (LD)
Like the Secretary of State and the hon. Member for East Thanet (Ms Billington), I am a survivor of COP15 in Copenhagen. I have seen just what hard work it is, and I commend the cross-party delegation for representing our country so well in Belém. However, environmental campaigners have raised concerns over the carbon budget delivery and the growth plan’s reliance on unproven technologies such as sustainable aviation fuel and carbon capture and sequestration. How will the Government ensure that the UK is not simply offshoring ecological impacts, including deforestation, or relying on fantasy future technologies on our pathway to net zero?
Ed Miliband
First, I thank the hon. Lady for her advocacy on these issues now and over a very long period, which is widely recognised. On CCS and SAF, I think we will have to agree to disagree, based on all the evidence I have seen. For the real nerds present, among which I obviously count myself, I strongly recommend the IEA’s “World Energy Outlook”, which came out during the COP—I have slightly lost track of when—and which looks at how far we are from the net zero pathway. It actually shows that we have overachieved on renewables, but we need to go further on some other issues. All the experts I respect say that there is no route to decarbonisation without carbon sequestration technology in different forms. As well as that, CCS is a big jobs creator. CCS and SAF are an important part of the future, and technological development is part of what we need. We have existing technologies, such as solar, wind and batteries, and they can also help us. We have seen a driving down of the cost of those, and we need to do the same for these other technologies.
Ms Stella Creasy (Walthamstow) (Lab/Co-op)
I was not at COP, unlike some of my colleagues, but I am so glad that others were there and saw, in particular, the enduring leadership of the Secretary of State on this issue. I am glad that my right hon. Friend is not listening to the hon. Member for Christchurch (Sir Christopher Chope), who said that we should be adapting to reality, because it is the poorest people in our societies, both at home and abroad, who often pay the ultimate price for our failure to tackle the climate crisis. It is also one of the biggest drags on growth.
It is because of the powerful leadership that the Secretary of State has shown at COP this weekend that I have to press him. He will know of the concerns many of us have that decisions at home around issues such as Jackdaw and Rosebank could undermine that leadership. Those developments could lead to nearly 300 million tonnes of carbon emissions and fatally attack our ability to stick to the 1.5°C increase in temperature. It would also not help the cost of living crisis. I know that there is a process ahead. Can he assure us that he will rethink the developments and that our global leadership as well as our local cost of living will be foremost in his mind when he makes a decision on Rosebank and Jackdaw?
Ed Miliband
I am not going to comment on planning decisions. I will, however, make the overall point that this Government had two manifesto commitments: to keep existing oil and gas fields in the North sea open for their lifetime, and not to issue new licences to explore new fields. Those were important commitments. They are how we will combine the just transition in the North sea, including for North sea communities, and ensure that we have environmental leadership. We are committed to both those things. I thank my hon. Friend for her wider advocacy on all these issues.
Kit Malthouse (North West Hampshire) (Con)
I am grateful to learn from the hon. Member for Walthamstow (Ms Creasy) that I am not the only person who was not invited to COP30. But I followed it closely and was very pleased to see the emergence of the Belém 4X agreement, which committed its signatories to quadrupling the production and deployment of sustainable fuel molecules by 2035. That would include, most importantly for the United Kingdom, green hydrogen. Unfortunately, while I could find the names of India, Italy and, obviously, Brazil on the agreement, I could not find the United Kingdom’s name. Did I miss it?
Ed Miliband
The right hon. Member did not miss it. Broadly, we are supporters of green hydrogen and many other things he mentions. Our issue is to do with whether the quadrupling of biofuels can be done in a sustainable way. We think that work now needs to be done to ensure that there are proper guardrails around this issue. The broader point he makes about diversification, green hydrogen and all those things is something we very much agree with.
Barry Gardiner (Brent West) (Lab)
I thank my right hon. Friend for the leadership he has shown internationally and nationally over the past 20 years—it has been quite remarkable. I thank him for his statement today. He will have seen over the time that has elapsed since COP26 in Glasgow the change in the language that is used. In Glasgow, when discussing the Glasgow climate pact, we talked about “phasing out” coal and fossil fuel subsidies. We then moved to “phasing down” and then to “transitioning away”. Now we have a “plan” or “pathway” to transitioning away. That, I am sure, causes alarm bells to ring in his head, as it does in mine. Can he tell us what he sees as the role of the Beyond Oil and Gas Alliance? He spoke about the need to work with other countries for a really ambitious future. How does he propose to do that?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend has enormous expertise on these issues, which he showed with his question. BOGA, as it is known, has played a really important role in assembling this coalition of more than 80 countries over the global north and global south. Indeed, I was proud to be part of an event and this precedent we set with the alliance on these issues.
My hon. Friend’s wider point is correct: this is hard. There are countries that are resistant to this change and think that previous agreements went too far. That is part of the dialogue being had at these COPs. I think we learn a lesson from what has happened on coal though. The progress the world has made on coal, including the UK, is partly reflected in the agreement at COP26, but it is also about the high-ambition coalitions that form together. As I said in response to an earlier question, we have to do both these things. We have to work in the context of the agreements—but, because they rely on unanimity, we cannot always get what we want—and then we have to work in these broader coalitions.
Harpreet Uppal (Huddersfield) (Lab)
It was disappointing to hear from the shadow Secretary of State that tackling climate change and attending COP is student politics. Clearly it is not; it is about grown-ups coming to the table. I thank the Secretary of State and his team for their commitment and work to get the agreement at COP. As we start looking towards COP31, how are we advancing and monitoring the domestic implementation of our nationally determined contributions? Can the Secretary of State also set out how global agreements at COP translate to practical support for communities and businesses in Huddersfield?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend made a very important point with her opening remarks, which I will let Members absorb. On her specific questions, we have a very important carbon budget monitoring system within Government. It is important to say that at the same time as the Conservatives are saying that they want to rip up the Act that they supported, and that David Cameron even had a hand in helping to shape from opposition, so many countries around the world still ask us about it and want to work out how to emulate it. It is head-spinning really.
On my hon. Friend’s point about her constituents, she is absolutely right. In so many different ways, we want to support her constituents. This is about not just future generations but good jobs today, cutting bills, helping community organisations to put solar panels on their rooftops, schools and hospitals and all those things. It is about bringing the benefits of clean energy to her community and communities across Britain.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
Order. I will finish this statement in the next 10 to 15 minutes, so I would be grateful if Members and the Secretary of State could keep their answers short.
Dr Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)
We are at a pivotal moment in the climate crisis. COP30 showed us the fossil fuel industry and its political cheerleaders doing their very best to de-rail action. I thank the Secretary of State for his work. I have two questions on points he raised in his statement. First, he said that ambition must be matched with finance, yet the UK has not contributed to the Tropical Forest Forever Facility or the just transition mechanism. Is it not time for the UK to put its money where its mouth is on this? Secondly, on the point of transitioning away from fossil fuels, the UK faces a defining test: Rosebank. Will he reject the Rosebank oilfield and fully back the just transition that our country needs?
Ed Miliband
On the second point, I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Walthamstow (Ms Creasy). On the first point, I think she is being a little unfair, to put it mildly, on the UK. We led the process of agreeing last year an ambitious NCQG on overall finance. We were part of an agreement that saw the trebling of adaptation finance by 2035, targeting those resources. She knows the fiscal situation that we face as a country. I say very clearly to her, and to all Members of this House who take an interest in these issues, that we absolutely have not ruled out contributing to the TFFF in the future.
Tulip Siddiq (Hampstead and Highgate) (Lab)
The Secretary of State will know my constituents well and will know that climate change is a huge concern for them. They are particularly concerned that the Government talk a lot about tackling climate change during COP, but all year round it falls off the agenda. Will he reassure my constituents that this is an ongoing commitment from the Government to tackle climate change and that the agreed road map for fossil fuels will not somehow become a loophole for climate inaction?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend asks a good and important question about keeping climate change on the agenda all year round. This is partly about international negotiations, but it is as much about the work that we do at home. Whether announcing new SMRs in north Wales, showing the jobs that come from tackling the climate crisis or putting solar panels on the roofs of schools and hospitals, that is all part of the argument for how this is the route to the right thing not just for future generations but for today’s generations. On the fossil fuel road map, we will work with Brazil on that, and I assure her that it will not be the thing that she fears.
Llinos Medi (Ynys Môn) (PC)
I thank the Secretary of State for the recent decision on the small modular reactor at Wylfa. To stay committed to the goals of the Paris agreement, we need to speed up the roll-out of technologies such as marine energy. Ynys Môn is home to the world-leading, community-owned Morlais tidal stream project. However, developers require a strategic vision from the Government to develop at pace. Will he consider setting a £40 million tidal stream and a £7 million wave energy ringfence in the next renewable auctions, as advocated for by the UK Marine Energy Council?
Ed Miliband
I thank the hon. Lady for her support for the SMR fleet in north Wales; the announcement that we made was a really important one. My hon. Friend the Minister for Energy, who is not in the Chamber, is very much involved with the Marine Energy Council. We have been proud in previous auctions to support tidal energy, which has a really important role. It is obviously a more expensive technology at the moment; we need to drive its costs down. I will pass her request on to him, and I am sure that he will get back to her.
Joe Morris (Hexham) (Lab)
I commend the Secretary of State for his ongoing commitment to fighting the scourge of climate change in the face of rising denialism. I was really pleased to hear him leave the door open to future contributions to the TFFF. Will he spell out the circumstances in which they might come to reassure me and my constituents, who are deeply concerned that that did not come forward at this COP?
Ed Miliband
That would be telling. Those are the discussions that we need to have with colleagues across government, including in the Treasury, as we look at the ICF programme and others in the future. But I do want to reassure my hon. Friend. We are proud to have worked on the TFFF over all the time of this Government, and indeed part of the time under the previous Government, we think it is a very innovative financing mechanism, and we are absolutely serious about keeping a future UK contribution under review.
Carla Lockhart (Upper Bann) (DUP)
We all believe in keeping our planet sustainable and being good custodians of our environment. What most people do not agree with, however, is the madness of net zero, with its astronomical cost to the taxpayer for minimal impact on a global scale and the damage that unachievable targets are having on agriculture and manufacturing. Will the Energy Secretary tell us what he is doing to ensure sustainability, given the six tonnes of CO2 he is supposed to have emitted as a result of two flights to Brazil to be part of COP30 along with 56,000 others, the £1,250-a-night hotels and the estimated £22,000 on flight costs? It would appear to most of the general public to be a case of, “Do as I say and not as I do.”
Ed Miliband
I could not disagree more with the hon. Lady. Honestly, this is a really important point: either we engage in international action on the global stage or we do not. We are 1% of global emissions, and unless we engage with the countries that produce the other 99% of global emissions, we will never keep our country safe. Do not look into the crystal ball; look at the record. Thirty years of COPs have reduced global warming forecasts from 4°—indeed 5°—to something like 2.3° to 2.5°. It is about multilateralism and working with others; that is so important. This is about our view of Britain. Are we a small, shrivelled country that cannot have any sway, or are we a country that can engage and stand tall on the global stage? That is what I believe.
Abtisam Mohamed (Sheffield Central) (Lab)
I thank the Secretary of State for his update and commend his continued leadership on this issue. I welcome the conference’s focus on strengthening multilateralism, including creating the Belém mechanism for a just global transition. But beyond the walls of the conference, here in the UK we need to be moving much faster away from oil and gas. The UK’s four biggest banks continue to finance polluters, and the drilling licence for Rosebank still has not been rejected. Does the Secretary of State agree that it should be the big polluters subsidising the taxpayer in our climate response and not the other way round?
Ed Miliband
I will be brief. My hon. Friend raises the issue of the banks. I encourage her to contribute to our consultation on transition plans for financial institutions and large companies, because that is an important part of making sure that the investments being made are aligned with net zero and the wider argument on tackling the climate crisis. She makes an important point.
Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)
Other countries in straitened fiscal circumstances did pledge to the Tropical Forest Forever Facility, so will the Secretary of State explain why the Government failed to commit a single penny, despite the fund being conceived and designed with British minds? There was even talk of it being headquartered here in the City, yet not a penny of official development assistance is being used. That damages our climate credibility as well as our relationship with Brazil and with our own future generations. What should I say to schoolchildren in my constituency who are involved in student politics and who asked me to go to Belém to help save the rainforest?
Ed Miliband
The hon. Lady should tell her constituents that we played a big role in helping to devise the TFFF, that we have absolutely not ruled out contributing to it in the future and that we are determined that the fund succeeds. As I have said, we will obviously keep the question of a UK contribution under review.
Olivia Blake (Sheffield Hallam) (Lab)
I thank the Secretary of State for his clear leadership, which is in stark contrast to the shadow Secretary of State. I was dismayed to hear her comments, which offered a complete dereliction of duty to future generations and followed others’ failures of leadership rather than showing leadership. I warmly welcome the role that the UK played under the Secretary of State’s leadership in championing the road map for fossil fuel phase out, but there is an elephant in the room. Will the Government continue that leadership by ruling out extraction at Rosebank?
Ed Miliband
On that question, I refer to the answer I gave a few minutes ago. My hon. Friend made a really important wider point. All hon. Members should ask this: when people look back in 10 or 20 years, will they say, “Why were they going on about that climate change business? That all turned out to be a passing fad.” I do not think so. Or will they say, “They were the generation who had the opportunity to act—why weren’t they doing more?” I think the latter is much more likely than the former.
Sammy Wilson (East Antrim) (DUP)
Does the Secretary of State not see the irony of 53,000 people—about 400 from each of the participating countries—flying to Brazil and landing on airfields cut out of the tropical forest to discuss, of all things, the reduction of CO2 emissions in the atmosphere? Of course, they reached the conclusion that to keep our homes warm and our economies ticking over, we will still need oil and gas.
The Secretary of State has talked about the UK’s vulnerability in depending on foreign sources of fuel. Why, then, does he resist and block the use of the plentiful gas and oil resources we have in our economy that could generate jobs, raise tax revenue, cut costs and reduce imports?
Ed Miliband
I just do not agree with the right hon. Gentleman—he and I have been having this disagreement for 20 years. I will concentrate on his first question. The truth is—I say this to him in all honesty—if we disengage from the world, it will not serve Britain’s interests; it will harm our interests. When we think about all the problems that the world faces, including but not limited to the climate crisis, multilateralism and working with others is the only solution. The idea that we should not engage in COP because it involves travel seems very mistaken.
Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)
Leadership at home, leadership globally, and now we need leadership on the fossil fuels road map. I am sure that my right hon. Friend will play a pivotal role in setting the terms of reference, the scope and the ambition of that. It is also important to build the industrial strategy to ensure that we can see a just transition for so many countries. How will he lead that opportunity for our country and others to ensure that fossil fuels are the focus leading into COP31?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend makes a really important point, and I will concentrate on the first bit of her question. This is very much about the just transition. Seventy thousand jobs were lost in the North sea under the last Government and they did not put in place the alternatives. That is why our investments in carbon capture and storage, offshore wind, electricity networks and all those things are crucial to provide the jobs of the future, as well as having North sea oil and gas fields open for their lifetime. We need to do both those things, and that is what the Government are determined to do.
John Slinger (Rugby) (Lab)
During a stimulating discussion with the highly informed students of Ashlawn school in Rugby yesterday, I mentioned COP30 as an example of how global politics is highly relevant to them. Does my right hon. Friend agree that strong British leadership at multilateral negotiations is part of a rebalancing that is more important than ever; preferencing the interests of the younger and future generations and giving them meaningful agency in our world?
Ed Miliband
That is a good point to end on. I congratulate the students at Ashlawn school for their interest. With the greatest of respect to all Members of this House, the young people at that school will have to live with the consequences of the decisions we make for much longer than us. I intend to live for a long time; nevertheless, they are the people who will have to deal with those consequences. We owe it to them to focus on doing everything we can to tackle this issue.
My hon. Friend is absolutely right that the only way we can do that is by working with other countries and by putting our faith not in letting each other sink or swim but in multilateralism. For all its flaws, that is what this COP was about and that is what the COP process is about. People should not despair because, actually, over 30 years, the world has made progress.
UK COP30 Priorities
Ed Miliband Excerpts(2 months, 3 weeks ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Ed Miliband)
Britain is going to COP30 to fight for our national interest and protect our way of life by working with other countries.
In the UK, we have put clean energy at the heart of our Government’s agenda, because it is the route to energy security, lower bills and good jobs for our country today. At COP30, we will be working with others to drive global action on the climate and nature crises to protect our home for future generations.
Communities are already paying the price of these crises—from wildfires in Scotland and flooding in Sussex to the devastation of Hurricane Melissa and repeated flooding in Brazil. Britain is just 1% of global emissions, which is why we must work with others to avoid disaster.
We are making progress as a world—and British leadership has made a difference. Before the Paris agreement, the world was on track for 4°C of warming. Now 2030 national commitments put us on course for 2.6°C, and 80% of global GDP is covered by net zero commitments. Globally, twice as much is invested in clean energy as fossil fuels. More is invested in solar each year than in all other power sources combined, and renewables have overtaken coal as the largest global electricity source.
We must go further and faster, but we must not overlook the progress made, or the role of British leadership in making it happen. From the world-leading Climate Change Act in 2008 to the success of COP26 in Glasgow to being the first major economy to legislate for net zero, Britain has helped change the course of global action. This leadership is more important than ever, because the world remains on a dangerous course, and we need to accelerate action. At COP30, Britain will be working with the Brazilian presidency and others to push for progress in five key areas:
1. Accelerating the global clean energy transition
Building on our clean energy mission at home, we will work with others abroad to drive progress towards the goal of tripling renewables and doubling energy efficiency improvement rates globally by 2030—including through the Global Clean Power Alliance. We will also drive forward progress in tackling super-pollutants such as methane, in order to deliver climate action and cleaner air. By speeding up the roll-out of clean energy internationally, we will unlock new investment and export opportunities for our country.
2. Driving ambition and accelerating implementation
The UK has led the way with an ambitious 2035 nationally determined contribution that is economy-wide, covers all greenhouses gases and is 1.5°C-aligned. It was announced by the Prime Minister at COP29 last year. We will continue to build on this to encourage others to act. We will call for COP30 to respond to the 2035 NDCs brought forward so far, and say how we will close the gap to keep 1.5°C within reach. To accelerate implementation, we will work with Brazil and others on reform of the global climate action agenda.
3. Protecting forests and nature
As countries gather for a COP in the Amazon, the UK will continue championing the commitment to halting and reversing forest loss by 2030, including through our role as co-chair of the Forest and Climate Leaders’ Partnership. We will support Brazil and other forest nations in scaling investment in forest-positive economies, including through high-integrity carbon markets. That will help Brazil to develop the tropical forest forever facility and support indigenous peoples and local communities.
4. Building global resilience to climate impacts
We will push for COP30 to finalise a robust and practical set of global indicators for measuring global progress on adaptation through the global goal on adaptation, and to accelerate the development and implementation of national adaptation plans.
5. Scaling up finance for the transition
Building on the Baku to Belém road map, we will work with others to chart a pathway towards the at least $1.3 trillion by 2035 called for at COP29. We will continue to push for reform of the financial system. We will harness the UK’s position as the green finance capital of the world to unlock investment in clean energy, nature and resilience.
We will continue to deploy our own international climate finance initiative to accelerate the transition and support others, and we will meet our commitment to provide £11.6 billion by April 2026 and to triple our spending on adaptation by 2025 from 2019 levels.
COP30 will be judged on whether the world can work together on the greatest long-term challenge we face. I will join the Prime Minister and the Prince of Wales at the world leaders summit in Belém, and lead the UK’s delegation during the negotiations, supported by the Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds North West (Katie White), and the Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry East (Mary Creagh). We will provide an update to the House once negotiations conclude.
[HCWS1018]
Clean Energy and Climate Action Plans
Ed Miliband Excerpts(3 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Ed Miliband)
Today, I am making a statement on the Government’s approach to meeting our carbon budgets, and the benefits this brings to the British public and industry—delivering growth, increasing energy security and lowering bills. I am proud of the progress the UK has made to date, but further action is needed to build on that success and fully embrace the opportunities clean energy and climate action present for our country.
We are publishing the carbon budget and growth delivery plan, which sets out how we will meet our targets while driving economic opportunity and delivering for those across the UK.
We are also publishing the government response to the Climate Change Committee’s 2025 progress report in reducing emissions. This responds to the points that the CCC raised and sets out key Government achievements in the past year.
Alongside this, we are publishing an investor prospectus, which signposts the opportunities for companies and investors that will drive clean economic growth.
Finally, we are also publishing the methane action plan. This is forward looking and action-focused, detailing the key methane abating policies we have developed as part of our carbon budgets, alongside highlighting progress the UK has made so far.
Together, these publications demonstrate the rapid progress we are making towards our mission to become a clean energy superpower, showcasing the breadth of action across Government. We will grow our economy and create good jobs, while improving our nature and biodiversity. These plans will deliver a wide range of economic and societal benefits, protecting our country for the long term and delivering immediate benefits for households:
Energy security
This government is taking back control by investing in homegrown clean power to protect the British people. Great British Energy, our publicly owned clean energy company, has kicked off its first projects —putting solar panels on around 250 schools, around 260 NHS sites and 15 military sites to cut their bills and save money that can be reinvested in frontline services. We are also ushering in a new golden age of nuclear. In July, a final investment decision was taken to build Sizewell C in Suffolk with £14.2 billion funding allocated for this Parliament, as well as investment in nuclear fusion and over £2.5 billion for small modular reactors.
Jobs and growth
Clean energy and climate action will create new businesses, attract huge levels of investment into the UK, and create highly skilled, well paid job opportunities across the country. Our recently published clean energy jobs plan sets out how Government, industry and trade unions will work together to recruit the workers needed for our mission and ensure people across Britain can benefit from the good jobs with high wages that clean energy brings. For too long the competitiveness of British industry has been held back by the high cost of electricity. In the industrial strategy, we announced additional support for 7,000 energy intensive firms through the British industrial competitiveness scheme, which will reduce electricity costs by up to £40 per megawatt hour. These reforms complement the Government clean power 2030 target, which is the only way to bring down bills for good by ending the UK’s dependency on volatile fossil fuel markets.
Improved quality of life
From warmer homes to cleaner air to more affordable travel, clean energy and climate action will improve the lives of people across the UK. We will shortly publish our warm homes plan, kicking off Britain’s biggest programme of home upgrades in generations. This will be backed by £13.2 billion of public investment to upgrade up to 5 million homes over this Parliament to lower bills and tackle fuel poverty. Meanwhile, the electric car grant, launched in July, is making EVs cheaper by offering discounts of up to £3,750 on eligible models. This complements wider efforts to make electric vehicle charging easier, fairer and more accessible for all.
Protecting our natural world
We must address the climate and nature crisis together. That is why we are supporting farmers with up to £2.7 billion per year of funding for farming and nature recovery which includes funding for nature schemes such as tree planting and peatland restoration. In addition, the Government are investing £816 million in our tree planting programme through to 2030. By 2030, we will also invest £85 million to bring back our wild peatland.
We have moved at speed on our mission over the last 16 months, but we have much further to go to address the long-term challenges we face as a country and bring the benefits to families and businesses as quickly as we can.
This Government will keep fighting to seize the opportunities that clean energy and climate action offer, acting to protect the British people now and for generations to come.
[HCWS1004]
Oral Answers to Questions
Ed Miliband Excerpts(3 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mary Kelly Foy (City of Durham) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Ed Miliband)
This Government’s approach is founded on the bedrock of the best scientific evidence, which, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, says that net zero by 2050 is essential to limiting global warming to 1.5°. That is why we supported Baroness May’s decision to put net zero by 2050 into law; that was based on advice from the Climate Change Committee. That decision was right for the climate, for energy security, and for the jobs and growth that it can bring to our country.
Mary Kelly Foy
This Government’s mission to make Britain a clean energy superpower is not only delivering against climate targets, but delivering jobs and investment in places like Durham and the wider north-east, where around 500 renewable energy companies already employ around 17,000 people in good-quality jobs—a figure that is set to rise to 24,000. Those who take a stand against climate action would put that growth at risk. Does the Secretary of State share my concerns that the fearmongering by some in this House about the cost and safety of renewables is not only misguided, but fundamentally against our national interests, and will he work with local teams to provide suitable knowledge and education, as suggested by Retrofit Reimagined?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Unfortunately, the Climate Change Act 2008 is now an issue that divides this House. I think Rain Newton-Smith, the director general of the CBI, put it very well recently when she said,
“The Climate Act has been the bedrock for investment flowing into the UK.”
Ripping up the framework that has given investors confidence that the UK is serious about sustainable growth through a low-carbon future would damage our economy. Seeking to abolish the Climate Change Act is not just a betrayal of young people—it is anti-jobs and anti-investment.
Lee Anderson (Ashfield) (Reform)
May I gently remind the Energy Secretary that it is his job to answer questions from MPs on behalf of their constituents? I will ask the same question that I asked him last time: if the UK became net zero tomorrow, by how much would it reduce the Earth’s temperature?
Ed Miliband
I will give the hon. Gentleman the answer I gave him last time. Action by the UK makes a difference here. Of course, we are 1% of global emissions, but our action means that other countries act. Where is the evidence for that? Well, it actually happened. When the Climate Change Act passed, 60 other countries passed their own versions of it. Net zero was signed into law in this country, and now 80% of global GDP is covered by net zero. That is the difference the UK makes. I believe in Britain; the hon. Gentleman does not.
Bill Esterson (Sefton Central) (Lab)
Lord Stern reminded us just today that
“Investment in climate action is the…growth story of the 21st century,”
while expecting growth from fossil fuels is
“futile because the damage it causes ends in self-destruction.”
The Office for Budget Responsibility confirmed the same thing in the summer, referring to the huge cost of not taking climate action. Is it not the truth that the energy transition is essential, not only to address climate action, but to exactly how we deliver economic success?
Ed Miliband
The Chair of the Select Committee speaks very wisely on this matter. The net zero economy grew three times faster than the economy as a whole last year. This is the growth opportunity of the 21st century. Now, we could let China or India take that opportunity, but I say that we need that opportunity for Britain.
Mr Peter Bedford (Mid Leicestershire) (Con)
The Climate Change Act forces Ministers to meet rigid, legally binding emissions targets, regardless of the economic consequences. Does the Secretary of State accept that this law has directly contributed to higher energy bills, the loss of British industry and declining competitiveness, and that the only sensible course of action is to repeal it?
Ed Miliband
No, and British business roundly condemned the Conservatives when they came out with that argument. The hon. Gentleman should have a word with the right hon. Member for East Surrey (Claire Coutinho), sitting on the Front Bench, who said just in March last year—life comes at you fast, Mr Speaker—that Britain was the “poster child” for net zero. She was lauding everything associated with that, and now she wants to abolish the Act that made it possible.
Rachel Hopkins (Luton South and South Bedfordshire) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Ed Miliband)
Earlier this month, Great British Energy jointly funded 46 new community energy projects in Scotland, including an island solar farm, a community ice rink and a small community wind farm. Great British Energy is also helping public services in England with their energy bills through its solar for all programme, which benefits schools and hospitals. In this way, GBE is transferring money from the pockets of energy companies to local communities and frontline services.
Katrina Murray
Many leisure centres, such as the Tryst in Cumbernauld, which was built and opened in 1973, are desperate to decarbonise, but face huge costs and the practical challenge of retrofitting renewable technologies into older buildings. Will my right hon. Friend set out how Great British Energy will support vital community facilities of that kind in making the switch to clean energy, and in reducing their bills?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend speaks very well about these issues. GB Energy is already taking advantage of the huge potential of clean energy, and hundreds of schools, hospitals and NHS sites across the country are already benefiting. The statement of strategic priorities made it clear that GBE will work collaboratively and in partnership with Scottish public bodies and the Scottish Government to increase investment in the local community energy sector in Scotland. Organisations such as my hon. Friend’s leisure centre sound like ideal candidates.
Jacob Collier
Thanks to Great British Energy and this Government, Queen’s hospital in Burton will get solar panels, which will save the trust money that can be ploughed directly into the frontline and be spent on patients. Does the Secretary of State agree that there is significant opportunity to expand that programme to other public buildings, and is he exploring that with his Department?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend is right, and I hope that the massive expansion to schools and hospitals that we have already ensured in 15 months is welcomed across the House.
Andrew Bowie (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine) (Con)
They did not need GBE to do it.
Ed Miliband
The hon. Gentleman says that we did not need GB Energy to do that, but the Conservatives never did it—not in 14 years. It is precisely through a publicly owned energy company that we are doing this, to the benefit of citizens across our country. I agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Burton and Uttoxeter (Jacob Collier) that there is huge opportunity here, and we intend to expand the plan.
Rachel Hopkins
I for one welcome the announcement that the publicly owned Great British Energy will roll out solar panels to more schools and hospitals in the coming year. What benefits will that bring to our communities, and what can places such as Luton South and South Bedfordshire do to take advantage of the clean power transition?
Ed Miliband
This is really important. Public institutions face significantly high energy bills because of the legacy of the last Government. GBE, with its programme, is cutting those bills. That is a transfer of resources from energy bills to frontline public services. The hon. Member for West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine (Andrew Bowie) is chuntering from the Front Bench. He should visit some of the teachers and NHS staff who think that this is a brilliant programme.
Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)
My constituency of Esher and Walton is home to the UK’s largest floating installation of solar panels; there are 23,000 on the Queen Elizabeth II reservoir, helping to support public services by powering a Thames Water treatment plant. It is a fantastically innovative renewables project, but very few of my constituents know about it. How will the Government use Great British Energy to argue more effectively for the benefits of renewables for communities and public services across the UK?
Ed Miliband
The Energy Minister says that he went on a profile-raising visit to the programme two weeks ago, so many more people now know about it, thanks to that. Indeed, even more—thousands, millions—will know about it as a result of watching this question time. The hon. Lady makes an important point about how GB Energy can roll this out across the country, and floating solar has real potential as well.
Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)
Over a year ago, the UK Government promised that there would be hundreds of jobs for GB Energy in Aberdeen. A year on, the oil and gas industry in Aberdeen is haemorrhaging thousands of jobs and we are barely into double figures for GB Energy jobs. When will that promise be kept?
Ed Miliband
I have to say that I do not agree with the hon. Gentleman about the work that GB Energy is doing. When I talk to industry representatives, they say that GB Energy now plays a crucial role. There is investment coming into the supply chain—a supply chain fund of £1 billion, thanks to the spending review, which the Conservatives would abolish because they do not seem to want jobs in Britain. There is £1 billion in the supply chain and GB Energy is rolling out community energy projects in schools and hospitals in England, as well as the ones in Scotland that I have talked about. GB Energy is partnering with the private sector. This is all part of the clean energy workforce plan, which we will publish soon, for 400,000 extra jobs as a result of our clean energy mission.
Mr Joshua Reynolds (Maidenhead) (LD)
By prioritising partnerships with schools, we will help to protect their budgets. I draw the Secretary of State’s attention to schools in Maidenhead, and specifically Furze Platt senior school—where I happen to be a governor—which recently partnered with MaidEnergy to install solar panels on the school’s building, thereby doing right by its budgets and by the environment, and setting a great example for the students taught there.
Ed Miliband
I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on being a school governor and on the work the school is doing. We can talk about the tangible benefits, but the wider point is that young people want us to act on these issues, and that is part of having an education system that teaches them about the benefits of moving towards clean energy. When I go into schools, there is massive enthusiasm for that kind of initiative.
Gareth Snell (Stoke-on-Trent Central) (Lab/Co-op)
Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Ed Miliband)
In the best traditions of the UK, we see it as our duty to work with other countries to tackle the climate crisis and protect future generations. It was British leadership that saw the Climate Change Act 2008 emulated in 60 countries across the world, and it was the leadership of the UK at COP26 that now sees 80% of global GDP covered by net zero. We will maintain that tradition of leadership into COP30 in Brazil and beyond.
Tom Hayes
The Amazon rainforest is the lungs of the earth, but it is gasping for breath. I am pleased that COP30 will be in the heart of the Amazon. Ella, a school student from my constituency, would like to know what steps the Government will be taking to stop deforestation and back nature-based solutions. On behalf of Ella, may I urge the Secretary of State to go as far as possible and do all he can?
Ed Miliband
I thank my hon. Friend for his question, and Ella for her interest in and enthusiasm for this incredibly important issue. Deforestation is a terrible thing for the planet, but it is also terrible for the people who are affected—the indigenous people who live in the forest. Nature-based solutions and solutions that put indigenous people at the centre make a huge difference. This is a COP in the forest, and I think the Brazilian presidency deserves congratulations on that emphasis. It is developing a number of initiatives, including the so-called TFFF—the tropical forest forever facility—to finance the prevention of deforestation, and we are working with it on that.
Warinder Juss
Young people in my constituency of Wolverhampton West are particularly concerned about protecting the environment and the future of our planet. I have been contacted by students at Wolverhampton girls’ high school and St Edmund’s Catholic academy, and recently I was proud to attend a climate justice art exhibition prepared by pupils at St Teresa’s Catholic primary academy. What steps are we taking to encourage international awareness of the dangers of global warming and the need to recycle and limit plastic waste, thereby also reducing marine pollution?
Ed Miliband
Plastic waste is something that my colleagues in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs work on. I think my hon. Friend’s wider point is important. There is a global context to this—and sometimes that context might not actually be as it appears—which is that, when we look across the world, we see that countries are still acting on these issues. Why? Because they recognise that it is in their national interest economically and in the long term for future generations. There is no future if people bury their heads in the sand and say, “We’re not going to act.”
Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)
COP30 begins next month in Brazil. The UK must play a leading role on the world stage to tackle climate change. At home, however, Somerset council is hampered in its attempts to achieve net zero by an escalating financial crisis following the maladministration of its previous Conservative administration. What steps will the Minister and Cabinet colleagues take to support councils in their net zero transitions?
Ed Miliband
Part of what we are doing is devolving more of the funding around warm homes, for example, so that local authorities can play a leading role. I congratulate local authorities on the interest that they are taking in this. The hon. Lady raises the wider picture of COP30, which is important—this is a crucial moment. The UK has already shown leadership in the past 15 months, including by publishing our nationally determined contribution at COP29 last year.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Secretary of State very much for his answers. The fact is that we are all in this together. We must understand that third-world countries have a role to play, just as the United Kingdom does, but we are the richer country. I am conscious that it may not always be financially possible for third-world countries to do the things that we ask them to, so what assistance can we give them to ensure that when we approach the task of doing this together, we actually achieve it together?
Ed Miliband
I welcome the hon. Gentleman’s question. Part of the answer here is that the economics have changed, so getting private finance into developing countries can make a massive difference. The “Baku to Belém road map” is being produced as part of the COP process—it is a $1.3 trillion road map—and most of that is about private finance. We can see across the world the effect of private finance in developing countries. In Pakistan, for example, solar has gone from playing almost no part in its electricity system to being the top part of that system in only three or four years, because it is in Pakistan’s economic interests. That is what we are seeing across the world. We need the private and public sectors to play their role.
Florence Eshalomi (Vauxhall and Camberwell Green) (Lab/Co-op)
Lorraine Beavers (Blackpool North and Fleetwood) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Ed Miliband)
Since the last oral questions in July, we have reached a final investment decision for Sizewell C, creating 10,000 jobs, and surpassed the historic milestone of approving enough clean power for 7.5 million homes after just 15 months of this Government. From next month, nearly 6 million families will receive £150 off their energy bills through the warm home discount. That is what it means to deliver on our clean power mission.
Lorraine Beavers
The National Energy System Operator is currently assessing whether tidal range technology can help us meet our clean power mission. In Fleetwood, we have a huge opportunity for a tidal range project, which could bring desperately needed jobs and investment. Will the Minister meet me to discuss that opportunity and the outcome of the report, to ensure that Blackpool North and Fleetwood feels the benefits of the Government’s clean power energy mission?
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend raises the important issue of tidal energy. I am very aware of the assessment that NESO is conducting—obviously, our Department is working with it on that assessment. The Minister for Energy chairs the marine energy taskforce, and is happy to meet my hon. Friend.
Claire Coutinho (East Surrey) (Con)
The carbon tax on electricity pushes up the cost of gas, wind, solar and nuclear in this country. It does not need to be there—the Secretary of State could axe the carbon tax tomorrow to instantly cut bills for every single family in this country. Why will he not?
Ed Miliband
I am afraid that the right hon. Lady’s question is economically illiterate, and that is putting it politely. The EU emissions trading scheme and the carbon border adjustment mechanism mean that exporters will pay the carbon price in any case. Quite extraordinarily, her policy means that they would pay it to the EU, not to the UK Government—I do not think that is a very good deal. That is why UK business welcomed the linking proposals that we made, including UK Steel, the CBI, Make UK and the Energy Intensive Users Group.
Claire Coutinho
The Secretary of State is trying to conflate two emissions trading schemes. He does not want to talk about the carbon tax on electricity, because he has increased it by 70% since the start of the year, pushing up everybody’s bills in the process. He is making electricity more expensive at the same time as taxing, banning and bribing people into electric cars and electric home heating—that is totally backwards. He is the worst enemy of a decarbonisation agenda in this country. Our cheap power plan would instantly cut electricity bills by 20%. The Secretary of State could do so tomorrow; what is he waiting for?
Ed Miliband
Dear, oh dear. I will be honest: I think it is sad what has happened to the right hon. Lady. When she was in government for a time, she was the great eco-champion. At COP26, she was telling people, “Follow Claire’s lead—be a great eco-champion.” Now, she has suddenly discovered that she is the anti-net zero warrior. All it does is show how desperate the Conservatives are, and the more desperate they become, the more irrelevant they become.
Marsha De Cordova (Battersea) (Lab)
Ed Miliband
My hon. Friend makes a really important point, and not only about what the mayor has done and the effects it has had on the health of Londoners. There is a wider point here, which is too often overlooked, about what the shift to renewables and away from fossil fuels can do to help save lives and tackle air pollution.
Pippa Heylings (South Cambridgeshire) (LD)
Frighteningly, the Earth has already reached its first climate tipping point linked to global warming. We are now seeing warm water coral reefs going into irreversible decline, which is threatening nature and millions of people and their livelihoods. The climate crisis is a global emergency and needs leadership, and when Britain leads, others follow. Can the Secretary of State finally confirm that the Prime Minister will attend COP30 and lead from the front?
Ed Miliband
I will give the answer that was also given by the Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds North West (Katie White), which is that the Prime Minister’s diary is above my pay grade. We will be playing a very active part at COP30. The wider point that the hon. Lady makes about tipping points and the recent report is important. Anyone who looks at that report will see where the science is taking us, and any political party in this House that sees that as a reason to then abandon the Climate Change Act 2008, as the Leader of the Opposition has done, is anti-science and anti-young people. It is a betrayal of the future.
Mr Speaker
Come on, Secretary of State, do you not want your own Back Benchers to ask questions?
Kenneth Stevenson (Airdrie and Shotts) (Lab)
Ed Miliband
Yes, I will. My hon. Friend makes an important point about the role of trade unions in the renewable industry, too.
Martin Vickers (Brigg and Immingham) (Con)
The hundreds of workers at Lindsey oil refinery will have noted that in response to an earlier question, the Minister did not attempt to respond on the future of the refinery. At least two investors are looking to take over the whole site. If they prove satisfactory, can the Minister assure me that the Government will back the project?
Sammy Wilson (East Antrim) (DUP)
This week a conservation charity has indicated that the creep of wind farms in Scotland—17 million trees have been cut down to provide for them—is destroying the highlands, while in England 5% of prime agricultural land is to be used for renewable energy projects at a time when we produce only 60% of our food. Does the Secretary of State not recognise that his policy is destroying tourist areas, will make us more dependent on foreign imports for food, and will put up electricity prices?
Ed Miliband
There is a two-decade disagreement between the right hon. Gentleman and me on these issues. The biggest threat to the countryside is the climate crisis. That is why this Government are tackling it.
Tracy Gilbert (Edinburgh North and Leith) (Lab)
Five Estuaries Offshore Wind Farm: Development Consent
Ed Miliband Excerpts(4 months, 2 weeks ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Ed Miliband)
This statement concerns an application for development consent made under the Planning Act 2008 by Five Estuaries Offshore Wind Farm Ltd for the construction and operation of an offshore generating station comprised of up to 79 wind turbine generators, off the coast of Essex and Suffolk.
Under section 107(1) of the Planning Act 2008, the Secretary of State must make a decision on an application within three months of the receipt of the examining authority’s report unless exercising the power under section 107(3) of the Act to set a new deadline. Where a new deadline is set, the Secretary of State must make a statement to Parliament to announce it.
The statutory deadline for the decision on the Five Estuaries offshore wind farm is 17 September 2025.
I have decided to allow an extension and to set a new deadline of 17 December 2025. This is to allow time to request further information that was not provided for consideration during the examination period and to give all interested parties the opportunity to review and comment on such information. While it is not my preference to extend, I am clear that applications for consent for energy projects submitted under the Planning Act 2008 must meet the necessary standards.
The decision to set the new deadline for this application is without prejudice to the decision on whether to grant or refuse development consent.
[HCWS919]
New Nuclear: Sizewell C Investment
Ed Miliband Excerpts(6 months, 1 week ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Ed Miliband)
The Government clean energy superpower mission is about replacing the UK’s dependence on fossil fuel markets with clean homegrown power that we control, to bring down bills for good and protect household finances.
As we drive for a clean power system, new nuclear can provide a backbone of reliable low-carbon electricity, working alongside expanded renewables to achieve a lower-cost, low-carbon and more secure electricity system for the long term.
That is why at the spending review, the Government announced plans to usher in a new golden age of nuclear power, with new funding for full-scale nuclear, small modular reactors, and fusion.
Central to this vision is Sizewell C. The spending review provided a £14.2 billion funding allocation to support project construction to the end of the spending period, building on the investments made since 2022, which have made the Government the majority shareholder in Sizewell C during the project’s development.
I am pleased to confirm today that—following the conclusion of the capital raise process and required Government approval—the Government have confirmed its final investment decision, the first for a new nuclear power station in the UK since Hinkley Point C’s construction was approved in 2016.
The Government have reached a commercial deal with a group of experienced equity investors: EDF, La Caisse, Centrica and Amber Infrastructure Ltd. The Government will take an initial 44.9% equity stake in the project and will be the biggest single equity shareholder. La Caisse will take a 20% stake, Centrica 15%, EDF 12.5%, and Amber Infrastructure Ltd initially 7.6%.
Alongside this investment, the National Wealth Fund—the Government principal investor and policy bank—is making its first investment in nuclear energy. It will provide the majority of the project’s debt finance. The remainder is set to be provided by a number of commercial banks lending to Sizewell C, under a proposed £5 billion guarantee from the French export credit agency Bpifrance Assurance Export.
Sizewell C Ltd plan to achieve a final capital cost for the project construction of around £38 billion (2024 prices). This cost estimate has been rigorously assessed by incoming investors as part of the financing process, and follows negotiations with the project’s supply chain as well as detailed scrutiny by the company of Hinkley Point C, the design of which Sizewell C will replicate. Delivering Sizewell C at this cost estimate would represent a saving of c. 20% on the estimated cost of Hinkley Point C.
During construction, consumer payments through our new funding model, the nuclear regulated asset base, will be limited to an average of around £1 a month on a typical household bill. This is a good deal for consumers, as demonstrated by the value for money assessment that will be published today. Once operational Sizewell C could create savings of £2 billion a year across the future low-carbon electricity system with consumers then benefiting from cheaper, clean power for decades to come.
Sizewell C will deliver this cheaper clean electricity to power the equivalent of around 6 million of today’s homes for at least 60 years. Sizewell C will also deliver major economic benefits, supporting 10,000 jobs at peak construction—and thousands more in the wider supply chain—and as it is built will create 1,500 apprenticeships. Seventy per cent. of the value of construction is set to be awarded to British businesses. Sizewell C Ltd anticipates it will have 3,500 UK companies in its supply chain, from across the entire country.
As well as its nationwide benefits, Sizewell C stands to make a lasting positive contribution to the local and regional economy, with £4.4 billion invested in the east of England during construction, 2,600 local construction jobs created in Suffolk at peak construction, and over one third of the apprentices to come from the local area.
Further details of the terms of the deal, including the project’s economic licence with modifications to use the RAB model, details of the project’s funded decommissioning programme, and a value for money assessment, will be published as a suite of documents on gov.uk.
To highlight key aspects of the project and the deal for the attention of the House, the commercial structure outlined above consolidates the Government position as the main provider of finance to Sizewell C, alongside the investment of our private partners.
Working in partnership with other shareholders, the Government will oversee the project’s progress and work closely with all those involved to ensure successful delivery. The private equity and debt lenders also provide a wealth of experience in delivering other large-scale infrastructure projects and encouraging positive commercial behaviours on the part of the company.
As noted, the project’s capital structure will be backed by the RAB funding model; this is a tried and tested approach to funding large-scale infrastructure, and the first time this approach will be used for a UK nuclear project.
The framework includes robust incentives and penalties for shareholders to ensure the project stays on track and mitigates the risk of significant overruns. These incentives include reducing investor returns if the project overruns cost thresholds set out in the economic licence. Lenders will also have levers to incentivise good governance and cost control by the shareholders, such as the ability to “lock up” shareholder dividends in certain scenarios. The company’s supply chain is also strongly incentivised to deliver to this cost estimate.
The RAB structure will be regulated by the UK’s independent energy regulator, Ofgem. Revenues will be collected from electricity suppliers by the Low Carbon Contracts Company, previously designated as the counterparty for revenue collection contracts for the purposes of the nuclear RAB model.
The outcome of the capital raise follows a competitive process involving a wide range of potential investors, and we are grateful to all parties who participated. The high level of interest demonstrates confidence in both the Government vision for nuclear power and in UK nuclear projects as an investable asset class, as well as confidence in the Government as a credible partner for delivering key infrastructure.
The deal confirmed today ends an era of delay to give Sizewell C the go-ahead. It will help secure Britain’s homegrown nuclear supply far beyond 2030, and marks a major step in the Government mission to take back control of the country’s energy supply, reduce dependence on global fossil fuel markets and protect household finances.
[HCWS880]