Fracking Ban
Martin McCluskey Excerpts(5 days, 23 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Martin McCluskey)
I thank the hon. Member for Thornbury and Yate (Claire Young) for bringing this debate to the House this afternoon, and I thank the Backbench Business Committee for granting it.
After the hottest summer on record, I would argue that the need for climate action is more acute than ever. We have seen really visibly this summer why it is so necessary, so I have to start by saying that what we have heard from the hon. Member for Boston and Skegness (Richard Tice) astounds me. He asked the question: who would forgive us? The question I would put back to him is this: who will forgive us if we, as he has done, deny the climate science? Who will forgive us if we fail to plan for a transition that is happening now—not in years to come—and on which work and jobs rely? And who will forgive us if we pass on to our children, grandchildren and the next generation a world that is worse than the one we inherited? To me, that is the question that sits at the heart of this debate. There may be parts of the debate where we disagree—even those of us who agree on the climate science—but on the basics of climate science, there is much that we can agree on.
It is important that the House, industry, communities and the wider public have clarity on the Government’s position on this issue, the evidence base behind it and the safeguards that apply, so let me remind the House of our position. It comes in three parts: first, a clear commitment to ban fracking for shale gas; secondly, the distinction between that activity and low-volume hydraulic fracturing techniques used in conventional oil and gas operations, and, as the hon. Lady acknowledged in her speech, other industries such as geothermal; and thirdly, the broader reality that the benefits of getting off the fossil fuel rollercoaster significantly outweigh the cost, with clean energy providing cheaper power, travel and homes for our country.
The Government have been clear in our commitment to ban hydraulic fracturing for shale gas, commonly known as fracking. There is currently no fracking for shale gas anywhere in the United Kingdom. Many Members across the House, including my hon. Friend the Member for Scarborough and Whitby (Alison Hume), asked about the energy independence Bill. The Bill was announced in the King’s Speech and will meet our commitment to not issue new licences to explore new fields—onshore and offshore—including those that could be used for fracking for shale gas. That will deliver on our commitment in law to ban fracking.
The effective moratorium on fracking for shale gas in England remains in place for existing licences because of concerns about the prediction and management of induced seismicity. Those concerns are not minor and not theoretical. In all three instances of fracking for shale gas in the UK, there was evidence of induced seismicity, including earthquakes strong enough to be felt by surrounding communities. Where communities have concerns about safety, environmental protection and local impacts, the Government have a responsibility to proceed cautiously and transparently.
Fracking for shale gas is used where gas is located within very small pores of shale rock and it cannot be extracted without repeatedly fracturing the rock. It typically requires injecting high volumes of fluid and propane at high pressure and at multiple points in a horizontal well to create high numbers of fractures extending hundreds of metres into the shale.
Martin Wrigley
Does the Minister agree that not only did the hon. Member for Boston and Skegness (Richard Tice) exaggerate the amount of available gas that might be in the UK—less than 10% of such gas is usually recovered, and that normally trails off after a year—but that such gas is not actually pulled out of the ground by nodding donkeys? Typically, a structure called a Christmas tree is used, not the nodding donkeys described by the hon. Gentleman.
Martin McCluskey
I agree with much of what the hon. Gentleman said. I would also say that we are not Pennsylvania or Texas; we are the United Kingdom, and we will operate on the basis of our national interest, energy security and national security.
The process of high-impact fracking can lead to seismic activity that can be felt on the surface. It differs considerably from the proppant squeeze used in conventional gas extraction and in geothermal, which uses smaller amounts of fluid to improve the production rate of gas in non-shale rock types. The Government’s commitment is directed at hydraulic fracturing for shale gas, where the combination of geology, the scale of the fracturing network, the fluid volume and the operational design has raised specific concerns.
I will say a little more about some of the other issues raised by hon. Members. We recognise that there are some concerns about low-volume hydraulic fracturing techniques, such as proppant or acid squeezes used in conventional, non-shale oil and gas operations. I am at pains to say that this is not the same as hydraulic fracturing for shale gas extraction, and it is not associated with the same safety issues.
Alison Hume
Does the Minister accept that using proppant squeeze is a loophole, because the industry has started using it to get round the moratorium, and therefore it needs to be included in any ban?
Martin McCluskey
I thank my hon. Friend for her question. In her introduction to the debate, the hon. Member for Thornbury and Yate raised the point about geothermal. The specific issues relating to high-intensity hydraulic fracturing that we have seen have been in shale, not in the types of fracturing used in conventional oil and gas, which are also used in geothermal. There has been some division across the House this afternoon: there was a suggestion from the Liberal Democrat Benches that we use a definition linked only to oil and gas, thus keeping geothermal out of it; there were suggestions from elsewhere that a full ban may also impact on uses such as geothermal. That points to why we have to be careful and specific about what it is we are trying to achieve.
Low-volume hydraulic fracturing has been happening in the UK for decades. It has been used not just in respect of oil and gas but in the water industry and geothermal. In that time, there has been no clear evidence that it induces seismicity that can be felt on the surface. Low-volume hydraulic fracturing operations are routinely used in conventional oil and gas operations. They target different types of rocks, create fractures close to the wellbore and are typically short, single-stage operations, as opposed to the continuous fracturing characteristic of shale gas fracking.
In practical terms, those operations are limited in scale and purpose. They are designed to improve flow from an existing conventional reservoir, not to fracture large areas of shale rock. They do not involve the same high-volume, multi-stage process associated with shale gas fracking, and they have not produced the same evidence of induced seismicity. Furthermore, all such activities are subject to a robust regulatory regime.
The hon. Member for Bath (Wera Hobhouse) and my hon. Friend the Member for Bolton West (Phil Brickell) spoke about safety. Operators must obtain planning permission, environmental permits and health and safety approvals before proceeding, covering issues such as groundwater protection, management of emissions, handling of fluids and waste, and monitoring requirements. Where health and safety approvals are required, operators must meet the standards expected for well integrity and operational safety. Planning processes also provide a route for local impacts to be considered before activities proceed. We recognise the strong interest that Members expressed in the Burniston application, for which the planning authority has now refused permission.
Let me be absolutely clear: there is no loophole and no hidden route by which shale gas fracking can resume. The evidence-based policy position is clear, the effective moratorium remains in place, and the Government will not issue new onshore licences in England, including those that could be used for fracking for shale gas. That is the reassurance that communities across the country are entitled to hear.
Finally, I will turn to the wider arguments sometimes made about energy security and domestic production. Some, like the hon. Member for Boston and Skegness, who spent his speech denying the climate science, suggest that fracking for shale gas would strengthen our energy independence or reduce consumer bills. However, oil and gas are traded on the international markets, as has been mentioned by a number of hon. Members, and increasing domestic production would not shield consumers from global price volatility.
Richard Tice
I just need to clarify for the hon. Member for Newton Abbot (Martin Wrigley) that when I referred to nodding donkeys, I specifically said oil wells. I hope that helps him.
With regard to the price of gas, can the Minister explain why the wholesale price of gas in the United States is 80% cheaper than the wholesale price in the United Kingdom? That completely undermines what he has just said. The Minister has inadvertently misled the House, Madam Deputy Speaker.
Martin McCluskey
Absolutely not. As I said a moment ago, we are not the United States; we are not Pennsylvania or Texas. It is a different energy market. There is nothing to suggest that the extraction of shale gas in this country would reduce the cost of energy, just as there is no evidence to suggest that extracting more oil and gas from the North sea would reduce the cost of energy, if that is the point the hon. Gentleman was making.
Douglas Lumsden
Does the Minister agree that if we produce our own oil and gas, that gives the Exchequer more money? If the Government want then to use that to take money off people’s bills, that is up to them.
Martin McCluskey
That is a different argument to the one the hon. Member for Boston and Skegness was making. What is clear is that it will not directly reduce the cost of energy in this country.
Recent years have shown that the answer is not to double down on fossil fuel production, but to reduce our dependence on those markets over time through clean, home-grown energy, as my hon. Friend the Member for Alloa and Grangemouth (Brian Leishman) set out in his speech. That will ensure that our oil and gas workers and supply chains benefit from the clean energy transition and that we support prosperity, jobs, economic growth, communities and energy security. This Government’s approach is both clear and pragmatic: ending new licences and introducing transitional energy certificates, maintaining the effective moratorium and accelerating the transition to clean, home-grown energy that improves resilience, supports jobs, reduces emissions and gives consumers greater protections from global price shocks.
The House should be in no doubt. Our position is evidence based, and it is clear: we will not issue new onshore licences in England, and we will maintain the effective moratorium on fracking for shale gas, because the concerns that led to it have not been resolved. Together, these measures will ensure that fracking for shale gas is not taking place in England. We will continue to ensure that conventional oil and gas activities are properly distinguished, properly regulated and properly scrutinised. That is the responsible course of action for communities, for consumers and for our climate commitments, and for the country’s long-term energy security.
Saudi East-West Oil Pipeline
Martin McCluskey Excerpts(5 days, 23 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Tim Farron (Westmorland and Lonsdale) (LD)
(Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero if she will make a statement on the implications of the closure of the Saudi east-west oil pipeline for UK energy security, fuel prices and global oil supply, and on the steps the Government are taking in response.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Martin McCluskey)
First, the United Kingdom strongly condemns the Houthis’ decision to resume conflict in Yemen and their recent attacks on Saudi Arabia, including the targeting of civilian and energy infrastructure. We offer our condolences to those injured and affected and stand with Saudi Arabia, the internationally recognised Government of Yemen and our partners in the region.
My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary has spoken with his Saudi counterpart, as has the national security adviser. We are closely monitoring the situation as part of our overall response to the situation in the middle east and disruption to the strait of Hormuz. Saudi authorities confirmed over the weekend that the east-west oil pipeline is temporarily closed following an attack on 11 September. The Saudi Government have not yet provided further information on the duration of the closure.
The pipeline enables Saudi crude oil to bypass the strait of Hormuz. Since the start of the middle east conflict, it has been used to reroute a significant share of exports. This temporary pause comes at a time of rising prices, and I know that many in this House and the public will be worried about the potential impacts. Fuel supplies to the UK have remained resilient since the start of the conflict. As people across the country would expect, the Government will mitigate where possible the potential impacts on our economy and our domestic security. We will continue to work closely with industry and the devolved Governments on detailed contingency planning for all events. We are working tirelessly with our international partners to find a permanent solution to the conflict and to minimise the knock-on impact on households. We will keep looking at what more we can do to insulate families from the effect of rising energy bills.
Tim Farron
I thank the Minister for his reply. Saudi’s closure of the 1,200 km east-west pipeline is a massive blow. The pipeline allowed Saudi Arabia to export millions of barrels of crude a day, and it has been the key alternative route to the strait of Hormuz since Donald Trump’s war led to its regular closure. The closure has predictably led to further increases in already high oil prices, which stand at $106 a barrel just today. We have reports that Saudi Arabia could exhaust crude available for export within days unless that pipeline resumes operation. The consequences are huge for my constituents and everybody else’s. We are already paying through the nose for fuel as a result of the war in Iran, and they are now being hit by even higher prices because of this closure. Rural communities relying on heating oil are especially vulnerable to shortages and price hikes. The impact on farmers and food production could do further damage to the UK’s food security. The tragic reality is that while the UK will struggle if the pipeline is not reopened, this could mean starvation for millions on the African continent.
The latest crisis puts a further spotlight on our failure as a country to be energy secure. Even those few people who are not yet convinced that climate change is real and needs tackling surely now understand that energy security really matters. Neither Houthi rebels nor Putin nor Iran nor Trump can turn off our waves, wind, sunshine or nuclear industry. It is time for siren voices to stop whining about wokery and start focusing on security. So I ask the Minister, what oil reserves does the United Kingdom have? Will the Government accelerate domestic energy generation? Will they implement a 10p temporary fuel duty cut, and cuts in bus and rail fares, so that people in Cumbria and across the country are not plunged into further hardship as a result of this crisis? What plans does the Minister have to accelerate the warm homes plan, which, sadly, has insulated only 0.3% of the expected homes this year—especially in communities such as mine, where a quarter of the housing stock was built before 1900 and is in need of more bespoke solutions? What will he do to introduce an energy price cap for heating oil, and what extra work is he doing with our allies in the middle east and NATO to ensure that the pipeline reopens as soon as possible?
Martin McCluskey
I will endeavour to answer all the hon. Gentleman’s questions, but if there are any that I do not answer, I will follow up on them in writing.
Let me begin with the discussions that the Government have been having with the Saudi authorities. The Foreign Secretary spoke to the Saudi Foreign Minister on Sunday, and we will keep talking to the Saudi Arabian authorities to understand exactly what the impact of this might be and what the Saudi Arabian Government’s plans are. As the hon. Gentleman will know, we have a diverse and resilient supply of energy in this country, and we continue to stand by that. We are not, at this moment, concerned about the impact on supply for the UK.
The hon. Gentleman asked about heating oil. I think he will know, because we have had conversations about this, that the Government have already provided £53 million for local authorities to assist the people who were particularly hard hit in March, when the cost of heating oil increased significantly. As we go into autumn and the winter, we will, of course, look at what further support might be necessary, but in some local authority areas, the money is not yet anywhere near exhausted, and I encourage local authorities to use the funding that is available to them to support those using heating oil.
The hon. Gentleman made an important point about our reliance on foreign sources of oil and gas. Opposition Members fail to grasp the fact—although they used to grasp it when they were in government—that we need to move away as quickly as possible from the rollercoaster of fossil fuels, and to produce energy in this country, so that we can control the security and the supply.
The hon. Gentleman will know that we have committed £15 billion to the warm homes plan, and have been pushing for more of that funding to reach communities. We are already delivering that through the warm homes local grant and the warm homes social housing fund, and in the coming weeks we will introducing more schemes, enabling people throughout the country to take advantage of that plan.
Joe Morris (Hexham) (Lab)
May I echo the comments of the hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Tim Farron) about heating oil, and express my concern for rural communities in my constituency? Does this not demonstrate the urgency of—as the Minister said—moving away from unstable oil from unstable parts of the world, and the need to double down on domestic production of renewables, not just to generate energy, but to increase our renewables production capacity? Will the Minister join me on a visit to Humshaugh Net Zero to see community energy projects in my constituency that already have widespread public support and are doing more to generate energy in Northumberland?
Martin McCluskey
I should be happy to join my hon. Friend on a visit to his constituency in the future. He is right to say that we need to double down on clean power. We need to ensure that we have our own renewable sources of energy, and can control both the price and the supply. This event has shown us once again why that is the right course to pursue for the country’s energy security and for our national security.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
I call the shadow Secretary of State.
Andrew Bowie (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine) (Con)
The ongoing events in the middle east have rightly brought the state of Britain’s energy security back to the forefront. We are witnessing growing geopolitical instability, and it is having, and will continue to have, a direct impact on our energy security, supplies and, of course, bills. The attack on the Saudi east-west pipeline will exacerbate this; 4% of global oil supply flows through that pipeline, which is not insignificant.
Saudi Arabia is a key strategic friend and ally of this country. Our relationship is integral to the security of the region and our national interest. What discussions has the Minister, or the Secretary of State for Energy and Net Zero, had with their Saudi counterparts about security of supply, and have the UK Government offered any support in that regard? We do not know when the pipeline will once again be operational, and as we have already heard, Saudi oil stocks for export could be depleted within days. With the safety of navigation through the strait of Hormuz remaining uncertain, the continued squeeze on energy supplies will only become tighter. Brent crude reached $106 a barrel this morning, and that increase shows no sign of slowing.
It is exactly because of this situation that I cannot understand the Government’s actions. Ironically, today should have been the day on which the Government announced that they were finally going to approve the Jackdaw gasfield, but they bottled it and put it on ice, because they are too scared of Zack Polanski and the Green party in the Holborn and St Pancras by-election. We are talking today about national security, and the Government are putting party before country. Great Britain has become increasingly and dangerously over-reliant on supplies of oil from overseas. We could be reducing some of that reliance right now by drilling and making use of our own resources, be it oil from Rosebank or gas from Jackdaw.
This is a moment of great geopolitical uncertainty. It is a moment when all countries around the world are seeking to ensure and shore up their energy supplies. No other Government of any other nation would make such a brazenly craven decision to put chasing votes in a by-election ahead of their duty to defend their national and energy security. Given the seriousness of this moment—given the threats to our energy and, indeed, to our national security—will the Government change course, and change their position on the North sea?
Martin McCluskey
Both the Foreign Secretary and the National Security Adviser have spoken to the Saudi Foreign Minister. The UK Government and the Government in Saudi Arabia will continue to engage on this issue, and officials across Government are collaborating on it. As for Jackdaw and Rosebank, the hon. Member would not expect me to comment on a quasi-judicial process. He stands at that Dispatch Box and throws the responsibility for this to the Government. We will make a decision on those consents in due course, but we are in this mess because the last Government did not conduct the process appropriately in the first instance, and we were then subject to a judicial review. We will not rush this process; we will do things properly in order to ensure the best outcome for people across the country, including workers in the North sea. The hon. Gentleman knows that oil and gas will be part of our energy mix for years to come. I have said this to him before from the Dispatch Box, and I will say it again: stop talking down our North sea oil and gas industry.
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
We live in an interconnected world, and the events in Saudi Arabia have a direct impact on my constituents in Harlow, who are concerned about the rising price of their energy bills. What is the Minister doing to ensure that we are not reliant on international fossil fuels? We have to accept that green energy is part of the solution. May I also ask the Minister to do as much as much as he can to help residents in my constituency of Harlow to bring their bills down?
Martin McCluskey
I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for his continued advocacy for his constituents in Harlow. He will know that we have a clean power mission, and the purpose of that mission is to ensure that we have renewable sources of generation, so that we control the supply and the price of energy. Obviously, we are looking into what support might be on offer to my hon. Friend’s constituents to help them with their energy bills over the winter, but the Prime Minister, in his first week, announced the removal of VAT from electricity bills from October. That, I think, will be welcome to my hon. Friend’s constituents, along with the £150 reduction in energy costs that was announced in the last Budget.
Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con)
The hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Tim Farron) is a lovely man, but I just cannot follow his logic. He says that the solution is to pursue green energy, which is fair enough in the long term, and in the same breath—in the very next sentence—he asks what oil reserves we have. Surely it is not a zero sum game. It will be decades before we rely entirely on green energy. I am not asking the Minister to comment on Jackdaw and Rosebank and all that, but does he accept that we must pursue oil drilling in the North sea to become self-reliant, and to get ourselves out of this crisis?
Martin McCluskey
I thank the Father of the House for his question. We are still extracting oil and gas from the North sea. We have a supply coming from the North sea every day. We have that energy mix, and oil and gas will continue to play a part in our energy mix for years to come. On that point and on the mix, I agree with the Father of the House, but we cannot lose sight of the fact that the North sea is a declining basin and has been for a very long time. [Interruption.] The hon. Member for West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine (Andrew Bowie) is chuntering from a sedentary position. It was under his Government that we saw the number of people working in the North sea decline. We know it is a declining basin, and that we have to prepare for the transition. That is what any responsible Government would do, and that is why we are investing so much in renewables across the country.
Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)
Given the ongoing risk to our energy security illustrated by this latest incident, should the Government prioritise EN-6 sites, such as Oldbury in my constituency, supplying the grid, rather than private wire arrangements that do not support local industry?
Martin McCluskey
The choice of sites is a national decision, involving the National Energy System Operator and Ofgem, in which we have a limited role. It is important that we have a diverse energy mix across the country, including renewables, so that we in this country have the most secure and resilient supply of energy.
Douglas Lumsden (Aberdeen South) (Con)
The parties that are talking down the North sea oil and gas workers are the Labour Government here and the SNP Government in Holyrood. The Conservative party is standing up for the North sea oil and gas workers. When I quizzed the Prime Minister on approving Jackdaw and Rosebank, he said that he would “take a pragmatic approach”, and that we would see that in action soon, but we now hear that there are further delays because the Labour party wants to save face in a central London by-election. At a time when our energy security is at risk, will the Government put the national interest above the interests of the Labour party and approve Jackdaw and Rosebank as a matter of urgency?
Martin McCluskey
Let me take that in two parts. First, this is obviously a decision that has to be taken carefully. The Secretary of State has to a make an assessment and a judgment. The hon. Member will know that the evidence has to come to the Secretary of State for her to make that judgment, and that is what she will do in due course. He will also know, as I said in response to an earlier question, that the North sea basin is a declining basin. We have to prepare for the transition. We are still extracting oil and gas from the North sea, and that will continue for decades to come.
Adam Dance (Yeovil) (LD)
Residents in rural parts of Yeovil continue to raise concerns with me about the rising cost of domestic heating oil due to conflicts abroad. Prices have sometimes hit as much as £1.10 a litre. As the nights draw in and winter comes around, what steps will the Government take to develop a price cap for heating oil? Just giving money to local authorities is not good enough; it does not support everyone.
Martin McCluskey
The hon. Gentleman will, I am sure, have seen the Competition and Markets Authority report on heating oil, published before the recess, and its recommendations for the actions we should take. We are studying the recommendations and will have a Government response to them in due course. The CMA raised concerns, though, about the impact of a potential price cap. This market does not operate in the same way as the traditional gas and electricity market. We would need to carefully consider the perverse impacts that might result from a straightforward price cap. There are other recommendations in the CMA report that we are, as I said, looking at and closely studying to make sure that people who have been affected by heating oil price increases are protected. The previous Prime Minister was very clear that the heating oil market was not working as it should, and I agree. I look forward to publishing the Government response soon.
Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)
As the Minister seems to have run out of supportive Back Benchers, I shall endeavour to ask him a helpful and easy question. Accepting that it will be some years, to put it mildly, before we can eliminate our dependency on oil and gas, does he accept in principle that we are more secure if we exploit our own domestic oil and gas resources, rather than relying on imports from the middle east, which can so easily be blocked?
Martin McCluskey
As I said in response to previous questions, we are exploiting the resources in the North sea; we are extracting oil and gas from it. We will make a decision on Rosebank and Jackdaw in due course, and we have a robust energy mix in this country. The right hon. Gentleman made the point himself about reliance on overseas sources of energy. We would still require production beyond oil and gas. That is why we are investing in renewables, be it wind or solar, all of which are helping to protect our energy security and our national security.
Richard Tice (Boston and Skegness) (Reform)
We are so lucky in this great country that we have enjoyed decades-worth of oil and gas—energy treasure—but we are so unlucky that we have an utterly clueless bunch of socialists not using this energy treasure. Will the Minister and the Government finally realise that the way to reduce our exposure to overseas fossil fuels is to use our own offshore, onshore and around the Falkland Islands? Let’s get some growth, let’s get some jobs and let’s grow the United Kingdom.
Martin McCluskey
I always enjoy it when Reform use “socialist” like it is a bad word and not a badge of honour. As I have said in response to previous questions, we are using the resources from the North sea and extracting oil and gas on a daily basis. That is part of our energy mix and will be for years to come.
Mr Andrew Snowden (Fylde) (Con)
The Minister seems confused about why the word socialism would be used in a negative context. It has something to do with the fact that every country that socialism touches it destroys, and we have a prime example here. Perhaps the Minister will take his head out of the sand and look at my hon. Friend the Member for Aberdeen South (Douglas Lumsden), who is sat on the Conservative Benches off the back of a stunning by-election win that was a referendum on the North sea oil and gas issue. That shows the complete lack of confidence the industry has in the SNP in Scotland and in Labour here. It is time to drill, baby, drill.
Martin McCluskey
I was not expecting to have an ideological debate on a Tuesday afternoon. I have said, and I repeat again, that we are using the resources from North sea oil and gas and we will continue to use them for decades to come. But if the Conservative party wants to put all its eggs in one basket and reject the renewables generation that is coming from this country right now, that is a road to nowhere. This is about energy security and national security.
Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)
Residents in my constituency, such as my constituent Rhys, have contacted me worried about the impact of this situation on their bills. He shopped around, has a renewable-only tariff, insulated his home and bought an electric car. Although he welcomes the VAT cut to electricity, he says that the recently announced increase in the cap and the one he is now expecting in January will more than wipe it out. He says that throwing money at consumers does not deal with the huge profits or change supplier behaviour. Will the Minister accelerate plans to fully and quickly decouple electricity prices from the wholesale price of gas?
Martin McCluskey
I thank the hon. Lady for her question. We took VAT off electricity bills from October and we took £150 out of costs last year. I encourage her and any of her constituents who are struggling with their energy bill to also make sure they are looking at the warm home discount, which is a further £150 off energy bills. We are looking at what more we can do to provide support through autumn and winter. We have already taken steps to start to decouple the price of energy from gas, as part of the previous Administration, and we will continue to look at what more we can do in that area.
Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)
The Houthis are not going away and it is likely that the crisis will get worse rather than better. On 16 March, I asked the current middle east Minister, the hon. Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty), who was previously in a different role in the Foreign Office, what UK naval assets could be, or were being, deployed to the region, given that it was pretty predictable that at some point Tehran would put pressure on the Houthis to assist it in its reign of terror in the region. I ask again: what naval and other military assets are being put in the region so that we can safeguard British, partner, allied and NATO shipping and ensure that the crisis is minimised as much as possible? Finally, three of our Five Eyes partners have proscribed the Houthis as a terrorist organisation. I do not expect the Minister to declare a proscription on the Floor of the House, but are the Government at least keeping that under review?
Martin McCluskey
I said at the outset that we stand firmly with our friends and allies in Saudi Arabia and the internationally recognised Government of Yemen. I will not be drawn on questions of operational military activity, but we are already providing air defence support to Saudi Arabia through the defence partnership. We have a long and proud history of supporting the defence of our partners and allies. On the question of proscription, I commit to discussing that with Foreign Office officials and writing to the right hon. Gentleman.
Ann Davies (Caerfyrddin) (PC)
Diolch, Madam Dirprwy Lefarydd. Rural communities in Wales are being hit hard at the pumps. While the average price of unleaded petrol across Wales is just over 162p per litre, the very cheapest in Caerfyrddin is 165.9p—166p per litre—with most forecourts charging more. Rural households do not have a choice but to drive, yet they are paying a premium simply because of where they live. The Government must surely step up and support those communities. Will the Minister extend the rural fuel duty relief scheme to Wales to support households in rural areas?
Martin McCluskey
We have put in place fuel finder, which I am sure the hon. Lady is aware of, to provide transparency in fuel prices and ensure that people are able to shop around for the cheapest fuel in their area. It is our belief that that will help to drive down the cost of fuel. I also point to some of the other support we have offered to rural households. There is support in place for heating oil, which I am sure many of the hon. Lady’s constituents have already taken advantage of. On home heating, to allow people to decarbonise and move away from fossil fuel boilers, we have extended the boiler upgrade scheme in England and Wales, adding an additional £1,500—that is a £9,000 grant for those who want to move to a heat pump.
Joe Robertson (Isle of Wight East) (Con)
The Saudi closure of the east-west oil pipeline and the continuing disruption in the strait of Hormuz demonstrate how important it is that the UK Government issue new licences to drill in the North sea—in our own British oil and gas reserves—in order to provide national security and job security, and, most importantly, to reduce energy bills for hard-working families. Surely the Minister can understand that.
Martin McCluskey
More extraction of oil and gas from the North sea will not reduce prices for consumers across the country, and it will keep us hooked on volatile fossil fuels. That is why we are moving to decarbonise our system with more renewables, more solar and more wind. As I have said in response to other Opposition Members, we will continue to have oil and gas as part of our energy mix for decades to come.
Richard Foord (Honiton and Sidmouth) (LD)
The National Security Adviser, Jonathan Powell, has said that Europe will experience real hardship this winter. We have repeatedly seen the UK exposed to energy shocks linked to volatile fossil fuel prices set on international markets: Russia and Ukraine, the strait of Hormuz, Bab al-Mandeb and now the Saudi east-west oil pipeline. Will the UK step up investment in clean, domestic renewable energy production, as well as in the grid to distribute it?
Martin McCluskey
We have already had about £100 billion of investment into renewable energy in the UK since 2024. That is why it is so important; it is one of the fastest-growing sectors of our economy. The hon. Gentleman is right that we need to continue with that investment to ensure that we move away from foreign sources of energy. The comments from the National Security Adviser are stark, and we in this House will stand with Ukraine now and through the winter.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Minister for his answers. The recent hostile attack by the Iranian-backed Houthis on critical Saudi pipeline infrastructure represents a deeply concerning escalation that threatens not only regional stability but global energy policy—it is as serious as that. Will the Minister outline what specific steps the Government are taking with our international partners to bolster the maritime infrastructure of our allies in the Gulf, and say when countermeasures to destroy Iranian-backed Houthi terrorists and murderers will take place? The only thing that they understand is a strong response to stop state-sponsored aggression.
Martin McCluskey
The hon. Gentleman will know that our priority is having free flow through the strait of Hormuz, and that is what we have been working on with our allies and partners globally. We will continue to do that to try to alleviate the situation. As I said in response to an earlier question, we are providing air defence support to the Saudi Government in the current situation. The hon. Gentleman would not expect me to comment on detailed operational military issues, but he can be reassured that we are providing air defence support and that we will continue our discussions with the Saudi Government.
Artificial Intelligence: Energy Systems
Martin McCluskey Excerpts(1 week, 5 days ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Martin McCluskey)
I am tabling this statement to inform Members of the publication of the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero’s AI-enabled clean energy system vision.
Artificial intelligence has the capacity to transform jobs, businesses and industries, drive productivity and boost long-term economic growth, including delivering a more affordable, reliable and responsive energy system for consumers.
In the energy system, artificial intelligence technologies can make more efficient use of assets, meaning we need to build less at lower cost while improving the quality of service for consumers. Put simply, better forecasting, planning and operation reduce waste and avoid precautionary overbuild, putting downward pressure on system costs and, ultimately, household bills and emissions. For consumers, this means a system that is not only lower cost, but more predictable, more responsive to demand, and better able to integrate technologies such as electric vehicles, heat pumps and flexible tariffs.
With world-leading deployment of renewable generation, strong scientific and innovation capabilities, deep capital markets and a skilled energy workforce, the UK is well placed to lead the next phase of energy system transformation. Many countries around the world have energy systems facing similar challenges. UK-based companies solving these with AI could export their products to markets around the world.
AI is already being adopted across the energy system, and this will continue with or without Government action. But as with previous technologies, adoption may be uneven, slowed by structural challenges, or pose new risks to the energy system and the consumer.
To this end, Government propose setting three high-level principles to guide AI deployment in the energy system—that it should:
Lower bills for households and businesses.
Increase the efficiency of the system and support decarbonisation.
Ensure energy security.
Government’s role is not to determine which AI models or tools should be used in particular functions, but to set clear public expectations, shaping the conditions for adoption. Government’s role is also to ensure that deployment by market actors is facilitated where it delivers system value and constrained where risks are unacceptable so that AI deployment is safe, ethical and aligned with societal expectations.
This document sets out early-stage thinking on how AI could transform the energy system over time, using two complementary lenses. First, it explores how existing and near-term applications could scale and connect across networks, markets, assets and end use—a plausible evolution in which AI becomes more embedded while strategic intent, governance and accountability remain firmly human-defined. Secondly, it uses a deliberately stretching “transformational” scenario to test what might change if AI autonomy and system integration advance rapidly, and what that would imply for control, accountability and governance in a safety-critical system.
This vision is intended as an initial articulation of opportunities and risks rather than a definitive assessment, and its core purpose is to test our framing and emerging positions with industry and other stakeholders. Following publication, we plan to deepen engagement and continue building the evidence base, including in response to the external review led by the Government’s AI and clean energy champion, which is being published at the same time and makes recommendations on rapid, safe and effective deployment pathways in electricity networks.
This engagement and evidence will inform prioritisation decisions on where and how Government should act to support adoption and manage risk, culminating in the UK’s upcoming AI for clean energy strategy.
[HCWS320]
Planning Application: Botley West Solar Farm
Martin McCluskey Excerpts(2 weeks, 4 days ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Martin McCluskey)
This statement concerns an application for development consent made under the Planning Act 2008 by Photovolt Development Partners on behalf of SolarFive Ltd for the construction and operation of a solar farm on land in the West Oxfordshire, Cherwell and Vale of White Horse districts.
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 a new deadline is set using the power under section 107(3) of the Act. 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 Botley West solar farm application was 10 September 2026.
I have decided to allow an extension and set a new deadline of 10 November 2026 for deciding this application. This is to enable my Department and other interested parties to consider further information received from the applicant.
The decision to set the new deadline for this application is without prejudice to the decision on whether to grant or refuse development consent.
[HCWS304]
Oral Answers to Questions
Martin McCluskey Excerpts(2 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
John Milne (Horsham) (LD)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Martin McCluskey)
The hon. Gentleman will know that tackling the cost of living is this Government’s priority. We have already taken action at the Budget, and we have also expanded the warm home discount to nearly 6 million households. We are working closely with other Departments on our kickstarter programme to test how public sector data could be better joined up to target support at those who need it most.
John Milne
The Liberal Democrat essential energy plan is an immediate way to address electricity affordability, but in the long term the solution must lie in more renewables, as I think the Secretary of State agrees. However, the Government’s failure to make the case effectively is now becoming a serious problem in itself. Does the Minister accept that promising to cut energy bills by £300 was a mistake, when the price was bound to be affected by many other factors, and does he also accept that another manifesto pledge, Great British Energy, is currently just a logo in search of a purpose?
Martin McCluskey
I am disappointed at the hon. Gentleman’s statement. We are making the case strongly and our pledge to reduce energy bills still stands. He will know that renewables are the quickest way to reduce our energy bills. He will also know that the warm home discount is providing significant support to people in his constituency right now. Just this year, the number of people in his constituency receiving the warm home discount has more than doubled to over 5,000.
Jonathan Davies (Mid Derbyshire) (Lab)
The warm home discount is a great initiative to help households cut their bills, but one thing we could expand to do more in this space is our heat network programme, and we may be getting a heat network in Derby. However, there is often a lack of awareness, particularly in some public sector organisations and businesses, of the opportunities that heat networks offer. It may be that winding down the public sector decarbonisation scheme is not enabling as many as we would like to sign up. Could I ask the Minister to look at our engagement with business, the public sector and housing providers to make sure that as many people as possible can benefit from heat networks?
Martin McCluskey
My hon. Friend makes a really important point. If we are to reach our clean power targets, we need heat networks on the system to be providing significant levels of clean heat. He will know that the green heat network fund is already providing significant support across the country, and we will of course look at what more we can do to support heat networks over the coming years.
Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Martin McCluskey)
I know the recent rise in energy bills will be very concerning for families across the country. At the last Budget, we took an average of £150 off energy bills, which is now factored into our bills for years to come, and we have also expanded the warm home discount.
Rachael Maskell
I thank the Minister for his answer. Preparedness for the sharp increase in domestic energy costs is vital, with 13.5 million homes expected to be paying more than 10% of their household’s spending on energy this winter and 5.5 million homes more than 20%, leaving families at breaking point. What further steps is he intending to make to expand the warm home discount scheme, to take levies off electricity bills to cut costs, and to expand social tariffs?
Martin McCluskey
We are preparing for every contingency and looking at the support that may be required in the autumn and winter. The significant increase in the warm home discount has obviously benefited households right across the country, not least in my hon. Friend’s constituency. The number receiving the warm home discount in York Central has increased from nearly 2,500 to over 8,000, to a value of £1.2 million in support offered to her constituents.
Carla Lockhart (Upper Bann) (DUP)
Last year, a Government-funded agency approved more than £50 million of taxpayers’ money for solar geoengineering projects, one of which endeavours to dim the sun. At a time when families are struggling with energy costs and domestic production is being constrained, why are Ministers backing speculative climate manipulation, instead of fully using North sea oil and gas to deliver affordable, stronger and more secure energy, and lower bills?
Martin McCluskey
This is nonsense. That was set up by an arm’s length organisation set up by the previous Government. It is not something that the Government are funding. In so far as that refers to more affordable energy, we are obviously working at pace to make sure energy is affordable right across the United Kingdom, including whatever support we can offer in Northern Ireland.
Joe Morris (Hexham) (Lab)
Mr Alex Barros-Curtis (Cardiff West) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Martin McCluskey)
I commend my hon. Friend and his constituents for their enthusiasm for the warm homes plan. They can already access grants through the warm homes plan, and they will soon be able to receive loans.
Mr Gregory Campbell (East Londonderry) (DUP)
Yuan Yang (Earley and Woodley) (Lab)
Putin’s war in Ukraine and Trump’s war in Iran have shown us the need to make Britain more resilient against global energy shocks. Can my hon. Friend set out what the Government are doing to ensure that domestic electricity prices are decoupled from global gas prices, so that my constituents can get the best out of cheap, green, local renewables?
Martin McCluskey
I pay tribute to the work my hon. Friend is doing for her constituents on this issue. The most effective way to decouple our electricity prices from gas is to expand our renewable generation. Every wind turbine we turn on and every solar panel that we deploy helps to push gas off as the price-setter. We will continue to work in this way.
Harriet Cross (Gordon and Buchan) (Con)
Just this year, Norway has opened up a licensing round for 70 new oil and gas blocks. It is reopening three old gas fields and has permitted development plans for three new fields. Meanwhile, this Government are still banning licences, taxing the industry out of business and not permitting Rosebank and Jackdaw. Why does the Secretary of State think he is right and our Norwegian friends are wrong?
Torcuil Crichton (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (Lab)
On heating oil, the Scottish National party Government boasted that they would add £5.4 million to the £4.6 million the UK Government gave to domestic consumers. However, there is scant evidence that that is reaching my constituents in the Western Isles, which have the highest fuel poverty figures in the country. Will the Minister join me in encouraging constituents to apply for support? Will he ask the Scottish Government to broaden the criteria and Advice Direct Scotland to get that money out the door, so that people are not left high and dry?
Martin McCluskey
My hon. Friend is right that more people need to claim the support that is on offer, and I encourage them to do that in his constituency and across Scotland. My understanding is that just over £1 million of the £10 million in the fund has been distributed.
Perran Moon (Camborne and Redruth) (Lab)
South Crofty in my Camborne, Redruth and Hayle constituency is approaching the historic restoration of Cornish tin mining, but high energy costs risk the UK losing control of the supply chain in domestic processing and refining. If the Government are serious about building up a sovereign critical minerals supply chain, will the Minister meet me to discuss extending BICS and the industrial supercharger scheme to critical minerals?
Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)
The Government have worked with Ofgem to bring forward low or no standing charge schemes, which are supposedly open for trial. I cannot find them and neither can my residents. The access to those schemes is so small, so what are the Government doing to make them available to more people now?
Martin McCluskey
I will share details of that with the hon. Lady. We are also undertaking the cost allocation review, which deals with those issues.
Sonia Kumar (Dudley) (Lab)
The UK’s green economy is worth more than £100 billion a year, and nearly half a trillion pounds in investment is in the pipeline. What steps is the Minister taking to ensure that the contracts that his Department provides prioritise British firms and British jobs, so that we can prove our national capabilities and secure our energy?
Non-domestic Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards
Martin McCluskey Excerpts(3 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Martin McCluskey)
I am pleased to provide an update on the Government’s approach to strengthening minimum energy efficiency standards in the non domestic private rented sector, following our previous consultations and extensive recent engagement with industry, investors, local authorities and other stakeholders.
The Government consulted in 2019 and 2021 on proposals to raise non-domestic PRS MEES to EPC B, reflecting the role of energy efficiency in cutting bills, strengthening energy security and supporting the transition to net zero. Since then, we have continued to engage closely with stakeholders on how these proposals would work in practice across a diverse commercial building stock.
Listening carefully to that feedback, the Government have now confirmed their intention to implement a revised and proportionate approach that maintains ambition where it delivers the greatest benefits, while providing greater flexibility for smaller businesses and landlords.
In practice, this means that from 2031 it is proposed that private rented non-domestic buildings over 1,000 square metres in England and Wales will be required to meet a higher energy efficiency standard of EPC B, where cost-effective. This offers a more targeted approach compared with the original proposal, which would have applied across the entire non-domestic building stock. Initial modelling suggests that raising the standard for the largest premises could save those tenants £360 million per year on their energy costs by 2031.
The intention is for buildings below 1,000 square metres to continue to be subject to the current EPC E minimum standard.
The previously consulted interim EPC C milestone for 2027 will not be taken forward, giving landlords and tenants more time to plan investment and retrofit works in a way that suits their buildings and lease structures.
Existing flexibility mechanisms, including the seven-year payback test and exemptions, will remain in place, ensuring that only improvements that are practical, affordable and cost-effective will be required.
The changes to raise MEES to EPC B for larger buildings will take effect following the successful passage of secondary legislation through Parliament.
This targeted approach focuses action where it delivers the greatest benefits, helping tenants in the largest buildings to save energy and reduce bills, protecting them from future energy shocks. While continuing to improve the poorest performing buildings through the existing EPC E standard, we are giving additional flexibility to our SMEs and high streets to upgrade their buildings over time, with no set deadline for going beyond this level. With a fair and proportionate timetable, the policy supports business investment, reduces exposure to volatile energy prices and strengthens UK energy security.
We will publish the Government’s consultation response in due course, setting out further detail on the policy and implementation of the threshold, and aim to introduce legislation and supporting guidance at the earliest opportunity.
We will continue to work closely with industry and other stakeholders to ensure that the pathway to EPC B is fair, clear and deliverable.
We look forward to continuing the dialogue with industry as we move into the next phase of delivery.
[HCWS126]
Energy Market: Consumer Protection
Martin McCluskey Excerpts(3 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Martin McCluskey)
We are acting today to restore consumer confidence in the energy sector and ensure that failures in Government insulation schemes can never happen again.
The 2025 National Audit Office report into the failures of the ECO scheme gave a damning account of the failures of the ECO4 and GBIS schemes that we inherited from the previous Government: thousands of faulty installations, terrible damage to peoples’ properties, and blameless families who had signed up to a Government scheme and were forced to live in damp and sometimes unsafe conditions as a consequence.
I promised, when I first updated the House on our response, that it would never happen again.
As we embark on the Government’s warm homes plan—the biggest programme of home upgrades in British history—we must ensure that people have confidence when retrofitting and upgrading their homes.
Homeowners and landlords need to trust that upgrading their buildings will deliver the right results and not leave them facing further issues down the line. Those faulty installations did not just damage people’s properties, they eroded trust and confidence in the entire market. In October, we set out three principles for reform of consumer protection that have guided our proposals:
Work should be right first time. Despite the unacceptable failures uncovered in ECO4 and GBIS, in most cases work on Government schemes is safe and carried out to a high standard. Consumers must be able to trust that work will be done right the first time in all but the rarest circumstances.
Simplicity. People should not be expected to navigate a variety of organisations when they want to make changes to improve their homes. The installation process for low-carbon heating and energy-efficient home upgrades will be clear and straightforward.
Swift remediation and a straightforward process for redress. In those rare cases where things do go wrong, there must be clear lines of accountability, so that consumers are guaranteed to get any problems fixed quickly
We are taking this chance to completely overhaul the consumer protection landscape and fundamentally reset a system that simply has not worked for people across the country.
Today we are launching a consultation on consumer protection, seeking views on how we can simplify the current fragmented landscape and establish a single, accessible, end-to-end consumer protection service for home upgrades, that means stronger central oversight, shifting the system towards prevention, and clearer lines of accountability across Government and industry.
This will have powers to enforce better service through contracts that hold installers and delivery partners to account, including bans from working on Government schemes if they do not meet high standards.
This will protect people in the future, but we must also support people who had faulty solid wall insulation fitted during ECO4 and GBIS. We are doing that in three ways.
First, at the end of last year we launched our “Find and Fix” programme to identify and offer a full house audit to the families who had external wall insulation installed under ECO4 and GBIS.
We have now contacted over 10,000 properties and arranged over 5,000 audits.
And we want to help all affected households to access an audit as quickly as possible. TrustMark will continue to contact households, and I would encourage everyone who hears from them to take up the offer of a free audit.
I have been clear that the families who have suffered from these poor installations should not be the ones to pick up the bill. It is the industry’s responsibility to put this right and help affected families.
Secondly, in cases where the installer that fitted the faulty installation is no longer trading and the guarantee is missing, fraudulent or cancelled, the National Energy Foundation will be contacting homeowners and arranging remediation of both internal and external wall insulation fitted under ECO4 and GBIS.
Eligible homes will be identified through audits, with remediation action in recipient homes taking place as quickly as they can make that happen.
Thirdly, in the rare instances where the cost of damage from faulty ECO4 and GBIS solid wall insulations exceeds the £20,000 limit covered by a valid guarantee, we are working with delivery partners on the right solutions.
I can announce today that the Installation Assurance Authority will now cover the cost of repairs up to £25,000 where these are within the terms of the original, still-valid IAA guarantee. We will continue to work on solutions for the remaining cases, and I hope that other guarantee providers will follow the IAA’s lead.
Families who were affected should first contact the installer who carried out the installation, and where the installer is no longer trading or unable to remedy damages, they can contact their guarantee provider to initiate a claim.
ECO4 and GBIS has some of the highest levels of non-compliance that Government have seen, but other issues have been brought to the Department’s attention. In particular, many households who had spray foam installed have found they have encountered problems when selling their home. I have held extensive talks with the spray foam industry to support homeowners that have struggled to sell or been targeted by rogue removal companies. Independent advice has been published online by the Property Care Association, and we will keep working with mortgage lenders to ensure they can be flexible when lending to those affected.
A range of major lenders are already on side and have confirmed that they will not take a blanket approach to houses with spray foam, including Nationwide, Lloyds, Santander and Barclays, and I am planning a follow-up roundtable with the sector later this summer.
Finally, ensuring a fair deal for consumers in the energy market remains a priority for the Government. Today we are also responding to our consultation on strengthening protections in the energy supply market, enhancing the powers of the Energy Ombudsman and making it easier for consumers to access support when they have a complaint about their retail supplier. We want to give the ombudsman stronger powers, including the ability to issue a penalty fee that will end up as compensation for consumers, to enforce decisions and hold suppliers to account.
Families will have clearer routes to pursue justice through the courts, and we are shortening the complaints process and making automatic referral to the ombudsman easier so that people are no longer stuck in limbo waiting for their case to be escalated.
If we want to change this country, restore faith in Government’s ability to improve lives and disrupt a status quo that is simply not good enough for so many people, then we need to learn from the mistakes of the past.
We need to rebuild confidence and take people with us, and we need to ensure that failures like those we saw on the ECO4 and GBIS schemes can never happen again.
This is our chance to build an energy sector that truly works for working people, and that is the message behind the measures I have set out today.
[HCWS121]
Plug-in Solar: Consultation
Martin McCluskey Excerpts(3 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Martin McCluskey)
Today I am announcing the publication of a consultation on proposals to enable the safe deployment of plug-in solar across the United Kingdom.
Plug-in solar brings the benefits of clean power directly to consumers across the country. Enabling more households than ever before to generate their own cheap, clean electricity from the sun could save households up to £110 per annum. Plug-in solar is already widely used by households across Europe, with Germany seeing around half a million new devices plugged in per year. However, existing regulatory frameworks were not designed with these technologies in mind. We are changing this, with safety at the forefront of our minds.
This consultation seeks views on proposed amendments to the Plugs and Sockets etc. (Safety) Regulations 1994 and a draft UK plug-in solar interim product specification, both of which will facilitate the introduction of plug-in solar products in a safe and proportionate way. The draft product specification has been drawn from established approaches in Germany, where plug-in solar is already widely deployed, demonstrating that these systems can be used safely when appropriate standards are in place, and adapted to ensure it reflects UK regulatory requirements, building practices and safety expectations.
The interim standard, together with the development of a long-term product standard, which we are developing in parallel, will ensure that plug-in solar is safely available and ensures a seamless transition while a full product standard is developed and fully consulted on.
We are seeking evidence on key issues including minimum product specification, consumer protection and market issues and implementation and timing. This will ensure that any regulatory changes are informed by a robust evidence base and reflect the views of industry, consumer groups, and other interested parties.
In the context of recent developments in Iran and wider energy pressures, we are making every effort to accelerate deployment of plug-in solar, ensuring that where it is safe and appropriate to do so products can reach the market and retail as quickly as possible.
The Government are committed to the development of a well-functioning and safe market. We will carry out targeted engagement and expert workshops while the consultation is running.
I am committed to making plug-in solar available within months, giving consumers a practical option to increase their energy independence, reduce their energy bills and benefit from this country’s vast clean power resources.
[HCWS118]
Clean Power by 2030
Martin McCluskey Excerpts(3 months, 1 week ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Energy Costs
Martin McCluskey Excerpts(3 months, 1 week ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Martin McCluskey)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms McVey. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Gorton and Denton (Hannah Spencer) for securing the debate, and I congratulate her on her first Westminster Hall debate and on giving hon. Members across the Chamber the opportunity to discuss a vital issue for all our constituents.
As I draw the debate to a close, I want to be very clear about this Government’s priorities. The increase in the price cap announced by Ofgem two weeks ago is not what any of us wanted, and it is caused by the war in Iran. Two days before the conflict began, the price cap fell by 7%—a reduction that is still built into the prices being paid today. As the Prime Minister has said, this is not our war, but we are now feeling the effects of it. That is why we are very clear that the strait of Hormuz must be reopened to traffic.
Richard Burgon
Is it not totally outrageous that energy giants will make billions in extra profits from Trump’s war on Iran while ordinary people are hit with higher costs? Does the Minister agree that we should introduce an emergency war profits tax to ensure that they cannot make a single extra penny in super-profits from this crisis? We can use that money to fund urgent cost of living support.
Martin McCluskey
My hon. Friend will know that decisions about tax are for the Chancellor. We already have the windfall tax on energy profits in place—a tax opposed by the SNP and the Conservative Opposition.
I will turn to the points raised by the hon. Member for Gorton and Denton and my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds East (Richard Burgon) in a moment. As I was saying, it is not our war, but we are now feeling the effects, and that is why we are very clear that the strait of Hormuz must be reopened to traffic. As Members across the Chamber would expect, we are continuing to monitor the situation. We are exploring all options for future support, but we are taking action now to deal with high prices.
Let us be clear why we are doing that: we know that the pressure of high energy costs is very real for many families across the country, as the hon. Member for Gorton and Denton described. Households continue to feel the burden of bills, particularly where incomes are tight, and there is little room in their budgets for unexpected costs. We are determined to return bills to the downward path they were on before the outbreak of the war. It is important to note that energy prices in 2025 were lower than they were in 2024. We delivered a 7% reduction in energy prices in February. They were on a downward trajectory before the outbreak of war in Iran. We are doing this to tackle fuel poverty and protect people from the rollercoaster of fossil fuel markets that has left too many families exposed to volatile energy prices for too long.
Susan Murray
It is good to hear the Government’s intention to reduce energy prices. The hon. Member for Gorton and Denton (Hannah Spencer) is right to call for more affordable energy. In France, electricity is about a third cheaper than it is here, with nuclear at the heart of the system. Does the Minister agree that ruling nuclear out or not progressing it quickly enough is wrong, and will he join me in calling for the assessment of Scotland’s nuclear potential to be published?
Martin McCluskey
I join the hon. Lady in those calls on nuclear energy, which is essential to our energy mix. She highlighted the example of France; one reason why its electricity cost is so low is that it carried on building nuclear through the ’50s, ’60s, ’70s and ’80s. Unlike this country, where we had a stop-start approach to nuclear energy, France has been able to keep costs low. It is disappointing that we have seen opposition to nuclear from the SNP, which will not allow it to be built in Scotland, and from the Green party, which has opposed it, including at Wylfa in north Wales, where we are creating a whole generation of new jobs around nuclear. More than 1,900 Scots move from Scotland to England each week to work on nuclear projects—people who could be working far closer to home if there was a new generation of nuclear energy in Scotland.
Turning back to the action the Government have already taken, in the autumn Budget we acted to reduce electricity costs, to the benefit of all households with a domestic electricity meter. We did that by scrapping the energy company obligation and moving 75% of the domestic costs of the renewables obligation to the Exchequer. By doing that, we have been able to provide immediate savings for households.
The average saving was around £117 within the price cap, but because it disproportionately fell on electricity—I know that the hon. Member for Inverness, Skye and West Ross-shire (Mr MacDonald) is interested in the cost of electricity, particularly in rural areas—the discount for rural areas and those on electricity was well over £300 within the price cap. As I said earlier, those changes are still factored into energy bills now; without that action, the July price cap would have been significantly higher.
We also announced the continuation of the warm home discount scheme until 2030-31. That will provide around 6 million eligible households with a £150 rebate on energy bills each winter; it is a significant extension of what was available under the previous Government, and it has reached far more people in the last year than it did in the past.
The main, structural reason why we find our energy bills so high is because of our exposure, in this country, to volatile international gas markets. The only answer to dealing with those high prices is to take back control of our energy through clean, home-grown power and homes that are cheaper to run. That approach is supported by our warm homes plan. The hon. Member for Gorton and Denton alluded to the need for more retrofitting and improvements to be made to housing, and that is what we are doing through the warm homes plan, which represents the biggest public investment in home upgrades in British history.
Tim Roca (Macclesfield) (Lab)
The Minister is making a powerful point about the investments that the Government are making in green and clean energy. In Macclesfield, families are suffering from high energy costs at the pumps or in making sure that their homes are warm when they need to be. Does he agree that tackling climate change, investing in clean energy and bringing down bills come together as a coherent argument, and that we should all be making the case for that?
Martin McCluskey
My hon. Friend is a champion for his constituents. He is making the argument not just for lower prices at the pump and lower costs of energy, but for doing that in a clean, green way. Those two things do go hand in hand; we can reduce energy and fuel prices while people can also make important decisions about clean energy in their own lives. That is exactly what the Government are doing.
As I was saying, the approach that we are taking is supported by our warm homes plan, which represents the biggest public investment in home upgrades in British history. It is backed by £15 billion and will help upgrade up to 5 million homes by 2030; that means real improvements to the homes people live in.
Households will benefit from solar panels, clean heat technologies and batteries, and improved insulation. Insulation is an essential part of what we are trying to do in the warm homes plan; it has always been part of Government schemes and will into the future. All that is to cut bills and improve comfort for homeowners, renters and others. It will mean a housing stock that is better prepared for the future and a country that is less vulnerable to energy price shocks.
Mr Angus MacDonald (Inverness, Skye and West Ross-shire) (LD)
We are waiting for the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero to come up with the results of the community benefit consultation. The highlands only got £9 million of community benefit last year, and Scotland as a whole got less than £30 million. There are tens of thousands of jobs in renewables in the highlands, but they are not for locals; they are imported teams. Very often, offshore firms are doing the construction. We sell 10 times more electricity than we produce. Effectively, there is nothing in it for the people of rural Scotland to produce electricity. Does the Minister agree that the community benefit conclusion from DESNZ is crucial?
Martin McCluskey
The hon. Member makes a powerful point. We will come forward with the response on community benefits soon. I point him towards what we have already announced regarding a trial of free wind power for communities close to generation, which will be coming later this year. His point about workforce is also really important. That is why I am chairing a workforce taskforce with the TUC to work through those points and make sure that we have good, home-grown jobs that are unionised and pay decent wages, and that local communities are feeling the benefit of that.
Mike Reader (Northampton South) (Lab)
The hon. Member for Gorton and Denton (Hannah Spencer) referred to retrofitting in her speech, and the Minister has talked about its importance. In Northampton, one of the biggest concerns people have about committing to retrofit is getting a dodgy builder. The Energy Security and Net Zero Committee recognise that, and we have recommended to Government that they bring forward a licensing scheme for contractors and an accreditation scheme for tradespeople. Could the Minister set out how the Government are progressing on that?
Martin McCluskey
My hon. Friend makes a really important point. We are coming forward soon with our proposals for consumer protection. I have said before in this Chamber that the first thing that landed on my desk, when I came into this role in September, was the NAO’s report into the previous Government’s energy company obligation scheme, which was shocking—awful. To answer the point raised by the hon. Member for Gorton and Denton, my driving force behind any consumer protection work that we do is to make sure that no one faces such a situation ever again.
We are working with those affected by the problems with solid wall insulation and internal wall insulation. We are working through a process of audits to reach every single one of those homes by next year and make sure that those people get the support they need. The hon. Lady mentioned that in her remarks, and we are taking action on SWI and IWI to reach every household. In some of the hot spots for poor work, we are sending people door to door to make sure that we reach each household, audit the properties, work out what remediation is required and then remediate it. We will be able to provide a more detailed update on that work soon. Those actions and others will lift 1 million households out of fuel poverty by 2030.
The warm homes plan is an offer for everyone. For those on low incomes and in fuel poverty—those who need it most—we are providing £5 billion of direct grant support for home upgrades delivered by local authorities and social housing providers. Given where the hon. Lady’s constituency is, I pay tribute to the work that the Greater Manchester combined authority has been doing through the warm homes social housing fund and the warm homes local grant—it is leading the way in some of the work that is being done.
We are making it easier for everyone to access low and zero-interest finance for technologies that can bring bills down over time. We have a strategic partnership with the Green Finance Institute to establish low-cost loans, ideally before the end of this year, to make sure that people have access to finance and can take advantage of clean technology; we cannot have a situation, as we have had in the past, where only those people with the deepest pockets are able to access these cost-saving measures.
We are, of course, continuing to support the expanded boiler upgrade scheme available to every eligible household in England and Wales. We have also broadened the range of clean heat technologies supported by the boiler upgrade scheme and continue to work with the industry to make clean heat and home energy upgrades simpler.
As the situation in Iran has developed over the past few months, we have seen that households want the chance to generate and use their own clean electricity. That is why the Government are supporting a rooftop revolution to bring solar technology into more homes; hon. Members may have seen the increase in solar over recent months. Subject to final approvals, we are bringing an additional £100 million of funding to the warm homes social housing fund, to support the delivery of up to 57,000 solar installations in this financial year. Our plan is to make plug-in solar available in this country for the first time, opening opportunities for homes where traditional rooftop installation is harder.
We also know that, in too many cases, the people paying the price of inefficient homes are the people with the least power to change them. Around 1.6 million children in this country live in cold and damp conditions in private rented accommodation, which is frankly a disgrace. That is why, as part of the warm homes plan, we are introducing new minimum energy efficiency standards in the social and private rental sectors. Alongside what other parts of Government are doing on wider housing reforms, such as the Renters’ Rights Act 2025, they will make sure that renters can benefit from warmer homes and lower bills, and that energy affordability is not reserved just for owner-occupiers.
Before I conclude, I want to turn to a couple of other points. The hon. Member for Gorton and Denton raised some issues around taxation. I have already mentioned in response to other Members the windfall tax, which remains in place, opposed by the Conservatives and the SNP. We have also recently announced increases to the energy generators levy and the encouragement to take those generators from the contracts they are on at the moment on to longer-term contracts for difference. Within the price cap is a cap on profit; the earnings before interest and taxes allowance caps profit at 1.9% and ensures that profit is there, but adequately capped.
I agree with the hon. Lady that we need to be going further and faster on the deployment of clean energy, but I draw her attention to the actions of some of her colleagues in local authorities across the country, where Green councillors have opposed clean energy that, on the latest estimate, could power 9.9 million homes. If we believe in clean power and this agenda, we must place our political will behind it to make sure that we move away from fossil fuels as quickly as possible.
The Government’s message here is straightforward: we are acting to deliver support directly to those who need it most. We have a serious, long-term plan to reduce exposure to fossil fuel price shocks, improve the homes people live in and ensure that everyone can reap the benefits of this Government’s clean power mission. Our approach is practical, fair and, above all, rooted in the everyday concerns of households. I thank hon. Members for their contributions to this debate.
Question put and agreed to.