Ed Miliband MP: speeches

Speeches

• 19 May 2026 · Energy Security · Hansard source

  More

  I am not going to give way as I need to finish soon. The energy independence Bill will legislate to help deliver the biggest investment in home upgrades in British history through our £15 billion warm homes plan. As part of this, we will act to help private renters. This is important, because it is about how we make sure that, in the drive to clean power, we help everybody in our society. It is a scandal that 1.6 million children living in private rented homes are suffering from cold, damp or mould, according to Citizens Advice. We say it is time to act. Minimum energy efficiency standards for renters were promised by the previous Government, then scrapped. The energy independence Bill will legislate for them by cutting bills for renters, and lifting 400,000 families out of fuel poverty by 2030. Part of this goes to the question asked by the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon), who is no longer in his place. We believe that the drive for energy independence can deliver for workers and communities. We are already seeing the jobs that clean energy is creating across the country: 11,000 more workers in nuclear, according to the industry’s latest estimates, 8,000 more in offshore wind, with thousands more upgrading the grid, on the way to 400,000 extra clean energy jobs by 2030, and £90 billion of private investment announced since the election.

• 19 May 2026 · Energy Security · Hansard source

  More

  I will make a bit more progress. That is why we have already brought forward our next renewables auction and taken steps to fast-track the roll-out of renewables on public land. But renewables are only part of the story, and I want to come to nuclear, because this is going to be fun. Those drafting the Opposition amendment obviously have a real sense of humour. Here is the truth about their record. They promised a final investment decision on Sizewell C in the last Parliament and did not deliver. They promised SMRs and never delivered. They promised fusion and never delivered. We have delivered them all, and they have the cheek to complain when we are delivering the biggest nuclear building programme in half a century—delivered by this Labour Government. I should welcome the fact that the shadow Secretary of State supports our nuclear regulation Bill, but I am bound to ask: why did her party not do it? Was it incompetence, idleness, ideology or a combination of all three? There is always a great quote from the hon. Member for West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine (Andrew Bowie) that we can read out. This is what he said following the last general election: “After 14 years of Conservative Government, we are now in a position where it’s more difficult to build critical infrastructure than it was when we came into power”. It is a Labour Government clearing up their mess.

• 19 May 2026 · Energy Security · Hansard source

  More

  It is a privilege to speak in support of this Gracious Speech. This debate takes place in the shadow of the second fossil fuel shock in four years. Families and businesses across the country are deeply concerned about the impact of the Iran war on the cost of living—a war which this country did not start and this Government chose not to join, but which is having significant effects here at home, just like when Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022 and energy bills rocketed, and the British people and firms paid the price. The argument at the heart of this Gracious Speech is that there is one overriding lesson of these two crises: while we remain exposed to the fossil fuel rollercoaster, we are deeply vulnerable as a country. Our sovereignty, our security and the British people’s living standards are undermined by this dependence and exposure, for a simple reason: we do not control the price of oil and gas, which is set on international markets. It is different from what it was like in the 1970s when we had fossil fuel shocks. There is an answer staring us in the face: energy independence through clean home-grown power that we control—clean home-grown energy that comes from our own wind, sun and nuclear resources that cannot be disrupted by foreign wars, that cannot be controlled by the whims of petrostates and dictators, and that means that our national security and energy security cannot be held hostage. One commentator put it incredibly well in 2023, after Russia invaded Ukraine: “Moving to home-based, clean power mitigates risks to bill payers, now and in the future”, protecting consumers from “volatility in international fossil fuel markets.” —[ Official Report , 16 November 2023; Vol. 740, c. 53-54WS.] I agree with that commentator—it was the right hon. Member for East Surrey (Claire Coutinho), the shadow Energy Secretary, in Hansard on 16 November 2023. I agree with her. The problem is that she no longer agrees with herself. Where the evidence says we need more renewables, not less, she opposes them. Where the evidence says we should electrify as much as we can, she says we should abandon support for people to get heat pumps. Where the evidence says electric vehicles can protect consumers, she opposes action for their take-up—not because the facts have changed, not because the evidence has changed, but because she has jumped on the anti-clean energy, anti-net zero bandwagon. I am very happy to give way to her, so that she can tell the House whether she agrees with herself.

• 19 May 2026 · Energy Security · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend puts it well. There is something ironic about the fact that Reform says nationally that it wants fracking, but its representatives in Scarborough and Lancashire seem to say that they are against it. From now until the general election, we are going to be asking where Reform candidates stand: is it with their local community, or is it with the fracking industry?

• 24 Mar 2026 · Household Energy Bills · Hansard source

  More

  First, I accept the hon. Member’s congratulations on our announcement of the future homes standards today, which are a really important measure—they should never have been abolished by the last Conservative Government. On warehouses and car parks—particularly on the warehouse question—we are looking at how we can roll that out more swiftly. There is so much unused space that could be used to help cut bills right across the country.

• 5 Mar 2026 · Energy Markets · Hansard source

  More

  I will answer the hon. Lady’s questions in a moment, but first I say to her that the biggest question for this House and for the country is: do we learn the lessons of these crises? Half the recessions that have happened since the 1970s have been caused by fossil-fuel price spikes. We all face a choice: we can either learn the lessons of those crises and drive towards clean, home-grown power—to be fair, at some points, that used to be the policy of the last Conservative Government—or we can pretend that those lessons do not exist, and we can keep repeating the same mistake. I fear that since the general election, the Conservatives, having already moved halfway from learning that important lesson, have moved away from it fully. That takes me to the answers to the hon. Lady’s questions. On nuclear, we are undertaking the biggest nuclear building programme for half a century. We are doing all the things the last Government promised and never delivered. Where were the Conservatives on Sizewell C? They said that they would have agreement on it in the last Parliament, but they did not; we are doing it. Where were they with small modular reactors? We are actually putting them in place. Yes, we will publish the details of the Fingleton review shortly, and it will be an important step forward in the regulation of our industry that the Conservatives never took. The hon. Lady said that the North sea is an incredibly “important” resource, which is exactly what I said in my statement. We listened to the industry and took a pragmatic approach on tie-back to existing fields, which was welcomed by the industry, to keep our manifesto commitment of keeping existing oil and gas fields open for their lifetime. I want to pause on the point that she raised about new exploration licences. The truth is, as everybody knows, new exploration licences, particularly in the light of tie-backs, will make no difference to production. It is important to remember that on average it is 10 years from exploration to production. Last year, an important report by the National Energy System Operator on the security of gas supply said that the biggest single thing that we could do for security of supply is drive towards a clean energy transition. The more we fail to do that, the more we are exposed, given that the North sea is a declining basin that has seen production fall by 75% in last 25 years, and that 70,000 jobs were lost under the Conservatives. On the hon. Lady’s point about the windfall tax, the Chancellor says that she wants the windfall tax to end, but obviously she has to look at the current circumstances. I notice that the Conservatives have now disavowed their decision to introduce the windfall tax. The windfall tax has raised £12 billion since 2022 because of supernormal profits—the money that was going from our constituents into the pockets of oil and gas companies. It is all very easy to say, “We shouldn’t have done the windfall tax,” but the Conservatives did introduce it, and I think it was the right thing to do. My right hon. Friend the Chancellor listens closely to the industry, and was talking to representatives from the industry about these issues yesterday, but it is important to recognise those other issues. On the environmental impact assessment process, we will follow the right process because we want to ensure that what we do is legally watertight and not subject to endless judicial review, and that is what the industry wants. To return to my original point—

• 10 Feb 2026 · Local Power Plan · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Lady—I say this genuinely—for her advocacy on this issue ever since we came into government and before. She is a powerful advocate for community energy. I congratulate the group in South Cambridgeshire, too. Let me deal with the points she raised. On investment, I think that in anyone’s view the scale of the investment we are making is very significant. As I said, it is £1 billion, compared with £60 million in the previous Parliament under the previous Government. This is a massive scaling up and a realist assessment of what can be spent over this Parliament, but obviously this is just the start of our ambitions. The hon. Lady made a point, I think, on working with local community groups, which is very important. She will know that one of the challenges local groups face is in getting to the stage of having a project that is ready to go. Part of this issue is about working with those groups to make sure that can happen. On Ofgem and some of the regulatory changes, absolutely we are going to work as quickly as we can to unblock some of the barriers and ensure that can happen as swiftly as possible.

• 10 Feb 2026 · Local Power Plan · Hansard source

  More

  Well, there were no questions, but I will reply none the less. Let me start with the AR7 auction, because this is very interesting and it will give the House a picture of what has actually changed. What has changed is the Conservative party, not the reality. We had the AR5 auction a couple of years ago, when the Conservatives were in power. In that auction, the price of solar was higher than it was in this auction. The then Secretary of State, the right hon. Member for East Surrey (Claire Coutinho) stated: “our reliance on gas for electricity production today risks making power prices higher than they would be in a system with a greater share of generation from wind and solar…Moving to home-based, clean power mitigates risks to billpayers—now and in the future.” What has changed? What has changed is that the Conservative party has gone full MAGA. Let us just be honest about this. It has decided to chase Reform into a ludicrous position, doubling down on fossil fuels and rejecting even solar and onshore wind, the cheapest, cleanest form of power you can possibly have. I guess the hon. Member for Mid Buckinghamshire (Greg Smith) was just reading out the script. On community energy, I have to congratulate the hon. Gentleman, because he has given a brilliant example of why the previous Government were so hopeless on community energy. He obviously thinks it is a terrible idea. He is very welcome to do so, but he is sending a message to every Member of Parliament and all their constituents that the Conservative party is against community energy projects and against the things that will cut bills for local community groups. To every sports club, community centre and library that will benefit from this funding, there is a very clear answer: the Conservative party says, “No, you don’t deserve it. We don’t want you to have those lower bills. We don’t want you to have that cheap clean power. We don’t want you to have the income and resources to reinvest in our local community.” If the Conservatives want that as a dividing line, bring it on, I say. This Government are on the side of local communities, on the side of cutting bills and on the side of reinvesting money into communities. The Conservative party, in its new incarnation, is against it.

• 10 Feb 2026 · Local Power Plan · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend makes a really important point. Local Members of Parliament have a massive role to play in, for example, approaching their local community groups and others who have the potential to benefit from the plan. I encourage all Members to do that. One of the most important things about Members of Parliament from all parts of the House is that so many of them have a sense of the groups and areas in their constituency that can benefit from the plan. My hon. Friend the Minister for Energy and I will provide resources for MPs across the House, so that they not only know about the plan, but can draw it to the attention of people and community groups in their constituency, so that they can benefit from it.

• 21 Jan 2026 · Warm Homes Plan · Hansard source

  More

  With permission, Mr Speaker, I will make a statement about the warm homes plan, which we publish today. It is a plan focused on the No. 1 issue facing our country, which is the cost of living crisis, and on the scourge of fuel poverty, which affects millions of families across Britain. At the Budget, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor took an average of £150 off the costs of energy bills from April. This winter, we have expanded the warm home discount to a total of six million families, and today, we allocate £15 billion in our warm homes plan. That represents a more than doubling of public investment in home upgrades compared with the last Parliament—in fact, it is the biggest public investment in home upgrades in British history to cut bills and tackle fuel poverty. In making this investment, we turn the page on the lost decade of the last Government’s failure, with home insulation levels falling by more than 90% between 2010 and 2024, the promise of minimum energy efficiency standards for renters broken, the cancellation of the zero carbon homes standard, the repeated failures of schemes such as the green deal, the green homes grant and the energy company obligation scheme, and—worst of all—our dependence on fossil fuels leaving us exposed to the worst energy bills crisis in generations. The last Government failed time after time; this Government are doing the work to put it right. The starting point for this plan is that clean energy is the right choice, not only for energy security and reducing emissions, but for cutting people’s bills. The public agree: they are showing record demand for technologies such as solar, batteries and heat pumps that can save families hundreds of pounds a year. Heat pump sales in Britain have grown by around 50% annually—it is one of the fastest-growing markets in Europe—and last year saw a record number of rooftop solar installations. The driving purpose of this plan is to ensure those benefits are available, not just to the wealthiest, but to families throughout our country at every level of income. The driving purpose of this Labour Government is to stand up for working people and tackle the affordability crisis. Let me set out the measures we are announcing in our plan today. First, today we announce £5 billion of public investment to directly deliver home upgrades for low-income families. This will help families living in social housing and low-income owner-occupiers to have warmer homes and lower bills. In setting out this plan, we are abolishing the failed ECO scheme and making the principled decision that we should fund support through public investment, not levies on bills. Our plan also pays heed to all the evidence that says that funding is best delivered with local authorities and mayors in the driving seat—with those representing local people delivering for local people. At the same time, we recognise the challenges facing suppliers who used to deliver the ECO scheme, so we will ensure that this extra money is used to help support them. The Minister for Energy Consumers will convene a working group of contractors, social housing providers and local authorities to oversee this work. Overall, this allocation is the biggest public investment in tackling fuel poverty in our history. Secondly, it is a scandal that 1.6 million children live in private accommodation are suffering from cold, damp or mould, according to Citizens Advice. We on the Government Benches believe in a simple principle: if someone rents a home, private or social, their landlord has a responsibility to ensure it is safe, warm and affordable to heat. The last Government promised higher standards, and then they ripped up that promise. Today, we deliver. By 2030, private landlords will have to upgrade their properties to meet minimum standards of energy efficiency, and we have consulted on similar rules in the social rented sector, tackling the scourge of poor-quality rented homes and cutting bills for renters. These measures alone will lift more than half a million families out of fuel poverty. Thirdly, it is right that we target help at those most in need, but we know the affordability crisis stretches well beyond those on low incomes. We want to make it easier for all households to cut their bills by choosing a heat pump, solar or batteries. Building on the steps we took at the Budget to make electricity cheaper, we are expanding the boiler upgrade scheme, increasing investment every year out to 2030. For the first time, we have a universal offer of £2,500 for a heat battery or air-to-air heat pump, as well as £7,500 to install a conventional heat pump, but I want to go further. Currently, just one in 20 homes in Britain has solar panels installed on the roof. We are determined to unleash a rooftop revolution, helping many more families to generate their own energy in order to cut their bills. I can announce that the Government are, for the first time ever, setting aside up to £2 billion to subsidise zero and low-interest loans for solar panels, batteries and other technologies, learning from the successful experience of other countries and meeting demand for this technology. That is just a first step, with a further £3 billion available for loans and investments over the coming years through our warm homes fund. Fourthly, as we upgrade existing homes, we will ensure that new homes are built cheaper to run, with solar and clean heating as standard. That is just common sense. People cannot understand why we are building new homes with higher bills. The reason is that the previous Government refused to act. We are putting an end to this absurd situation. We will publish the future homes standard shortly. For the first time, solar panels will be fitted as standard in new homes. Alongside the other measures I have set out, this is designed to help treble the number of homes with solar by the end of the decade. Fifthly, to make these changes happen, we cannot go on with the old system of accountability and delivery that has failed. People have had to navigate a fragmented and confusing system of home upgrades, delivered through a bewildering number of organisations and schemes. We need to face up to the fact that, after the previous Government’s repeated failures to deliver schemes effectively, we need a specialist body with the technical expertise and focus required. By consolidating functions from Ofgem and other organisations and abolishing Salix—there will be no increase in arm’s length bodies—we will establish a new warm homes agency. It will deliver impartial advice and guidance, work with local authorities and businesses and oversee Government schemes, and it will be backed by a reformed system of consumer protection. We will put an end to the scandalous failure of accountability and regulation, and waste of public money, that we saw under the previous Government. Finally, we are determined to ensure that this roll-out delivers not just for consumers, but for workers. We are the largest producer of gas boilers in Europe, and there is a huge opportunity to harness this expertise to produce heat pumps, too. Manufacturers are already embracing this opportunity, including Ideal Heating in Hull, Vaillant in Derbyshire, which I visited last year, and Copeland in Northern Ireland, but currently less than 40% of heat pumps sold in Britain are made in Britain. We are setting a new aim of at least 70% of heat pumps installed in the UK being made in the UK, backed by a trebling of public investment in heat pump manufacturing, with £90 million set aside today. Overall, we expect the warm homes plan to support up to 180,000 additional jobs in energy efficiency, heat pumps and heat networks by the end of the decade. That will create opportunities for builders, electricians, plumbers and installers, as well as new workers entering the industry. We will establish a new taskforce with the TUC, working with business, to ensure that those jobs are well paid and highly skilled, with a proper role for trade unions. Because we are a Labour Government, we expect the rights of working people to be at the heart of this industry’s future. Taken together, these are the elements of a landmark plan that stands in a great reforming tradition of Labour Governments: after 1945, delivering on the promise of “homes for the people”, modernising the nation’s housing stock under Harold Wilson in the 1960s and introducing the decent homes standard for social housing in the 2000s, with each Labour Government meeting the rightful expectations of working people that the next generation can expect higher standards of living than the last. That is what this Government seek to do in our time, with a plan to cut bills for millions, help lift a million families out of fuel poverty, and create good jobs. I commend the statement to the House.

• 21 Jan 2026 · Warm Homes Plan · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is right. Working with the private rented sector to raise the standards is incredibly important and, frankly, we cannot let this scandalous situation, which affects so many private tenants, carry on. She makes another important point: upgrading the nation’s housing stock is a big journey. We have been left a long and bad legacy, and we are determined to make a difference.

• 21 Jan 2026 · Warm Homes Plan · Hansard source

  More

  I half thank the hon. Lady for her questions. On the second question, by anyone’s reckoning, this is a very substantial investment. It is multiple times more than was invested in the last Parliament, and there needs to be recognition of that. I recognise that there is further to go. This will help 5 million homes; there are a lot more homes that we want to help, but this is, by any measure, making a difference. On her first point, I reassure the hon. Lady that we absolutely see the value of making fabric and insulation part of this agenda, but the focus has to be on what works to cut bills. That is what our constituents want us to focus on.

• 21 Jan 2026 · Warm Homes Plan · Hansard source

  More

  I am not going to do that, but what I will say to the hon. Lady is that lots of landlords already meet the standards. Secondly, we want to provide some help for landlords to make that happen. This is an important point. Some of the schemes we have been talking about will be available to landlords. Through a combination of some landlords already meeting the standards and that help, we are confident that costs will be reduced and it will not lead to higher rents.

• 21 Jan 2026 · Warm Homes Plan · Hansard source

  More

  I will get to the question. We inherited the system from them, and we have raised the standards in the solar road map through the solar stewardship initiative with the solar industry, we have raised the standards through GB Energy, and my hon. Friend the Minister for Energy is working with colleagues across Government to ensure that slave labour is not used in the supply chain.

• 21 Jan 2026 · Warm Homes Plan · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman is shouting about bills. Let me tell him that the average bill in 2025 was lower in real terms than in 2024, and so was the price cap, as he will know from the figures. I am incredibly proud that this Government, unlike the last Government, are taking £150 of costs off bills thanks to the Chancellor’s decision, funded by taxes on the wealthy—and the Conservatives oppose all those tax measures. The hon. Gentleman talked about renters. I think that, basically, what I heard—and perhaps it should not surprise me—was that he is actually against the higher standards for renters. He would leave private renters languishing in cold, damp homes, which is what the Conservatives did during their 14 years in power. We are proud of the decision that we are making. Thanks to the brilliant work of the Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, my hon. Friend the Member for Inverclyde and Renfrewshire West (Martin McCluskey), we actually have a supportive quote from the landlords. Even the landlords want more action than the Conservative party when it comes to the renters! To amuse the House briefly, I will read out that quote. Ben Beadle, chief executive of the National Residential Landlords Association, said: “a clear roadmap for the reform of PRS MEES is welcome.” Even the landlords are more on the side of renters than the Conservative party. The hon. Gentleman asked why we were setting up the warm homes agency. I will tell him why. He said, “Wouldn’t it be better to do this within Government?” The Conservatives presided over a scandalous and shocking disaster in the ECO scheme, a mess that we are having to clear up. We are going to reform the system so that we have a proper agency with proper technical expertise to ensure that nothing like what they visited on thousands of families across the country ever happens again. I like the hon. Gentleman, and I feel a bit of sympathy for him because he has nothing to say about this issue. Let us just be honest about this: the Conservatives failed over 14 years, and we are delivering.

• 21 Jan 2026 · Warm Homes Plan · Hansard source

  More

  Any cases should be brought to the attention of the Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, my hon. Friend the Member for Inverclyde and Renfrewshire West (Martin McCluskey). I feel a deep sense of sympathy for the people who have been badly affected by ECO4 and its problems. It was brought to our attention when we came into office, and we are determined to have remediation for all the people affected. The fundamental principle must be that those who, through no fault of their own, were badly let down by the system deserve to have that made good. On the hon. Lady’s point about how we stop the same thing happening in the future, I would say a couple of things. First, our experience is that local authority schemes had many fewer problems and much higher standards of safeguards. Secondly, the point of the warm homes agency is to have a proper system of regulation that Government oversee. That is the fundamental principle here. We had a piecemeal, privatised, fragmented system, and that is partly what led to the problems. We cannot allow that to continue.

• 21 Jan 2026 · Warm Homes Plan · Hansard source

  More

  Absolutely, and I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for her work on this issue. We want the benefits to be spread as widely as possible. The Minister for Energy Consumers tells me that he will shortly visit that project with my hon. Friend. As this is the final question, Madam Deputy Speaker, I would like to say one final thing. I want to thank the civil service team that have worked on this plan. They have worked on it tirelessly over many months, so I really want to put on record my thanks and the thanks of other Members. We look forward to engaging with Members across the House on implementing the plan.

• 14 Jan 2026 · Offshore Wind · Hansard source

  More

  Even by the standards of the UK all-comers record for SNP miserabilism, that question takes some beating. I think the hon. Member gets the award. This is a great news story for Scotland, and not just in terms of Berwick Bank but in relation to floating wind. We want to carry on with that progress in AR8.

• 1 Dec 2025 · Budget Resolutions · Hansard source

  More

  It is a privilege to open this Budget debate on a theme of paramount importance to our country: the cost of living crisis facing Britain’s families. Whatever our party, we should take a step back and think about the history of the last two decades since the financial crisis, during which we have seen: the stagnation of real wages, only this year getting back to their 2008 levels; the worst progress on living standards in the last Parliament since records began in the 1950s; an epidemic of in-work poverty such that, according to the Resolution Foundation, seven out of 10 families with children who live in poverty now have someone in work; home ownership falling from two thirds of young people in the early 1990s to less than half today; and the biggest rise in energy bills in generations earlier this decade when Russia invaded Ukraine, on top of public services facing strains as never before. Each of those on their own would cause people to doubt whether this country really works for them. Together, they represent a perfect storm that makes people question their basic assumptions about our economy, society and country. This is the condition-of-Britain question of our time, and it is the backdrop against which this Government were elected 17 months ago. The mission—the driving purpose of this Government and this Budget—is to tackle that crisis. That starts from an understanding that this crisis is due to not accidental circumstances but a governing ideology, and that our response must be to change course in three ways. First, we need to make fair choices that favour ordinary working people, not the rich and powerful, who have been favoured for too long. Secondly, we must invest in and rebuild our public services and infrastructure so that we never return to austerity, which was such a disaster for the social and economic fabric on which so many people rely. Thirdly, we must endeavour to change our economy so that it produces more good jobs at good wages that sustain a decent living for people, ending the hollowing out of our economy and our communities. That is what this Government are about; that is what this Budget seeks to deliver. First, then, I want to talk about fair choices. An illuminating chart—I love charts—on page 33 of the Budget Red Book shows the impact of decisions since the 2024 autumn Budget. It shows the progressive approach of my right hon. Friend the Chancellor. It shows that every decile will be better off as a result of her measures, except the richest 10%, with the greatest gains as a percentage of income to lower and middle-income families. That includes raising the national living wage and the national minimum wage, freezing rail fares for the first time in 30 years and freezing prescription charges, as well as two measures I want to focus on. The first measure is lifting the two-child limit in universal credit, which goes to the heart of the affordability crisis that so many face. I think we need to have a debate about this issue. According to a Department for Work and Pensions document published on the day of the Budget, since its introduction in 2017, the two-child cap has put 300,000 children into relative poverty. That is the equivalent, as the document says, of 100 children every single day—more than three primary school classes each day being pushed into poverty. It is also part of a wider picture. According to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, 7.1 million low-income households—one in four across the UK—have gone without essentials in the last six months, in one of the richest countries in the world. That is why we have acted on the two-child limit. Two million children will be helped, and 450,000 fewer children will be in poverty by the end of the Parliament. As I understand it, the Conservatives oppose the policy change because they claim it is about helping people out of work who are undeserving. We need to unpack this false claim. The inescapable fact that the Opposition want to run away from is that around 60% of families impacted by this policy are in work, not out of work. These are people for whom work simply does not pay, like in the case—highlighted by the Child Poverty Action Group—of Shauna and her husband, who have three children. Shauna’s husband works full time and she says, “This will make a big difference because we’ve had to incur debts. Hopefully it will mean I can cover the last bills that come in each month instead of being in the red. I could buy a new mattress for two of my children. They can feel the springs on the mattresses they’ve got that they’ve had for many years.” That is the condition-of-Britain question. How does the Leader of the Opposition describe Shauna and her husband? She calls them “Benefits Street”. These are people working all the hours God sends, working hard, trying to do the right thing: the very people the Conservatives claim to stand up for. How dare she!

• 1 Dec 2025 · Budget Resolutions · Hansard source

  More

  Let me make a bit more progress. My second point is about public spending. In the spending review and the Budget, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor made the crucial decision not to return to austerity. She could have made a different choice and cut public services—I think that is what Conservative Members would go back to doing—but we know the impact of that approach from the last 14 years. This is about the living standards of millions of people across our country who cannot buy their way into private health care or private schools. This can be hidden by the smokescreen that Conservative Members want to put up, but the Chancellor has made the incredibly important decision to invest in the future. That has enabled the Government to cut NHS waiting lists by more than 200,000, roll out free breakfast clubs in schools, expand free school meals, fund the expansion of free childcare, and announce the biggest boost to investment in social and affordable housing in a generation. Conservative Members are back to austerity.

• 1 Dec 2025 · Budget Resolutions · Hansard source

  More

  Let me develop my argument, because this point is crucial: we can tackle the affordability crisis that people face only by investing in the future. Our vision of what makes an economy succeed is different from that of Conservative Members. We believe that public investment crowds in and does not crowd out private investment; that the only route to economic success is a Government who support industry and workers with a proper industrial strategy; and that rights at work and strong trade unions are not an impediment to a good economy but an essential ingredient of it. Nowhere is that more apparent than in clean energy. Since the election, we have seen the largest public investment in home-grown clean energy in our history, leveraging private sector investment—that is the point—of more than £60 billion. We have the largest nuclear building programme in half a century, with Sizewell C, small modular reactors, and fusion at West Burton, which the Conservatives failed to deliver. There is funding for carbon capture in Teesside, Humberside, Scotland and the north-west, which the Conservatives failed to deliver, and we have the first new publicly owned energy company in more than 70 years in Great British Energy, which they opposed.

• 25 Nov 2025 · COP30 · Hansard source

  More

  With permission, I would like to make a statement about the COP30 climate summit. The climate crisis represents the greatest long-term threat we face as a world, but the transition also represents the greatest economic opportunity of our time. At home, we are driving for clean energy and climate action, because it is right for energy security, lower bills, good jobs and growth for the British people, as well as for protecting future generations. We went to COP because, with the UK representing just 1% of annual global emissions, working with other countries to tackle the climate crisis is the only way to protect our home and way of life, and because there are huge investment and export opportunities for our country by accelerating the transition globally. More than 190 countries participated in this COP to build on the progress made over more than three decades of global co-operation, which has seen us move from a world heading for 4°C or more of warming to one where national commitments put us on course for around 2.3° to 2.5°; from a world where no major economy had a net zero target to one where 80% of global GDP is covered, thanks in no small part to the leadership of the UK at COP26 in Glasgow; and from a world where a majority of energy investment was in fossil fuels to one where twice as much is invested in clean energy. The energy transition is happening, the world is moving and multilateralism is working. The forces around the world—including here in Britain—who want to deny that the climate crisis exists, or to delay the action we need to address it, are losing. But at the same time, we were conscious in Belém of the further progress that needs to be made. Our Brazilian hosts were determined to make this an “implementation COP”, and the negotiations served as a focal point for action. This was the first COP to be held in the Amazon, and therefore a significant focus was on protecting forests. The UK was proud to work with Brazil to help it develop the pioneering Tropical Forest Forever Facility, and work on this was moved forward at COP. The UK was also proud to work alongside the Brazilian presidency on the global climate action agenda, which is about building coalitions of Governments, businesses, cities and civil society groups to accelerate action on issues including reducing methane emissions, phasing out coal and driving investment in clean energy. Thousands of British businesses, as well as our researchers, universities, mayors and others, were involved. The agenda is part of the unstoppable transition that is happening in the real economy, including here in Britain, where our net zero sectors are growing three times faster than the economy as a whole, and where £52 billion of private investment has been announced in clean energy since July 2024. Turning to the negotiations themselves, I want to put on record my thanks to the UK’s brilliant COP negotiating team, led by our chief negotiator Kate Hughes. I saw once again in Belém the huge admiration there is around the world for the talent, expertise and dedication of our civil service, as well as the recognition of British climate leadership, which has built up over many decades under Governments of different political parties—the foundation of our ability to stand up for Britain on the world stage. Of course, there is a truth that we must acknowledge: these summits are hard and complex. More than 190 countries negotiating how to transform their economies and societies is never going to be easy. We did not get everything we wanted from the talks, and there were times when it appeared that there would be no agreement, but in the end an agreement was reached, and the outcome represented progress on three critical issues. The first is about redoubling our efforts to keep global warming to 1.5°. Last year, the Prime Minister announced the UK’s target to reduce emissions by at least 81% by 2035, based on the previous Government’s carbon budget. Many other countries have announced commitments over the last 12 months, including China pledging to cut its emissions for the first time, alongside the EU, Brazil and a total of 120 countries, covering three quarters of global emissions. However, we must do more to close the gap to 1.5°. Recognising the urgency of action, it was agreed in the final COP30 text that all countries had to play a part to keep 1.5° within reach, that this required us to meet net zero as a world by or around the middle of the century, and that all countries should be encouraged to raise their targets. There will now be a forward process into COP31 next year, so we remain focused on the urgency of this issue. Secondly, ambition on reducing emissions goes hand in hand with finance. This is in our interests, because there is no route to global stability, growth and development without supporting developing countries to take the low-carbon path and to better protect their populations from the impacts of the climate crisis. At COP29 in Baku last year, countries agreed that we needed to mobilise at least $300 billion per year for developing countries by 2035, and to scale up towards $1.3 trillion from all sources. COP30 agreed to target a share of the global resources agreed last year towards a trebling of adaptation finance by 2035, to make sure that developing countries have the resilience they need. Thirdly, we know that there is no solution to the climate crisis without action on the transition away from fossil fuels. The need for this transition was agreed by all countries at COP28 in Dubai, including by the UK under the last Conservative Government. The Brazilian presidency put forward the idea of agreeing to a road map so that we could grapple with the difficult issues facing fossil fuel-producing countries, as well as the need for a just and fair transition. At COP30, we saw the emergence of a broad coalition of 83 countries from the global north and global south, backed by more than 140 global businesses and civil society groups that endorsed the idea of a road map. This turned out to be the hardest sticking point in the talks, and it could not be agreed in the final text because some countries objected, yet as a result of the momentum built, the Brazilian presidency announced at the conclusion of the COP that it would launch such a road map on fossil fuels, as well as a road map to halt and reverse global deforestation. These coalitions of the willing are important when we cannot reach universal agreement, as we have seen with the Powering Past Coal Alliance, initiated by Britain and Canada, which is now supported by 65 national Governments. The COP30 agreement also took important steps forward on building carbon markets, the just transition, technology transfer, and transparency on implementing commitments so that countries are properly held to account. Taken together, this package represents incremental but important progress and extends the arc of the progress we have seen over 30 years of COPs. That was particularly important this year, because the summit was a test of whether countries would continue to work together on the collective threat we face or whether, with the US stepping out of the Paris agreement, there would be a domino effect of others departing. That has not happened. At COP30, more than 190 countries reaffirmed their faith in the Paris agreement, their faith in working together to keep global warming to 1.5°, and their faith in multilateralism. The message coming out of Belém was clear: whatever the challenges, clean energy and climate action are the foundations on which the global economy is being remade and rebuilt. That is good for Britain because of the economic opportunities that clean energy represents. It is good for Britain because it is the route to energy security and lower bills. And it is good for Britain because it is the only way we can keep future generations safe from the threat of climate breakdown. I commend this statement to the House.

• 25 Nov 2025 · COP30 · Hansard source

  More

  I have huge respect for the right hon. Gentleman and his work under the previous Government on a whole range of development and climate issues, and I thank him for his question. I think my view of COP is a bit like the Churchill view of democracy: it is the least-worst system we have. For all the complaints and all the problems with it, we are bringing together 193 or 194 countries and, as he will know from his experience of COPs, there is an element of accountability: the smallest island states can confront the big emitters. This is hard, and it is painful, but I know that the right hon. Gentleman cares passionately about these issues. We skated over it in these discussions, but I would just say to him that the agreement to treble adaptation finance within the new collective quantified goal that was agreed last year, which the hon. Member for South Cambridgeshire (Pippa Heylings) drew attention to, is a significant development. It is not as much as many of the developing countries want, and looking at the scale of need—Hurricane Melissa, and so on—we can see the difficulties. I was involved in the £100 billion overall finance that Gordon Brown produced around the Copenhagen summit; again, it was hard, and developing countries complained about it being late, but it did set a bar of accountability for the developed world. I agree with the right hon. Gentleman that I am sure the process could be better, but I do think it is an important mechanism of accountability and driving progress.

• 15 Jul 2025 · Renewable Energy: Private Sector Investment · Hansard source

  More

  Since the election last year, we have secured over £50 billion of investment into the UK’s clean energy industries. Last year’s renewables auction for allocation round 6 was the most successful in our history, and we will shortly open the AR7 auction. This is the way to deliver energy security, lower bills and good jobs for our communities.

• 15 Jul 2025 · Clean Power: Jobs · Hansard source

  More

  This is an important issue that we need to take seriously. At the moment, it comes under the health and safety regime, but we are consulting on the best arrangements to ensure that we have the highest standards of safety. There are high safety standards in place, but as we see the growth of batteries, we will endeavour to ensure that those standards are maintained.