Oral Answers to Questions
Pippa Heylings Excerpts(2 weeks, 6 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Pippa Heylings (South Cambridgeshire) (LD)
We are in the third heat wave this year and, as we have heard, we are in the climate emergency now. The Climate Change Committee’s report, “A Well-Adapted UK”, has said that we are woefully unprepared across all sectors to face 2°C of warming, let alone more. Communities like mine in South Cambridgeshire deserve to hear to the facts and the evidence, and they are holding people’s emergency briefings. I have written a joint letter with the leader of the Liberal Democrats to ask: does the Secretary of State support the televising of a national emergency briefing, so that all households know what we need to do to strengthen our food security, nature, health, energy and national security?
Ed Miliband
I support all efforts to make people aware of this emergency. Indeed, the state of climate and nature annual statement, which we pioneered last year, will be happening again in the next couple of weeks precisely to draw people’s attention to this issue. I suspect that the hon. Lady would agree that we have got to make people aware of the dangers and show that there is something that we can do about them. If we say to people, “It’s an emergency but there’s nothing that can be done,” people will be despairing, whereas if we say, “It is an emergency and we are acting, and we can act, and we can even act more than we are,” then we can show that something can be done.
Pippa Heylings (South Cambridgeshire) (LD)
When it comes to local and community energy, we welcome the investment by Great British Energy, and the local power plan. However, the Liberal Democrats pushed to get community energy in the Great British Energy Act 2025, because we knew that there were hurdles beyond investment, as pointed out by my hon. Friend the Member for Bath (Wera Hobhouse), who is on the Energy Security and Net Zero Committee. We have been waiting for over a year to hear about this. The Minister has said that the Government are creating the much-awaited energy independence Bill, which will include changes to local energy trading, so that there is a right to sell supply locally. However, I would like to know about the community energy export guarantee, power purchase agreements for local authorities—
Climate Change
Pippa Heylings Excerpts(1 month ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Pippa Heylings (South Cambridgeshire) (LD)
I thank the Minister and the Government for allowing a good length of time for us to debate and give due consideration to this issue of national security, just as it demands. On the day that we are debating the draft Carbon Budget Order 2026, which aims to balance our carbon emissions from 2038 to 2041, it has just been confirmed that we have surpassed the UK’s record June temperatures, which were set in 1976. The record has been surpassed in Charlwood in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Dorking and Horley (Chris Coghlan). The Met Office has also issued a red warning for extreme heat this week, with temperatures likely to hit 40°C, but once again the UK is woefully unprepared because we keep putting our head in the sand.
Climate change is no longer a future threat; it is here with us today and the consequences are already being felt. The shadow Secretary of State, the right hon. Member for East Surrey (Claire Coutinho), asked about costs. This week alone, hundreds of schools have closed. GCSE and A-level students are taking what may be the most important exams in their lives in sweltering conditions, in schools unfit for the current temperatures. Public transport is gridlocked and trains are being cancelled today. Telecommunications are down and the economy faces hundreds of millions of pounds of lost productivity and infrastructure failures.
Turning to the public health costs, last summer’s heatwaves contributed to an estimated 16,500 avoidable excess deaths across Europe, with 1,504 heat-associated deaths last year in the UK alone. We know that that is affecting our elderly and the most vulnerable.
Adrian Ramsay (Waveney Valley) (Green)
The hon. Member is making an important speech. She highlighted the record-breaking June temperatures, and I heard Members behind me talk about how it is lovely and warm, but she highlights the very real human cost and the number of deaths per year that we are already seeing. Did she hear the Climate Change Committee highlighting that on the current trajectory, if we do not take action by mid-century, we will see 10,000 unavoidable deaths per year due to heat? Does that not show how serious the situation is?
Pippa Heylings
Absolutely, I agree with the hon. Member.
Let us no longer hide from this, but look it clearly in the eye: there are clear costs. They are no longer in the future; they are here now. There are costs to our economy, but also to our communities.
Let us talk about food costs. Food supplies are coming under increasing pressure. Three of the UK’s worst harvests on record have occurred within the last five years, hitting our farmers and driving up costs for families at every shop. Floods and wildfires are making homes uninsurable and putting lives and livelihoods at risk. But this is much more than a story about a few hot days. If we think that this week’s heat is uncomfortable, the difficult truth is that what today feels exceptional will increasingly become normal, and without purposeful climate action, it will keep on getting worse.
Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)
The hon. Member is making an important speech. Climate change is one of those issues that my constituents contact me about all the time, particularly my young constituents. This is something that really bothers them as much as it does us. Does she agree that climate change is something we are experiencing now—we know that when we step outside? Does she also agree that a dead planet with plenty of jobs is no good for any of us, so we need to focus on this and deal with it?
Pippa Heylings
Like the hon. Member, I regularly meet young people across my constituency. I find it hard to look my children and children in my constituency and beyond in the eye, because that is one of the things they talk about the most. I challenge any MP in this Chamber to say that they do not receive those emails or have those meetings in schools where this issue is brought up. I feel that responsibility deeply, and I believe that that feeling is shared across the majority of those in this Chamber.
Without action, we risk handing our children and the next generation a Britain where extreme heat regularly keeps children out of classrooms. Did we not learn from covid, during which the more disadvantaged were left behind because they were told to go home? They did not have large homes, cool gardens or broadband, and that is happening yet again this week. We will have a Britain in which thousands die prematurely each summer and in which water scarcity, with a deficit of 5 billion litres a day of public water, is a reality. In my constituency of South Cambridgeshire, which is one of the most water-stressed in the country, this issue is affecting growth right now, so we know how critical it is.
Wera Hobhouse (Bath) (LD)
We should add that water shortages are a real cause of conflict. Many communities will be displaced. Anybody who is worried about migration now should be deeply worried about migration in the future, because people will simply be displaced—
Wera Hobhouse
They will come, and you will shut the borders, but we will have wars over water shortages. We absolutely will. It sounds alarmist, but we can do something about it. We should not put our heads in the sand. Does my hon. Friend agree?
Pippa Heylings
I thank my hon. Friend, as always, for her passionate defence and her knowledge on this issue. I worked for 20 years in east Africa, southern America and the Caribbean on UK climate policy, including under the previous Conservative Government. I saw countries already facing water shortages and what that meant: devastating crops and economies, and putting countries into recurrent economic recession. We must be committed to net zero emissions by 2050 because the science when the former Government agreed this—
Claire Coutinho
The hon. Member is making an emotional speech, and I understand she cares deeply about this issue. This target is imposing costs on our businesses in Britain, which is driving them away from one of the cleanest energy systems in the world. Our refineries now pay more on their carbon tax bill than they do on their wage bill. What does that mean? It means we are importing back those same goods from countries such as India that have higher emissions—twice the emissions, in fact. Why should we set a target more onerous than that in other countries, driving production away, only to import goods with higher emissions? What does she think that will do for climate change?
Pippa Heylings
Perhaps I would contest the fact that we cannot equate the emotion with a rational mind as well. These are science-based targets that the hon. Member’s Government agreed to set. What is recommended in the carbon budget order is set by the independent Climate Change Committee, with robust figures, and the science has shown us that this is our best chance to limit warming to under 2°. Global collective action avoided—at least for now—a 4° warmer world, and as I understand it, the Treasury has accepted modelling to show that we have accepted a 2° warmer world. It means that every Department will have to look at what a 2° warmer world means and how we adapt to that. I agree, however, that the impact on our industry, with some of the highest energy prices, means that it is less competitive. Let us therefore work together and focus directly on how we can get energy bills down.
The Liberal Democrats welcome the seventh carbon budget, and we are glad that the Government have accepted the advice of the robust and science-based Climate Change Committee, which puts us on a consistent and achievable pathway to meeting net zero while building a fairer and thriving new economy.
Kerry McCarthy (Bristol East) (Lab)
Does the hon. Lady agree that we will never persuade other countries to take action to reduce their carbon emissions unless we show global leadership? Will she join me in congratulating the Prime Minister, who went to COP29 in Baku, announced an ambitious nationally determined contribution of reducing emissions by 81% by 2035? That was real climate leadership. Having been at that COP, I know that there was such disappointment among other countries about the fact that the previous Government had stepped away from showing that kind of leadership.
Pippa Heylings
I very much appreciated the work that the hon. Member did in her former role, and we were together at that COP meeting. Yes, I congratulate the Prime Minister, but I also congratulate former Prime Ministers. I was working internationally, and I worked on the macroeconomic budgets of developing countries, particularly the emerging economies, and we saw what they could do to follow the UK’s lead and leapfrog technologies in their economies. I absolutely agree with the hon. Member, which is why it is disappointing to hear from those on the Conservative Front Bench that they want to delay science-led targets and oppose environmental action, which would lead the world in a more insecure and uncertain place, and leave businesses without the certainty they need. I urge them to help us rebuild the consensus that we need. It can only smell of a desperate attempt at political opportunism to join Reform and gamble with the lives and livelihoods of future generations.
Claire Coutinho
If the evidence is so science-led, will the hon. Member explain why the Climate Change Committee was out by a factor of three—300%—on the cost of offshore wind, which is one of the key inputs for the target that she will be voting for today?
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
Order. When she sends a letter back.
Pippa Heylings
When a response to the letter comes back. Let us talk about the economics.
Richard Tice
It is an excellent idea to talk about the economics. The hon. Member for Chesterfield (Mr Perkins) could not answer this simple question, but perhaps the hon. Lady can instead: when will the bills come down?
Pippa Heylings
The answer to that is in two ways. First, we must take gas out of the system as much as possible. Secondly, we must fix a broken electricity market. The way we charge customers and businesses right now is broken, and we need to change that. I do not believe in what happened under a previous Government, when George Osborne as Chancellor reduced taxation on oil and gas companies three times. By the end of that we had negative receipts to the Treasury, because we were also looking at decommissioning exemptions. Until some of the windfall tax profits came in, negative receipts were coming into the Treasury at that point.
If we talk about the economy, let us talk about the transition. As we have already heard, research from the CBI and the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit shows that the green economy is already contributing more than £100 billion and over 1 million new jobs. Clean power and decarbonisation are about growing our economy, creating those jobs, lowering energy bills and strengthening our energy security.
Although we welcome the carbon budget, setting targets is the easy part; delivering them is what counts. That is why we look forward to the Government’s delivery plan and seeing the steps that will be taken, because we worry that there is a risk they will fall short. The carbon budget will take much more than decarbonising our power supply and cannot be delivered in a centrist way from Whitehall alone. We Liberal Democrats want to see more action and ambition from this Government, not a focus on energy alone.
Emissions reductions will be experienced in people’s lives, and not just environmentally but economically, through changes in how homes are heated, how people travel and how energy is used. Local authorities, communities, farmers and businesses will be required to be partners in delivering change. We will have to double our efforts to restore nature, which is one of our most powerful tools for tackling climate change, by more generously supporting our farmers to accelerate tree planting and peatland restoration. But please, we should not treat nature protections as a blocker to economic growth. I ask the Government to get rid of the lazy, reckless rhetoric that divides climate and nature, rather than seeing them as indivisible necessities. We will also have to increase powers and funding for local authorities and communities to implement credible local climate and nature delivery plans.
Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)
My hon. Friend knows well about the issues of coastal erosion on the north Norfolk coast and the existential threat to communities such as Trimingham and Happisburgh. There is hard work being done by our local authorities and our Lib Dem councils through schemes such as Coastwise, and there is much more to do in the future, but does she agree with me that everything being done to protect those communities will be undermined by the worsening climate emergency, which has sped up erosion and will cause it to worsen further?
Pippa Heylings
I feel deeply about what my hon. Friend says. He is a well-known champion for rural and coastal communities that are facing such an insecure future, not knowing whether their homes will still be standing and whether they will be insurable. That is definitely something we need to look at.
Most importantly for this carbon budget, as we have heard from Members across the Chamber, electrification across key sectors is the key to rapidly reducing emissions and helping households to cut bills. Today, the Climate Change Committee has warned that progress in electrification has slowed, with heat pump installations up just 7% this year compared with 56% the year before. What is more, the share of electricity in industrial energy use fell last year, so we must see greater acceleration of electrification.
Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)
On seeing a new development recently, I was dismayed that the developer said they were not putting in heat pumps because the cost of electricity meant that people would rather have gas boilers. Does my hon. Friend agree that if we removed the renewables obligation levy from electricity, so that we were fairly pricing electricity—currently, electricity is unfairly disadvantaged—we would incentivise far more heat pump installations?
Pippa Heylings
My hon. Friend often brings that issue up in the Chamber and in the Select Committee. We have to fix the broken system whereby households and businesses do not feel the benefits of cheaper renewable energy from solar and wind.
Finally, the Liberal Democrats believe that building public confidence in the transition to net zero requires people to see the benefits in their own communities. That means empowering those best placed to deliver change on the ground. Local authorities, community organisations and local leaders understand the needs of their areas, can bring people with them and are uniquely placed to turn national ambition into practical action. We need regulatory change so that community energy projects can sell energy locally, but those bodies can also take action on better public transport, warmer homes, nature restoration or street-by-street electrification.
Too often local climate action remains fragmented, underpowered and dependent on short-term funding. Critically, local authorities still have no statutory responsibility for delivering net zero for climate and nature duty. Such responsibility has been voted down every single time it has been introduced in devolution legislation. Will the Minister look at placing local authorities at the centre of delivery of the seventh carbon budget by legislating for a clear climate and nature statutory duty for local authorities, and by ensuring that they have the funding and powers needed to unlock these opportunities? Many Liberal Democrat Members have been local councillors and we know that local authorities can do that, together with local people. Climate change will not wait and neither should we—the time is now.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
With an immediate five-minute time limit, I call Olivia Blake.
Harriet Cross (Gordon and Buchan) (Con)
I will use my time to draw attention to parts of the impact assessment, because we are, after all, debating the carbon budget.
First, this budget allows for 37% of our energy consumption by 2040 still to come from oil and gas. The Climate Change Committee itself is allowing for oil and gas to be included in our energy mix into the years to come. On that basis, why are the Government still committed to banning new licences in the North sea? Why are they still committed to the energy profits levy? Why are they still stopping the permitting of Rosebank and Jackdaw? All that will do is increase our imports of more carbon-intensive oil and gas, which is not good for the climate, economy or jobs in the UK. That point can also be found in the impact assessment.
Secondly, reaching the carbon budget will require an “electrification of industry”. That means a reduction in our industrial capacity. The electrification of steel means a move away from blast furnaces, which will mean we lose our virgin steel capacity. Virgin steel is used for other industries as well, such as defence and civil nuclear, so we are going to hinder our civil nuclear capacity by reducing our virgin steel capacity.
Thirdly, the impact assessment—I hope Members have read it, but I am not so sure—says that
“a faster transition to renewables will not eliminate global supply chain risks.”
It is not true, no matter how often it is said, that reducing our reliance on oil and gas and upscaling renewables makes us less vulnerable to global pressures. It does not. This impact assessment says it does not. We must recognise that everything has a cost and a risk, including renewables.
I will bring my remarks to an end shortly, because I do not want to speak for too long. We must be realistic and pragmatic. As my hon. Friend the Member for Broxbourne (Lewis Cocking) pointed out, this carbon budget assumes that we will reduce our meat and dairy consumption by 25%. It assumes that we will put a cost on households of thousands of pounds, which far exceeds any £300 saving on energy bills, were this Government to achieve it.
China is not putting these costs on businesses or households, and it is not closing down its domestic industries. China is opening 50 to 70 GW of new coal every year. It has almost 1,200 coal-fired power stations, which it is using to export its renewables technology to us—it does not make sense. China is responsible for over a third of global emissions, and we are responsible for 1%. We are not making a difference to global climate change by impoverishing our businesses, industries and households. We said that we wanted to lead, but there is no point in leading if nobody is following. The key players are not following.
Pippa Heylings
Can the hon. Lady confirm by when China said it will meet its net zero commitment?
Harriet Cross
I am sure the hon. Lady has a gotcha for me on that one. I believe it has either not set a target or it is 20 years, but I could not tell her which.
Energy Security
Pippa Heylings Excerpts(2 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Pippa Heylings (South Cambridgeshire) (LD)
Oil and gas prices have a long history of spiking and damaging our economy. The UK was among those countries in western Europe worst hit by the price shock following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022. As long as we remain tied to volatile international fossil fuel markets, dictators and foreign wars will have a grip on our economy and on the pockets of families and pensioners across this country. Surely it is time to wake up to that reality and learn the lessons of the past. That is why we Liberal Democrats welcome the Government bringing forward a Bill on energy independence. We will scrutinise it carefully to ensure that it contains not only the urgent and ambitious measures necessary to bring down energy bills and ensure energy security, but a fair, managed and prosperous transition to clean energy.
As households nervously await next week’s announcement of the energy price cap, with forecasts showing that households could be hit with a £300 Trump war tax on energy bills, we Liberal Democrats are clear that the best way to get energy bills down is through home-grown renewable power, with prices that we control.
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
I know that the Lib Dems are big fans of localism—that is not a dig, by the way. In my constituency, Church Langley primary school has led the way by having solar panels on its roof, and it is able to generate all the energy it needs from those solar panels. Does the hon. Lady welcome the work that this Government are doing to ensure that other schools can benefit from the same sort of system?
Pippa Heylings
I definitely welcome that; as the hon. Gentleman will hear later in my speech, we want to go even further. As we know, it is Liberal Democrats who fix people’s church roofs and put the solar panels on them.
For too long, the pace of change has been too slow. It has left people and businesses trapped, at the mercy of a broken energy system that they are literally paying the price for. It is time to take back control of our energy future, and that starts with our communities. In the last Session of Parliament, I welcomed the Government agreeing with our calls to include community energy and community benefits in the Great British Energy Act 2025. Now communities must be given the right to sell and buy energy locally, and we must mandate community benefit requirements where communities host renewable infrastructure. The transition must be done with those communities, not to them.
I also welcomed the adoption of the New Homes (Solar Generation) Bill, or sunshine Bill, introduced by my hon. Friend the Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson), which requires solar panels on all new homes—but why wait until 2027, and why not go further? We Liberal Democrats want to see solar on new warehouses and car parks, turning rooftops across the country into sources of clean, affordable power. We also want to see solar panels on schools and hospitals. Since 2019, energy bills for schools and the NHS have more than doubled, forcing impossible choices between heating and healthcare or between bills and books. The current Government investment reaches less than 1% of schools. Liberal Democrats would go further and faster, helping to protect frontline budgets for our schools and hospitals.
Families, too, want to do the right thing; there has been a record increase in sales of solar panels and heat pumps since the start of the war in Iran. We must build on that momentum and help households and small businesses to take back control of their bills, giving them access to zero-interest or low-interest loans for upgrading properties by establishing an energy security bank to support electrification.
At the same time we need to fix the broken energy market. It remains absurd that electricity is still priced so highly compared with gas, meaning that people are often not rewarded for electrifying their homes and businesses. It is also crazy that consumers are paying billions to switch off our wind turbines when the grid cannot cope with surplus renewable generation. That is why I welcomed the recent steps taken to begin breaking the link between gas and electricity prices, a reform that the Liberal Democrats have long called for. However, we urge the Government to go further and faster in their Bill: moving unfair policy levies off electricity bills, providing a progressive social energy tariff for those unable to absorb repeated bill shocks, upgrading grid infrastructure and ensuring that customers benefit directly from cheaper renewable power through flexibility when there is surplus renewable generation.
Yes, we need energy independence, but that does not mean isolation. The UK and the EU have deeply interconnected energy systems, but the damaging Brexit deal has meant a huge increase in energy costs. Our future lies in ever closer energy ties to our nearest neighbours, and this Government need to drop their red lines on Europe. Rejoining the EU’s internal electricity market and linking our emissions trading schemes will reduce costs and strengthen resilience.
My right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Ed Davey) was right to say that
“it is simply fantasy and fabrication for some in this House to pretend that there is a solution in the North sea”—[Official Report, 13 May 2026; Vol. 786, c. 31.]
to people’s high energy bills. Even when North sea production was at its peak nearly 30 years ago, the UK was still exposed to global price shocks, because we have been price takers. Nor is the answer fracking, which some are calling for; it destroys our countryside and pollutes our waterways. We will push for a complete ban on fracking and complete clarity on closing all the loopholes.
We need a secure energy mix, and that includes nuclear; we believe that small modular reactors have great potential to strengthen energy security alongside renewables. Oil and gas will also be part of that energy mix for decades to come, but we must recognise the need for a fair and managed energy transition, given that our remaining reserves are in decline. Communities cannot be left behind. We urge the Government to establish a just transition commission, to future-proof supply chain jobs, and to enable the retention of our brilliant, skilled oil and gas workers in high-quality jobs in renewables and other sectors.
Harriet Cross
Does the hon. Lady agree that new licences in the North sea would help protect the workforce and the supply chain, to help with the transition to new energies?
Pippa Heylings
Research has shown that the hundreds of new oil and gas licences awarded by the Government between 2010 and 2024 have resulted in only about 36 days’ worth of extra gas. We need to look at the jobs that people can move into. I think there were 75,000 jobs lost without any outcry from the previous Government. We are looking at a just energy transition that helps those high-skilled workers into jobs.
Pippa Heylings
I will keep going.
Proponents of prolonged over-reliance on fossil fuels often ignore the costs of inaction. There is an overwhelming scientific consensus that transitioning away from fossil fuels is essential to our efforts to tackle climate change. Communities around the country are already feeling the impacts and costs of extreme weather events. My South Cambridgeshire constituency is one of the most water-stressed in the country; last month, we saw 5% of the average rainfall, and we are feeling it. Floods and droughts have battered farmers across the country—they are reeling from the worst harvest on record, which will lead to problems with food security and put up our food prices.
One avoidable death is one too many for the elderly and vulnerable during recurrent heatwaves. No one wants ravaging wildfires ripping through our most treasured woodlands and national parks. As the Government-suppressed assessment on global biodiversity loss, ecosystem collapse and national security laid bare, the destruction of nature threatens the UK’s resilience, prosperity and national security.
People want to know the truth. In my constituency and across the country, people’s emergency briefings are happening. People are taking control. They want to know and to be better prepared. That is why we must also look to prepare for the climate shocks that we cannot avoid. We reject the Government’s false dichotomy between climate and nature, where they say that nature is a blocker to growth. We have to be better prepared. We have to overcome the silos between energy, climate and nature. We need to promote nature-based approaches to capture carbon as well as adapting. We have to work on storing water, regenerating our soil, cooling buildings and protecting people’s homes from becoming uninsurable.
A secure future for our country depends on our energy independence, on restored nature and resilient communities, and on meeting our responsibility to our children and young people for a healthier future for generations to come.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
I call the Chair of the Select Committee.
Cost of Heating Oil
Pippa Heylings 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
Pippa Heylings (South Cambridgeshire) (LD)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. As many have done, I thank my hon. Friend the Member for North Norfolk (Steff Aquarone) for securing this hugely subscribed and important debate and for representing rural constituencies across the country.
As we have heard, people in rural areas already face higher living costs, higher levels of fuel poverty and poorer energy efficiency compared to urban homes, and those areas also have many vulnerable elderly people. The Liberal Democrats are deeply concerned that, once again, we are debating urgent support to rural, off-grid households facing immediate and unaffordable cost increases who are uniquely exposed to volatile global fossil fuel markets.
Clearly, we have not learnt the lessons from the very recent past. In the current energy crisis resulting from Trump’s dangerous, reckless and illegal war in Iran, heating oil is not covered by Ofgem’s price cap, just as during Putin’s illegal invasion of Ukraine in 2022 it was not covered by the energy price guarantee. We must not allow rural households to be left behind again. As the UK and Ireland Fuel Distributors Association points out, the situation is exacerbated by the fact that the price of imported jet fuel is the largest component in the retail price of a litre of heating oil, and it is far more volatile than Brent crude oil. The association has reported prices jumping from 44p per litre in January to 100p litre this week and, as we have heard, the final price landing on consumers is way above that.
In my constituency, 2,954 households—35%—are reliant on heating oil. That is much higher than any other Cambridgeshire constituency. As soon as the conflict began, I heard directly from constituents in the villages of Fowlmere, Barrington, Litlington, Weston Colville, the Abingtons and Heydon, who, despite having agreed a price, were being told that neither that price, nor even the date of delivery, could any longer be guaranteed. One vulnerable elderly resident had only two days of heating oil left in their home. Some bought heating oil from a different provider at double the price because they could not wait.
It is questionable that the UK and Ireland Fuel Distributors Association justifies that kind of action as acceptable and appropriate because it is approved by the Competition and Markets Authority. I was the first to demand directly of the Chancellor, when I talked to her in the Chamber, that she not leave households exposed once again, as they were in 2022. Her response was that public money would not be spent and that she would focus exclusively on price gouging and complaints to the Competition and Markets Authority.
As Liberal Democrats, while we welcomed the Government’s U-turn to channel £53 million of funding through the newly launched crisis and resilience fund through county councils—Cambridgeshire county council was one of the first councils to get that up and running—we have heard that it is not enough. As other Members have said, it is averaging around £30 to £35 per household, and I have already been told that many struggling households are now complaining that they do not meet the criteria from the fund. As I have mentioned repeatedly to Ministers—and as highlighted by research from Energy UK—improved data sharing from Government Departments—that goes beyond the Department for Work and Pensions—is critical for the funds to be fair and effectively target and reach those who really need them. We need to look closely at price gouging and at whether this unregulated market for heating oil is fit for purpose in serving and protecting rural households.
Will the Minister respond to our Liberal Democrat proposal for a three-month zero rating of VAT on heating oil; for a better regulated sector, with a proper price cap that shields households not only on heating oil but on LPG; and for improved consumer protection? Will he also look at the regulation we probably need on improved data sharing, so we can ensure that this help reaches those who need it most?
As many have said today, the long-term solution is not to leave rural households on the rollercoaster of volatile fossil fuels. We need to increase the transition to home-grown clean energy, insulate homes and ensure that the warm homes plan works for rural and off-grid homes.
Martin McCluskey
Well, the hon. Member was a Member of the party that was last in government, let me say that, and I find it difficult to listen to him tell us about the lessons that we should have learned. We should never have been in this position, and we should not be in a position again where we are facing higher energy prices because of an international situation, and where we are having to deal with an unregulated market in heating oil. I argue that the then Government should have looked at this in 2022 and determined what action needed to be taken.
I will explain what we have done so far. The CMA is conducting an investigation at speed. These investigations normally take around a year, but it is going to conduct this one within 12 weeks. It has already completed the evidence-gathering stage, and it is now in the process of examining that evidence. I hope that it will come forward with the report in June. The Prime Minister has been clear that we will look at what comes forward from the CMA and examine the case for regulation.
Hon. Members across the Chamber have spoken about a price cap, but I do not want to prejudge the work of the CMA. There have also been suggestions about minimum orders and price guarantees—there a number of different proposals on the table—but we have to ensure that we make the right decision, and do not end up with unintended consequences that could make the situation worse. In a market with a large number of players, many of which are quite small rural businesses, it is especially important that we do not make the situation any worse. We are looking at a range of options.
The Chancellor has written to the CMA to ask that it remains vigilant across heating oil prices and tackles any unjustified increases that it might find. The Government are also in daily contact with industry to understand the drivers of recent price movements. We have reminded heating oil distributors of their commitments under the trade association code of practice.
Pippa Heylings
Does the Minister have a timescale for when he expects the review of the market and any recommendations to come back from the CMA? When will the Government enact them? Will they be part of the energy independence Bill, or is there another way in which they could come into effect quite quickly?
Martin McCluskey
I hope the report will come back to us some time in June, and then we will examine it to determine what may be required in terms of further action. I want us to move as quickly as possible. I have another meeting with the chief executive of the CMA tomorrow to discuss progress on the market investigation and ensure that work is carrying on at the pace that we want. We are not moving slowly. We have already accelerated this process—it was a year, and it is now 12 weeks. That is significant, but we obviously want it to move as quickly as possible.
Let me turn to the wider structural issues that we face in the energy sector. We recognise that the heating oil sector is under-regulated. Unlike gas and electricity, heating oil is not regulated by Ofgem, and we will put that right by exploring what regulations are needed to protect consumers and get them a better deal.
Taking a step back, ongoing events provide us with yet another clear reminder that we must get off the rollercoaster of global fossil fuel markets and on to the path of clean, home-grown energy that we control. We will learn the correct lessons from the crisis, unlike the previous Government, who went through the situation in 2022 and did not. In our mission to make the UK a clean energy superpower, we have already brought in £90 billion of investment in clean British energy. In the light of spiking oil and gas prices, we intend to go further and faster in the pursuit of national energy security.
We are bringing forward the next renewables auction, just months after the most successful auction that we have ever had, which secured enough power for the equivalent of 16 million homes. We are making plug-in solar available for the first time in Britain so that families can buy a low-cost panel straight from a supermarket and set it up on their balcony or in their garden.
We are speeding up delivery of the £15 billion warm homes plan. I heard what many Members said about the fabric of housing. There is obviously support within the £5 billion that we have set aside for low-income schemes, but there is also work going on about low interest and no interest consumer loans. I am trying to accelerate that work so that we can get that to people as soon as possible.
Pippa Heylings
We welcome the publication of the warm homes plan, but we have not received details of what will replace the energy company obligation 4 programme, which was run through local authorities. Can the Minister tell us when he expects that detail to be available? Will it be published ahead of the winter so that it can be applied and homes can be upgraded?
Martin McCluskey
As the hon. Lady knows, the Department runs a range of programmes. We took the decision to abolish ECO4 because it was not working effectively. In some cases, it was costing more to find people who needed the measures than it was to deploy the measures. The Department has been provided with an additional £1.5 billion, which took the total up to £15 billion for this financial year. That money is being deployed through the local government schemes—the warm homes social housing fund and the warm homes local grant. That is enhancing what has already been provided to low-income households through the Department.
As I say, £2.7 billion of capital is being deployed to provide low interest or no interest consumer loans. We need to accelerate that. At the moment, we are probably looking at early next year, but I would like to see that come forward so that we can use those consumer loans as a response to the current situation. We know that there is significant demand for home upgrades, including solar, battery and heat pumps, but we have to give people the support they need to take up those options.
We will speed up the delivery of the £15 billion warm homes plan—the largest home upgrade programme in British history—and we are reforming nuclear regulations following the Fingleton review so that we can fast-track new nuclear power stations.
Oil and Gas
Pippa Heylings Excerpts(4 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Pippa Heylings (South Cambridgeshire) (LD)
We need to be clear that this energy crisis is, in effect, an oil and gas crisis and shows us yet again just how dangerous our overdependence on fossil fuels is. Just as with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the middle east conflict shows how a single geopolitical escalation can send energy prices soaring, leaving households and businesses here in the UK exposed to shocks beyond their control. History is now in danger of repeating itself: families struggling with higher gas, petrol and food prices while energy companies’ profits surge. Forecasts from Cornwall Insight suggest that, if the conflict continues, energy bills could rise by £332 this July—a £332 Trump war tax on our energy bills.
Yet what do we see in the Conservative response? More drilling, more dependence, more of the rollercoaster of volatile fossil fuel prices. Alongside Reform UK, the Conservatives who are here today to mislead the public on the need to “Drill, baby, drill” are the same ones who were gung-ho in urging the Prime Minister to join Trump in the illegal war that caused this very crisis.
Claire Coutinho
Can the hon. Lady explain why the production of oil and gas makes us more reliant on the consumption of oil and gas? Will she consider the example of Norway, which, despite exporting oil and gas, and getting tax revenue from it, has high electric vehicle penetration? Why does she conflate these issues?
Pippa Heylings
I believe that the Minister answered that question. Norway has a very different system, and it made different decisions about consumption, based on the faster and greater adoption of techniques and heat pumps. The dither and delay under the previous Conservative Government meant that we did not move forward and reduce consumption.
The truth is that expanding oil and gas production in the North sea—a mature basin from which we have already extracted 93% of resource—would do nothing to cut people’s energy bills, because any oil and gas extracted is sold on international markets to the highest bidder. Nor would it influence global prices, given that the UK can contribute only a tiny fraction of the global supply, even if new licences were granted. It would neither cut bills nor increase the security of supply.
Research by Uplift shows that fields licensed by the previous Conservative Government over 14 years have produced just over a month’s worth of gas to date. Energy security is national security; as long as we rely on fossil fuels, we rely on foreign dictators and petrostates. Trump’s national security report was clear: he will use his gas to project power, turning it on and off at will. The Conservatives and Reform have shown that when Trump says “jump”, they ask, “How high?” That is not energy security; it is energy surrender.
Harriet Cross
Just to confirm, is the Liberal Democrats’ position that they do not want new licences in the North sea?
Pippa Heylings
I can confirm that the Liberal Democrat position is not to support new fields for exploration in the North sea. Rather, we should accelerate our own home-grown clean energy, the price of which we control. Otherwise, our constituents will forever be at the mercy of a deteriorating world order.
Pippa Heylings
Let me turn to jobs, which matter deeply. Those working in the North sea are skilled workers. They have kept our lights on, and must be at the heart of any transition. A just transition recognises that, although we will need oil and gas for decades to come, the North sea is a mature basin, and oil and gas workers, as well as supply chains, need support to transition. Even though the Conservatives supported new North sea drilling, the number of jobs in the oil and gas industry fell by 70,000 when they were in government, but without this level of outcry or support.
I grew up in Hull—a city that knew the devastation of unmanaged transition. I saw, through my father’s work as a GP, the human cost of industries collapsing without a plan. Dockers, trawlermen and entire communities were left behind and lost pride. We must not repeat those mistakes. Yet in Hull today, we also see what success can look like. With investment in offshore wind, companies such as Siemens are creating skilled, well-paid jobs for the future building wind turbine blades—that means jobs and pride.
Pippa Heylings
Let me turn to climate change. Although fossil fuels are driving skyrocketing costs, they also drive the costs of the unabated climate change that is already hitting our farmers and our communities, through crippling flooding and droughts. Approving Rosebank alone would add nearly 250 million tonnes of emissions, pushing us beyond our climate targets and further out of line with the Paris agreement, which aims to protect us all. Opening new fields would worsen the climate crisis without cutting bills or improving energy security. It would exacerbate climate breakdown, which is a national security threat that drives instability, displacement and economic shocks.
Richard Tice
The hon. Lady criticises us for trying to extract oil and gas, so does she also criticise Norway’s successful and excellent programme of drilling 49 new wells last year? We drilled none.
Pippa Heylings
We have been taking out less gas for decades now, and those decisions were taken by successive Governments. We have seen the assessment on the security of gas supply: Norway’s geological situation shows that it has more left, while our basin has less and the supply is dwindling. Expanding North sea drilling is not pragmatic; it is reckless and incompatible with the UK’s climate commitments.
There is another path, however. The Liberal Democrats have been clear that we must break our overdependence on fossil fuels and decouple gas and electricity prices so that households benefit from cheap, clean power. The more we expand renewable clean energy through contracts for difference—provision introduced by the Liberal Democrats—the less gas sets the price, so families and businesses could have fixed renewable energy prices. We would go further in taking policy costs off energy bills, so that households feel in their pockets that the wind and the sun are cheaper than gas. We must also make homes cheaper to heat in the winter, and cool in the summer, with a more ambitious warm homes plan and a 10-year emergency home upgrade programme.
We should build on the Liberal Democrat success by getting the Government to commit today to putting rooftop solar on all new builds. Rejoining the EU’s internal energy market would reduce wholesale costs, make the trade of energy more efficient, and avoid higher costs. More drilling means more volatility, more insecurity and higher bills. The Liberal Democrats offer a different path: decoupled gas and electricity prices, and the lower bills that families and businesses deserve.
Sir Alec Shelbrooke
On the subject of the hon. Member for South Cambridgeshire (Pippa Heylings), it was a shame that she did not take my intervention, because she may have been able to answer this question. She was very keen to talk about what happened under the Conservative Government and how we need to have renewables, but does my right hon. Friend the Member for Beverley and Holderness (Graham Stuart) find it incredulous that at no moment did the hon. Member for South Cambridgeshire mention that it was Nick Clegg who cancelled all the nuclear power stations? He said that he was not going to invest in something that would not come along until 2022.
Draft Electricity and Gas (Energy Company Obligation) (Amendment) (Specified Period) Order 2026
Pippa Heylings Excerpts(4 months ago)
General CommitteesRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Pippa Heylings (South Cambridgeshire) (LD)
The extension of the ECO scheme until December will be welcome news for the numerous insulation installers who have faced significant instability after the ECO scheme cliff-edge cut in the November Budget. However, the Liberal Democrats remain frustrated at the original decision to scrap the energy company obligation. Energy retrofit firms warned of a supply chain collapse after the Government pulled vital funding for upgrading damp, mouldy and draughty homes for the poorest households, as well as pulling funding from the small and medium-sized contractors that deliver the work. I am now hearing of thousands of redundancies among skilled installers coming down the line. What a waste and a crying shame—putting businesses and livelihoods at risk over this period.
It is also concerning that there are no carry-over arrangements for when the scheme ends. The National Insulation Association made its concerns clear in the consultation, opposing the cut and saying that any extension should come with a pro rata increase in obligation levels. Equally, the lack of detail in the warm homes plan for ECO’s replacement, with a suspected 18-month delay to delivery, means that next winter there will effectively be no operational national fuel poverty strategy. Given the middle east energy crisis, reducing energy demand is one of the best ways to help lower-income households reduce bills. Improving building fabric could cut heat demand by 15% to 20%, which would also help to reduce risk and balance the grid, reducing the peak heat gap in winter, as research by Energy Systems Catapult shows.
It is shocking that 90% of solid-wall homes are still uninsulated. That is why the Liberal Democrats keep calling for a 10-year emergency home upgrade scheme that would offer free insulation to low-income households.
Draft Warm Home Discount (England and Wales) Regulations 2026
Pippa Heylings Excerpts(4 months, 1 week ago)
General CommitteesRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Pippa Heylings (South Cambridgeshire) (LD)
We agree that bringing down energy bills is a priority. It is especially necessary given the crisis in the middle east, which exposes families and small businesses once again to soaring fossil fuel prices, as seen in the spike in price for those who must use oil for heating, including in my constituency of South Cambridgeshire. The Liberal Democrats therefore agree with the extension of support through the warm home discount until 2031 to support those in fuel poverty. The Government should also consider other measures, such as tackling the growing energy debt, which is a spiralling crisis in this country, and creating a social energy tariff, for which the Liberal Democrats have long called. It is crucial to ensure that such support, including support from energy suppliers, is targeted to reach those who need it most.
Although the legislation before us updates some important data sharing provisions for the warm home discount, I urge the Minister to learn the lessons of the covid pandemic and the 2022 energy bill crisis and immediately enact a data sharing scheme between more Government Departments—not only DWP but the NHS and others—to determine eligibility. I also urge the Minister to devolve that scheme, where necessary, to local authorities to enable them to deliver targeted support to those who need it most. Meanwhile, we need to urgently decouple gas and electricity prices so that families and businesses feel the benefits of the clean energy transition and are not on the rollercoaster of volatile global energy prices.
We also call for a swifter roll-out of the warm homes plan. The cheapest form of energy is that which we do not use, and an effective insulation programme for struggling families across the country would bring down bills and lift households out of fuel poverty. The Government’s changes to the energy company obligation programme have meant that we have an effective delay of about 18 months to insulation programmes, which has put hundreds of small and medium-sized upgrade and retrofit companies at risk. The changes also potentially mean that this winter a Labour Government does not have an operational national fuel poverty strategy.
Heating Oil Support
Pippa Heylings Excerpts(4 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
Pippa Heylings (South Cambridgeshire) (LD)
We welcome the Government finally taking action to protect households from soaring energy costs due to the middle east crisis, following calls from those on the Liberal Democrat Benches and MPs of all parties. However, today’s intervention is a sticking-plaster solution, with too many households potentially falling through the cracks and not receiving support. We have heard that those families who must use oil for heating are the most exposed and defenceless, caught in the crossfire of Russia’s war in Ukraine and now the volatility in the middle east.
The heating oil market needs regulating. The Liberal Democrats are calling for the immediate introduction of a three-month VAT holiday on heating oil, as well as a proper price cap, because these households deserve the same protection as those that use gas and electricity. The real way to protect households and businesses is not by parroting Trump’s “Drill, baby, drill” mantra and buckling in for more roller-coaster rides that burn a hole in people’s pockets but by accelerating the transition to secure, home-grown clean energy that we control and extending preferential treatment to the warm homes plan, to help those homes that use heating oil to electrify and get off volatile fuel that we do not control.
Will the Government agree with the Liberal Democrats and set a price cap for heating oil to shield off-grid households? Also, if the Government want to provide targeted support, will they learn the lessons from the covid pandemic and the 2022 energy crisis and immediately enact a data-sharing scheme between Departments, including the Department for Work and Pensions and the NHS, and devolve this to local authorities to enable them to deliver targeted support to those who need it the most through, right now, the crisis and resilience fund that they want to be adopted on 1 April?
Martin McCluskey
I thank the hon. Lady for her constructive tone, for working together on some of this, and in particular for her comments on the need to move towards a transition to ensure our energy security and, ultimately, to lower bills.
On the hon. Lady’s point about a cap, the market for heating oil, as she will know, is very different from the market for electricity and gas. The reason that the price cap was introduced many years ago was the potential loyalty penalty that existed, whereby consumers who were with an individual company for a long time were penalised for that. Heating oil, by contrast, is supplied through a highly competitive market. That is why we have asked the CMA to look at this in more detail and we will examine its findings to establish what regulation may be required.
On the hon. Lady’s comments regarding the warm homes plan, the low income fund will target many of those people. She may also be interested to know that about 50% of the grants given out under the boiler upgrade scheme are to rural homes, many of which will be in this situation, that are transitioning from oil heating to electrified heating through a heat pump.
Energy Markets
Pippa Heylings Excerpts(4 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
Pippa Heylings (South Cambridgeshire) (LD)
The conflict in the middle east reminds us again how dangerously exposed the UK is to volatile global fossil fuel markets. Forecasts by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation have shown that, just as happened after Putin’s illegal invasion of Ukraine, energy bills could go up dramatically, placing further pressure on families and businesses that are struggling, while energy companies make profits. The leader of the Liberal Democrats, my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Ed Davey), asked the Prime Minister yesterday to give a cast-iron guarantee that he would not let energy bills rise by £500 this year, but he did not. Will the Secretary of State give that guarantee?
Why are we so exposed? Because of our heavy reliance on gas, limited storage capacity, dependence on imports, and falling domestic liquefied natural gas inventories. As recently as January, the Conservatives were arguing in favour of continued reliance on gas, due to the price falling at that time, but it has taken less than two months for them to be proven wrong. Meanwhile, given the instability in European energy markets caused by the ongoing conflicts, I am glad to hear that the Secretary of State has engaged with energy counterparts in the EU. I would like to hear more details of their analysis of the potential impact on supply, prices and regional energy security.
Ed Miliband
I agree with the hon. Lady on her fundamental point about why we are exposed. Cost of living support is obviously a matter for the Prime Minister and the Chancellor, but I reiterate to her that the Chancellor showed a willingness to act on these issues in the Budget because she recognised the pressures that families are facing, and that the cost of living crisis is by far the biggest issue facing our country. At Prime Minister’s questions, the Prime Minister again reiterated that we are carefully monitoring the situation. The Government have shown their willingness to intervene, and if necessary, we will intervene again.
On the wider points that the hon. Lady makes, the most important thing to emphasise is that we have to go back to the fundamentals. That means driving forward with clean power and the insulation of homes. Our European counterparts, whom she asked about, face similar challenges. Through the International Energy Agency, we are all engaged on some of the issues around oil stocks that I raised in my statement. She is absolutely right that co-operation with our European colleagues is particularly vital at this time.
Local Power Plan
Pippa Heylings Excerpts(5 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
Pippa Heylings (South Cambridgeshire) (LD)
The Liberal Democrats welcome the Government recognising what communities across the country have been saying for years: community energy is one of the most powerful ways to cut bills, rebuild trust in the energy system, rebuild local resilience and take people with us on the journey to net zero. We campaigned hard to see community energy written into the Great British Energy Act 2025, alongside many people—although not everybody here today it seems—in this House and the other place, and alongside community groups such as the South Cambridgeshire Climate and Nature Group and other community organisations across the country.
We believe in localism, empowerment and giving communities a real stake and ownership in our clean energy future. I thank the Minister for working with us to make sure that we did get that into the 2025 Act. As we rightly move away from volatile fossil fuel costs controlled by foreign powers, we must ensure that our new clean energy system puts communities first. It must mean giving people the power to generate, own, and, crucially, sell their own clean energy locally, with profits reinvested in the places where the energy is produced.
We welcome the local power plan in principle, but the devil is in the detail. First, what happened to the Government’s pledge of £3.3 billion for community-owned energy, when today we are hearing about £1 billion of investment? We do not want to follow the Conservative Government’s retreat from ambition on local clean power. It is not the time to scale back ambition.
Secondly, on the crucial issue of local empowerment, regulation is needed. Organisations such as Power for People constantly told us that there are, as the Secretary of State said, barriers to access fair local markets. They welcome this plan, too, echoing the Minister’s promise that the Government will establish local energy supply models. The local power plan—I have looked through it very quickly—talks about the regulatory changes necessary, but when will they come through? The energy transition has to happen not to communities, but with them—