Heating Oil Prices: Rural Areas

Graham Leadbitter Excerpts

Wednesday 4th November 2026 Westminster Hall

[Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)]

I congratulate the Member across the Moray Firth from me, the hon. Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross (Jamie Stone), on securing this debate.

In Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey, 44% of homes are off the gas grid, and over 60% rely directly on oil central heating—more than triple the Scottish national average and nearly six times the UK average. Across Scotland as a whole, 142,000 households depend on heating oil to keep warm, yet while grid-connected homes have an energy price cap, which in itself is going to see a huge increase, off-grid households have no such protection.

Heating oil is an unregulated market, leaving consumers massively exposed to price volatility. When prices reached 123p per litre, an average household using 2,000 litres faced an annual bill of nearly £2,600—more than £869 higher than the main energy price cap, and that does not include electricity on top. A pensioner in Findhorn wrote to me after paying £1,205 for just 1,000 litres of kerosene, describing it as simply unsustainable. Pensioners with severe medical conditions report orders exceeding £900 per tank, forcing them to choose between heating their homes and buying basic essentials.

Powers over energy market regulation and consumer protection remain with Westminster, yet Ministers refuse to institute price caps or regulate minimum delivery thresholds. That underscores a fundamental truth: Scotland is an energy-rich nation, yet under Westminster control, forgotten homes are left out in the cold.

[Torcuil Crichton]

Will the hon. Member give way?

[Graham Leadbitter]

No, I will finish.

With independence, Scotland would take full control over energy market regulation, price caps and consumer protection, preventing such a crisis from happening in the first place.

Long Duration Electricity Storage Systems

Graham Leadbitter Excerpts

Tuesday 20th October 2026 Westminster Hall

[Mr MacDonald]

The hon. Gentleman has hit the nail on the head. There is not enough in it for the communities to benefit from. Pump storage seems to be as good a way of providing electricity that we could find.

In the highlands, we have the wind, water and geography that make the area so important for our national energy system. We have been producing hydroelectricity for the rest of the country for generations and we now have the opportunity to store much more of it. The highlands already generate 12 times the amount of electricity they need, but we have one of the highest levels of fuel poverty in Britain. Go figure, as my children would say.

When Alex Salmond was First Minister of Scotland, he declared that Scotland could become the “Saudi Arabia of renewables”. Yes, the hills of Scotland are covered in wind turbines, but they are manufactured abroad and are often owned by overseas utilities. From a multi-billion pound industry, Scotland’s communities got only £30 million of community benefit last year and the highlands got only £7 million. That is just £30 per head of population in the highlands.

The highlands already generate almost 8 GW of renewable electricity per year; roughly a third from hydroelectricity and two thirds from onshore wind. Even before factoring in pump storage, we play an important role in the electrification of the UK. I have said in this House before that I want the highlands to properly benefit from the enormous value of their natural resources. I was hopeful about onshore wind investment and the jobs and opportunities it could bring, but in practice that has been minimal. The proposed pump storage projects are now the only remaining chance I can see to bring proper money into my left-behind part of Britain.

Why does electricity storage really matter? Long duration storage has an important role in our energy future and the highlands have a particular ability to help deliver it. We need to be able to store electricity when there is plenty of it and to use it when we need it. Batteries play an important role in managing shorter periods, but we need technology that is capable of supplying electricity for much longer stretches.

Pump storage is a proven technology, capable of providing large amounts of electricity for long periods. These are long-life infrastructure assets, which are expected to operate for more than a century. They use electricity to pump water from a lower reservoir to a higher reservoir; when electricity is required, water is released through the turbines. As people can imagine, with our geography the highlands is very well placed for these assets. Our lochs, hills and mountains allow us to create the height differences that pump storage requires. The technical term is hydraulic head. In simple terms, the greater the height difference between the reservoirs, the more energy that can be produced with the same amount of water.

This summer, Ofgem announced that it has provisionally approved three pump storage sites in the highlands: Coire Glas, near Invergarry; Loch Kemp, near Loch Ness; and Lochan na h-Earba, which is quite near Newtonmore. These three sites will produce a collective 4 GW of electricity, which is three times as much electricity as Greater Manchester uses. The development costs will be over £5 billion, which will make the entire scheme by far the biggest ever infrastructure investment ever seen in the highlands. There are also three more pump storage sites that are keen to get Ofgem’s go-ahead: Loch Fearna, near Invergarry; Loch Ericht; and Loch na Cathrach, on Loch Ness.

[Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)]

The hon. Member mentioned Lochan na h-Earba, which is in my constituency. The number of projects included in the Ofgem list at the moment, which he mentioned, and the number of projects that we could build and get benefit from differ quite significantly. And in addition to the possible projects in the highlands, there are some in the lowlands as well, in Dumfriesshire and other areas, which could benefit from Government investment, time and effort to get them onstream. Does he agree that we absolutely need to maximise the use of the extremely reliable and extremely well-tested technology of hydro?

[Mr MacDonald]

I think that hydro is a far better source of electricity than wind. It has much less visual impact and it is available when we really need it; we have quite a lot of wind, but it is obviously dependent on the wind blowing.

The future energy scenarios report of the National Energy System Operator, or NESO, for 2025 suggested that Britain could need between 13.2 GW and 16.6 GW of long duration storage by 2050. The six sites in the highlands that I have mentioned will go a long way towards providing that storage.

The second point I wish to make is about the implication for the electricity market and the people paying their bills. One aspect of this is the way that the wholesale electricity market works. Excuse me for stating the obvious, but gas still sets the price for electricity when gas-fired generation is needed, even at a time when a great deal of electricity is coming from renewable sources.

Mains gas is 8p a kilowatt at the moment, whereas electricity is 26p a kilowatt, or more than three times as much. Broadly speaking, people in rural areas across the whole of the UK do not have mains gas. In my patch, only those people in Inverness city and Dingwall receive mains gas.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr MacDonald]

I have always believed that tide is probably the single best energy source, because it is entirely predictable and operates well in the estuaries where our cities are, so we do not need to transform it. I am not up to date, but it is something that we should really concentrate on.

[Graham Leadbitter]

There are also huge opportunities for geothermal energy, particularly in Aberdeenshire, but also in other parts of Scotland. The Government could focus more attention on geothermal and tidal stream. Does the hon. Gentleman agree with that sentiment?

[Mr MacDonald]

Hopefully, we will have all these different renewable energy sources coming through, but geothermal is a big one.

We have an enormous opportunity in rural Scotland to facilitate the electrification of Britain, and long-duration storage can help us make better use of the renewable electricity we generate. It can improve the security of supply and support a more efficient electricity system. Rural Scotland plays a role in enabling Britain to achieve its net zero ambitions. However, the impact on our communities is currently almost entirely negative. It is like telling the inhabitants of Norway or Aberdeen in the 1970s that there will be an oil and gas boom, but the locals should not benefit from it. As things stand, these multibillion-pound pump storage sites will produce few local jobs, no legacy housing and minimal community benefit for the people of the highlands. That is completely unacceptable.

Pump storage sites are an essential part of our national energy portfolio, and they are great for Britain. Let us make them great for the highlands, too.

--- Later in debate ---

[Michael Shanks]

Let me come to that point, because we have discussed that before. My starting point is that communities who host infrastructure should feel the benefits of it, and they should be meaningful benefits. We consulted on how we will deliver both community benefits and shared-ownership opportunities for communities. We have put £1 billion pounds into Great British Energy to make sure that there is the financial capacity for communities to take up that shared-ownership offer. We will continue to push that.

I have spoken before about the need for us to balance that though; ultimately, all the costs of building these projects is borne by consumers across the country. The hon. Gentleman and I share the objective of bringing down bills as much as possible. There is a balance to be struck and I do not pretend that is easy because his community—he is right to champion them—will rightly want more and more community benefits. My job is to balance that against the cost of these projects. I need first to ensure that they are economical and will be built, because that is important for the national interest, and secondly that they are built as affordably as possible so that we can bring down bills for everyone. There is a balance to be struck, as I have said to the hon. Gentleman before.

I know that the hon. Gentleman will always want us to go further, but I would just say that the cap and floor scheme is designed to provide not huge public subsidy to make these projects happen, but just the right amount to make them viable. That is the key thing; the cap and floor scheme is designed to be a viability mechanism, so there is a risk that we end up using consumer bills to subsidise projects if we go too far. That does not mean that I do not share his ambition, and I have been very clear with developers that we should see genuine community benefits coming forward and that those should be meaningful for communities.

[Graham Leadbitter]

Very briefly, I am raising these issues with colleagues in the Scottish Government as well, but while DESNZ and Ofgem have a role in this, I think it is helpful for every organisation to be pushing the developers and saying, “What are you doing about the roads infrastructure? What are you doing about how you get people to and from the sites?” Projects represent big influxes of people into areas, while the local infrastructure can be just lane-and-a-half roads, with passing places and all that. Will the Minister commit to putting some pressure on those companies to invest in that?

[Michael Shanks]

I thought the hon. Member was going to conclude by asking whether I would commit to putting some pressure on the Scottish Government, which would be unlike him. But I agree with him, actually. I have had a number of really productive conversations with Stephen Gethins, Scotland’s Energy Minister, on exactly that topic of how we can make these projects work for local communities. If we can bring that local investment into roads and other infrastructure, it leaves that legacy that I think we all want to see in communities. It is also of benefit to the projects, which will need some investment in road infrastructure anyway.

In summing up, I want to pick out two issues. First, I really welcome the hon. Member for Inverness, Skye and West Ross-shire’s recognition of the importance of long duration energy storage for our system. The truth of the past few years has been a recognition that, for decades, we had a consensus on building renewables across Scotland and the rest of Great Britain, but we did not make the investment that we should have in building the grid to connect them. We are now paying the price for that.

Equally, storage is absolutely central to how renewables can work in the system, giving us the flexibility to deploy that energy when we need it most and making sure that we are genuinely bringing cleaner, cheaper power to homes and businesses when we need it, which is how we bring down bills. It also has to be the foundation of delivering economic growth. The hon. Gentleman rightly recognised the Prime Minister’s commitment to growth in every postcode. Energy policy does not exist in a vacuum; it is part of our industrial strategy.

We are building these extraordinarily important projects that will last for more than a century. There has to be some legacy for communities from those projects, and we have to bring people with us on this journey. I frequently say in this place in particular, but in the main Chamber as well, that we do need to build infrastructure as a country—that is important—but we should try to bring communities with us wherever we possibly can. Community benefits and real investment are a critical part of that.

The Scottish Government are clearly a key partner in this, given that planning decisions in Scotland are not for me but for the Scottish Government. I know that they share my ambition about the importance of both deploying long duration energy storage and community benefits. They have guidance on this matter, and we are working together on it.

Whether it is through community benefit funds, the bill discounts that we have announced in terms of electricity infrastructure, or our ongoing work to make sure that there is an industrial benefit from these projects, I hope that the hon. Gentleman recognises that, while we might not get everything quite to the extent that he would like, these projects are an opportunity for communities to benefit from construction, from community benefits and from—I hope—a genuine lasting legacy.

Importantly for us as a country, this is how we deliver the secure, home-grown clean power that we need in the system, bring down bills for people and continue the transition to net zero, which is so important. I commend the hon. Member for Inverness, Skye and West Ross-shire again, and I look forward to what I am certain will be further conversations on this in due course.

Question put and agreed to.

Oral Answers to Questions

Graham Leadbitter Excerpts

Tuesday 13th October 2026 Commons Chamber

[Blair McDougall]

As ever, my hon. Friend is a champion for business and industry in Southport. The short answer is yes, I will write to Ofgem on this matter, and I will share the response with my hon. Friend. In the meantime, I reassure him that Ofgem’s cost allocation and recovery review is considering how costs should be recovered from consumers, and the arrangements for recovering network costs.

[Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)]

I entirely agree with the comments made about business costs. That also applies across the public sector; local authorities and NHS trusts and boards all pay substantial amounts for their energy, particularly leisure trusts, which have swimming pools and ice rinks and provide a great deal of community wellbeing. Will the Minister commit to addressing these issues for public authorities as well as businesses?

[Blair McDougall]

The hon. Gentleman makes one of the many good arguments for acting at pace to get cleaner energy, which is good for business and household consumers, and saves a considerable amount of money for the public sector. That is exactly why we are investing in, for example, rooftop solar across the public sector. We will certainly work with the Scottish Government on that.

Jackdaw and Rosebank Oil and Gas Fields

Graham Leadbitter Excerpts

Thursday 3rd September 2026 Commons Chamber

[Katie White]

I thank my hon. Friend for his comments and interest in this and other energy decisions. I cannot make any further comments on these particular projects because of the robust regulatory process that is under way.

[Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)]

Both Labour and the Conservatives are guilty of failing oil and gas workers by driving uncertainty in this debate: the Conservatives by their U-turn on climate change policy, something which both the oil and gas sector and the renewables sector are deeply unhappy with, and the Labour Government by their complete lack of pace in decision making on regulatory issues, such as the transmission network use of system—TNUoS—charges, the 18 months to decide what is happening at Ardersier, and now on Jackdaw and Rosebank. The whole energy sector needs pace in and clarity of decision making. Scotland would make this a priority with the full powers of independence. Will the Government put the same pace and effort in?

[Katie White]

I agree with the hon. Member that the Opposition have made a certain number of U-turns, and those U-turns keep coming so we will continue to see what their position is. Also, their lack of clarity on strategic planning for our energy systems—they are not listening—has had regretful consequences. Where I would disagree is that the deadline was in August, and everybody would expect us to listen to that evidence and take account of all that input. On not moving at pace, nobody would say that this Government have not moved at pace in terms of our clean energy mission.

Oral Answers to Questions

Graham Leadbitter Excerpts

Tuesday 7th July 2026 Commons Chamber

[Ed Miliband]

What is he on, Mr Speaker? To be clear, even in the most ambitious scenarios, our plans for solar in 2030 would use 0.6% of agricultural land; I am happy to repeat that. I do not know what makey-uppy nonsense the shadow Minister is producing. The wider issue is that the Conservatives complain about energy bills, and energy bills are too high, but we have the cheapest form of power available—solar power—and they say no to it. They want to keep us hooked on fossil fuels, and we saw the impact of that with the Iran war and the Russia-Ukraine crisis. I think the Conservatives have got to go back to the drawing board.

[Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)]

6. Whether he held discussions with the Scottish Government and local authorities prior to announcing potential nuclear energy sites in Scotland.

[The Minister for Energy (Michael Shanks)]

Ministers commissioned Great British Energy Nuclear’s study of Scotland’s potential for new nuclear last autumn. That study indicates that Scotland has land areas with high potential for future development. We remain open to discussions with the Scottish Government on opportunities for new nuclear in Scotland, and I welcome the conversations I have with the new Scottish Energy Minister on a range of topics.

[Graham Leadbitter]

Two years ago, Labour promised to cut bills for every household by £300. Not only are households now paying hundreds of pounds more instead of less, but Labour’s nuclear tax on household energy bills will cost Scots a further £300 million over the next decade. The Minister knows that Scottish energy consumers pay among the highest electricity prices in the UK; he knows that there are serious alternatives that are quicker to implement and could actually reduce bills, such as geothermal energy; and he knows that the Government’s own figures for a nuclear waste disposal facility are up to £53 billion. With serious and far more cost-effective alternatives available, will the Minister listen to the Scottish people, stop the obsession with costly nuclear power that Scotland neither needs nor wants, and transfer energy power to—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I think the Minister has got the message.

Cost of Heating Oil

Graham Leadbitter Excerpts

Wednesday 15th April 2026 Westminster Hall

[Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. I congratulate the hon. Member for North Norfolk (Steff Aquarone) on securing this important debate.

In his statement to Parliament yesterday, the Prime Minister said that energy bills had gone down on 1 April, yet for literally tens of thousands of my constituents, that is simply not true. It is estimated that in my constituency alone, 22,500 households—approaching 50,000 constituents—are not connected to the gas grid. Thousands of those homes are reliant on oil and LPG tank gas to heat their homes.

Let us delve a bit deeper. One low-income house in Newtonmore, which is in the Cairngorms national park, an arctic-alpine mountain environment, went from paying £640 to £1,220. The supplier told them there was a minimum order of 1,000 litres. A constituent in Forres went from paying £307 plus VAT in December, to £827 in March for 500 litres. That constituent is disabled, with multiple health conditions.

This inequity is not new. When it comes to their electricity bills, people in Moray, the highlands and across Scotland are paying among the highest energy prices in Europe, and substantially more than most of the rest of the UK, despite vast amounts of that energy being produced right beside them.

[Torcuil Crichton]

Like the hon. Member’s constituency, many businesses in my constituency, including distilleries, rely on kerosene heating oil for manufacturing processes. Would he urge the UK Government and the Scottish Government to devise a loan scheme to help these businesses to get over this Trump spike?

[Graham Leadbitter]

I will come on to the energy powers that should be devolved, but it is currently the UK Government’s responsibility.

Over the years, Scotland has sent over £350 billion to the Treasury from oil and gas activity, yet when it comes to the crunch, all the Treasury can come up with is the equivalent of £35 per household for oil. Yet again, the Scottish Government have had to step in and boost support by more than doubling the fund, for an issue that the UK Government have failed to address properly in the first place.

Rural homes and communities in Scotland are being overlooked and ignored. Is the Minister really happy that he is presiding over discrimination that is putting so much financial stress on vulnerable households? Will the Government take urgent measures to increase significantly the support funding? Will they provide support to those reliant on LPG gas for their heating? Will they properly regulate heating oil with a price cap, which I fully support?

If the Government are unwilling to take those actions, will they devolve energy powers and budgets to the people of Scotland, so that they can make their own decisions in their own Parliament on these vital and urgent issues?

Oil and Gas

Graham Leadbitter Excerpts

Tuesday 24th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)]

I will start with some facts: energy security is national security, global instability is rife, and our closest ally is now, at best, hugely unpredictable, and it is questionable whether it is reliable. When the UK Government should be protecting energy supply, they are instead sacrificing North sea jobs and communities on the altar of ideology. Job losses continue month on month, and the loss of skills is rife. “Just transition” are mere words for the communities affected. For me, this is a repeat of what Thatcher did to Scotland’s mining communities and the steel industry in Motherwell in the ’80s, destroying an industry without proper future planning and transition arrangements. Scottish Labour MPs—indeed, all Labour MPs—should be ashamed of their Government’s actions in that regard. It is utterly shameful.

[Brian Leishman (Alloa and Grangemouth) (Lab)]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for giving way, which is generous of him. I have been very critical of my Government in relation to the closure of Grangemouth refinery, but I will give you the opportunity of being critical of your Government’s inaction on the issue.

[Graham Leadbitter]

I think I am here to scrutinise what your Government are doing—that is the job of MPs in the House of Commons. I would also say that Conservative Members are no better on this. Government Members have an ideology of driving towards net zero and clean power, but it appears with no regard for the North sea; Conservative Members have an ideology of protecting oil and gas in the North sea, while getting rid of climate change targets. The industry does not like either of those positions—not the oil and gas sector, and not the renewables sector—and everybody in the Chamber knows that. Those sectors need each other to survive, and they need the skills to transition from one to the other. If we lose skills in the oil and gas sector, we will not develop the renewables sector as quickly as we need to, and those are the facts of the situation. If those skills and jobs are lost, or disappear into other places around the world, such as the Caspian sea or the Gulf of Mexico, they will not easily be brought back.

[Graeme Downie (Dunfermline and Dollar) (Lab)]

The hon. Gentleman talks about the North sea industry and ideology. What were his views when his Government were in coalition with the Green party, which wilfully wanted to destroy those jobs immediately overnight because of ideology? Did he support that Government coalition?

[Graham Leadbitter]

I supported the coalition at the time because we were gaining plenty of other benefits from it, but I concede that I was not 100% supportive of its position on oil and gas. I suggest that under the current SNP leadership, there is a balanced view of the North sea, and a pragmatic approach to protecting jobs in its oil and gas sectors, while still driving towards renewable jobs and the reindustrialisation of Scotland through the diversification into renewables that we need, recognising that oil and gas will be needed for decades to come.

[Andrew Bowie (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine) (Con)]

There is some confusion about current SNP policy on oil and gas. Is it, or is it not, still SNP policy to be against new oil and gas in the North sea?

[Graham Leadbitter]

Current SNP policy on oil and gas is that there should be a proper assessment of each individual application. That is the normal licensing process. I would think most Members of the House would recognise that if a process is put in place, it should be applied rigorously and consistently.

[Harriet Cross]

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

[Graham Leadbitter]

No, I will not give way again because I do not have much time.

There are many reasons why we need to support oil and gas, not least protecting the workforce and not losing the skills. There are also numerous other areas where the Government are not making decisions quickly enough. On the transmission network’s use of system charges, Government policy has taken 18 to 20 months to come through, and it will be several more months before it is in place. That will be after the start of allocation round 8, which is being accelerated, and many companies in the North sea are saying that they will hold on and wait for AR9 before making an investment decision, because they want certainty. That lack of certainty, pace and pragmatism is preventing those jobs from being created and preventing a just transition.

I can apply the same point to Ardersier, which is in my constituency, and the proposal by a Chinese company, Ming Yang, which wants to invest there. I understand that the Government have reasons and things that they need to consider in this matter, but it has been on their desk for 18 months. A decision is needed to either move on to other investors or decide that there is a risk, so that we can mitigate the risk, let them get on with it, create supply chain jobs and have serious, high-skilled, high-paid jobs that will provide a just transition and a serious opportunity for North sea workers. That decision needs to be made sooner rather than later. We experienced an excessive delay in the run-up to decisions on carbon capture, usage and storage; it took forever to get there, and jobs have been lost because of that lost time.

Let me turn very quickly to consumer pricing. The Government have been waxing lyrical about price gouging by energy companies at the moment. The Government and previous Governments have been responsible for state-sponsored price gouging in the energy market, with the highest prices for electricity in Scotland. With that, I urge Members to—

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

Order.

There was a particularly unedifying exchange between Members in which the use of “you” and “your” was very liberal indeed; I assume that it was addressed directly to me. Can we all try to do a little better? While I am on my feet, I will say that after the next speaker, the time limit will have to be reduced to three minutes in order to get all Members in.

Oral Answers to Questions

Graham Leadbitter Excerpts

Tuesday 24th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Martin McCluskey]

I was pleased to join my hon. Friend in Stornoway last week to meet those organisations. It is absolutely crucial—whether it is through the local government schemes that we are running in England or through the centralised scheme that the Scottish Government are running—that we take advantage of local knowledge to ensure that the support reaches the people who need it.

[Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)]

In Aviemore it will be snowing tomorrow—in fact, in quite a lot of north Scotland it will be snowing to a pretty low level. People in those areas are suffering hugely from massive energy prices for electricity, heating oil and liquefied petroleum gas for tanks. In Aviemore, a 2,500-litre tank, which was filled in November for £1,400, now costs £3,400 to fill. That is the differential that people are having to pay. Does the Minister agree that £35 per household is frankly a drop in the ocean?

[Martin McCluskey]

I think the hon. Member should be careful not to sow fear about these issues among his constituents, which is precisely what his remarks do. My right hon. Friend the Chancellor provided £4.6 million to the Scottish Government, who have increased the fund to £10 million. It is absolutely imperative that the Scottish Government tell hon. Members and constituents how to access the funding. They are delivering that £10 million scheme, which they have told us will be available from 1 April, so it is up to them to set out how it will get to people.

Local Power Plan

Graham Leadbitter Excerpts

Tuesday 10th February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Ed Miliband]

The two ideas that my hon. Friend puts forward sound absolutely ideal for this fund to me, but as for the eventual outcome, I must not put my thumb on the scale too much. He is right about this. We are starting something that will grow bigger and bigger over time. This is partly about raising our eyes and thinking, “Well, if it works in Germany and Denmark, why shouldn’t it work here? Why shouldn’t local people get the benefits of this?”. It represents a big, transformative shift in our thinking about what is possible.

[Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)]

The SNP has been very committed to community energy projects for a long time; indeed, we have invested more than the previous Government in community energy projects—over £67 million in nearly 1,000 projects. This announcement on community and renewable energy, while belated, is welcome. When the Secretary of State talks about community energy, does he include in that community heat projects that can be combined with community energy projects? A turbine with a community heat network, for example, can drive a huge amount of benefit to the local community.

[Ed Miliband]

Yes is the answer to that question. Community energy includes all kinds of innovative projects. As we open these funds for bidding—both from local authorities and community groups—we will find local people coming forward with innovative, imaginative ideas for how to drive this scheme forward. I suspect that we will be overwhelmed with the imaginative innovation that we see, and that is what is so exciting about this.

Oral Answers to Questions

Graham Leadbitter Excerpts

Tuesday 10th February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Chris McDonald]

I am extremely grateful to my hon. Friend for engaging with me on this topic in advance of the recent changes to the emissions trading scheme to include maritime emissions. It is incredibly important that domestic maritime emissions are included, so as to incentivise the investment required to decarbonise. I am aware of the issue in the Isle of Wight. On one route, two vessels will be affected. I know that he has invited me to visit the Isle of Wight and meet the businesses concerned, and I am allowed to make the commitment from the Dispatch Box that I will do that.

[Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)]

Businesses and public services in the north of Scotland pay among the highest commercial energy prices in the whole UK. The Government have had 18 months to try and fix that. Why do they still think it is okay to discriminate against people in the north of Scotland in that way?

[Chris McDonald]

In fact, the Government are taking an approach across the whole United Kingdom to deliver the energy infrastructure and energy generation capacity to guarantee low-cost, home-grown, secure energy for the future, ensuring that the jobs and benefits from that are seen across the country. I would have thought that the hon. Member might wish to welcome those jobs in Scotland. There will be 20,000 additional jobs by 2030 in clean energy industries in his community and mine.