Energy Markets

Matt Western Excerpts

Thursday 5th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Ed Miliband]

I thank the hon. Lady for the point that she makes. It is worth saying that Lord Browne of Madingley, formerly of BP, was on the radio yesterday making precisely the same point that she and I have made. This is a man who used to run one of the world’s largest oil and gas companies, and he said that the lesson of this crisis is that we have to get on to clean power.

On the hon. Lady’s point about networks, it is important to be transparent about that. It is also important to bear down on those costs, and I obviously discuss that a lot with the regulator.

[Matt Western (Warwick and Leamington) (Lab)]

My right hon. Friend talks about the lessons learned. Despite my youthful good looks, I recall the 1979 Iranian revolution—the last Iranian revolution—which led to a fuel crisis globally. The importance of what we are doing is underlined by the need for the energy transition and the need to improve our domestic energy resilience. That is why we need to see more renewables and to roll out Rolls-Royce small modular reactors urgently and take a lead globally on that.

My right hon. Friend talks about household support. What does he think President Trump was thinking about the impact that this situation would have on businesses and the humble motorist?

[Ed Miliband]

My hon. Friend was obviously a precocious five-year-old in 1979, with a great knowledge of and interest in politics. I will not speculate on the last part of his question, but what he said about the indiscriminate Iranian attacks is an important point to underline. The fundamental point he makes about driving forward with renewables, nuclear and all the things that get us off the markets is surely the lesson that we must all learn from this crisis.

Oil Refining Sector

Matt Western Excerpts

Thursday 11th December 2025 Westminster Hall

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Matt Western (in the Chair)]

Order. I see that seven Members are looking to speak. Let us start with six-minute speeches and see how we progress.

--- Later in debate ---

[Matt Western (in the Chair)]

Order.

[Lee Anderson]

If the right hon. Gentleman wants to intervene, he is more than welcome.

What the Government did not realise at the time is that when they got rid of a coalmine—each coalmine had a football team, a rugby team, a cricket team, a community club, a miners’ welfare, a brass band and a bandstand in the local welfare grounds—it destroyed whole communities, and those communities will never come back. They will never be the same again.

Fast forward 40-odd years and we have a Labour Chancellor and Government, who we would think would protect these industries. Look at the hypocrisy in that part of the world. We have Drax power station, which used to burn coal from a nearby coalmine, just a few miles down the road. I think that was shut about 10 years ago. I remember the Energy Secretary at the time was campaigning to keep it open. How things have changed! The power station now burns wooden pellets from trees chopped down in North America—in Canada. They chop the trees down and put them on diesel-guzzling cargo ships. They then chop them up into pellets using diesel-guzzling machinery on the ship. They then come to this country, are put on diesel-guzzling cargo trains and transported to Drax power station, where we set fire to them. And we say that is renewable energy. That costs the British taxpayer about £1 million a day in subsidies. I think it has cost about £10 billion so far since we have been using wooden pellets there.

Just a few miles down the road we have the perfectly good Lindsey oil refinery, which appears to be doomed, with 400 jobs at risk and a thousand more in the supply chain. If the Government are going to use taxpayers’ money to subsidise industry or keep places open, they should look at the oil refineries, because once they have gone, they are never coming back, and we have lost the community and that sense of pride.

There are not many Government Members here, to be honest—I cannot see many—although I will thank the hon. Member for Alloa and Grangemouth (Brian Leishman) for his passionate contribution. I did not catch most of it because I am a little bit deaf; I will sit a bit closer next time.

--- Later in debate ---

[Seamus Logan]

I hear what the hon. Member says about oil refineries, and I share many of his concerns—you will have heard what I said—but I have also heard him and his party colleagues talking about “net stupid zero”. Does he actually believe that we should cancel all the wind farm projects and all the grid infrastructure rebuilding? Is that what he firmly believes we should do?

[Matt Western (in the Chair)]

Order. I remind Members that when they say “you” they are speaking to me.

[Lee Anderson]

I have heard colleagues talk about “net stupid zero” in the past. We think the targets should be scrapped; we are not against trying different sources of energy to fuel our nation. We are saying we should have a sensible transition. China has got it right: it is burning coal. China is opening coal mines and using coal-fired power stations. The irony is that China makes solar panels and windmills using electricity generated by coal-fired power stations, and then flogs them to us. We think, “That’s great! Look at this: we’re reducing the Earth’s carbon.” We are not reducing the Earth’s carbon; we are just exporting it to other countries. It is absolute madness and hypocrisy. When we are committing this nonsense, it costs our Treasury billions of pounds in receipts a year. It is absolute nonsense. When some of my hon. Friends say “net stupid zero”, that is what they are referring to. And it is stupid—it is absolute madness.

I am going to finish now, because I have had an extra minute and I know other people want to speak. I have been one of those working men who gets up in the morning at 5 o’clock and goes and does a dirty, horrible, dangerous job. I know what it is like to come home, after doing a horrible shift on a horrible job. I know what the people in these communities feel like. They do it because they love their family and their community, so they go and do some jobs that nobody in this room would ever do. This Labour Government should remind themselves what the Labour party was founded on: helping the working man in this country.

--- Later in debate ---

[Euan Stainbank]

When the hon. Lady’s party was in power, in February 2024, in response to a question from the former Member for East Lothian, her then party leader said that the future of the Grangemouth refinery was “obviously a commercial decision”, essentially excluding themselves from taking any action. Does she agree or disagree with the former Prime Minister’s characterisation, considering what we have heard from the Conservative Benches—and I agree—about how oil refineries are strategically important? It was not a commercial decision, and something could have been done when her party was in office.

[Matt Western (in the Chair)]

I am sure the hon. Lady will give the Minister enough time for her speech.

[Harriet Cross]

I absolutely will, so I will end on that point. I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention. I find the what-aboutery from Government Members extraordinary. They seem to think that because something has happened in the past, it is okay for something else to happen now. The Government are shutting down the UK oil and gas sector because they keep taxing it. Jobs such as those lost at Grangemouth are being lost every single week across the country as a result. If the hon. Member thinks that is okay, he should say so, but I do not think it is okay, and that is why I am fighting against it.

--- Later in debate ---

[Katie White]

I am glad that the right hon. Gentleman intervened, as I was going to come on to his points—in particular, his interesting point about the national interest. I say to him gently that I feel we are working in the national interest, but the national interest includes energy security as well as respecting the science of climate change, which is happening. As he is the Father of the House, I genuinely listened to his points, but I was a little disappointed—[Interruption.] He can laugh all he likes, but I listened to his points. He talked about the UK being responsible for less than 1% of emissions. That is the case in terms of nation states, but I think the UK’s impact in the world is so much larger, whether through people following our policy decisions, the impact of our banking sector or our consumption of goods, which has also come up a lot.

We are looking at how we manage the transition, and we want to do it in a way that respects the science, but I am also competitive about where Britain can take advantage of these industries. We want to make sure that we have these industries, including the wind turbines that the right hon. Gentleman mentioned, but we also want to look at how we can make the transition justly and fairly. I will come on to that later in my speech.

Last month, the UK ETS Authority confirmed that current benchmarks will stay in place for the 2027 scheme. That decision gives refineries and other energy-intensive industries the certainty that they need. By maintaining those benchmarks, we are providing stability and breathing space, helping businesses plan, manage costs and prepare for future changes to the scheme.

We are also reviewing compensation for energy-intensive industries. We announced in the autumn Budget that we are assessing the feasibility of including refined products in the carbon border adjustment mechanism, so that imported goods face an equivalent carbon price and the sector’s efforts to decarbonise will not be undermined by carbon leakage. This is the refining sector’s top priority, which the Government are committed to exploring as one of several levers to support the sector’s long-term future. These measures demonstrate our commitment to supporting investment, driving innovation and ensuring that the refining sector remains competitive and resilient as we transition to a low-carbon economy.

Looking ahead, the Government are taking further steps to secure the long-term future of the UK refining sector and to ensure a just transition. The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero has established a dedicated team to work across Whitehall and with industry. A number of Members asked about working across Whitehall; we will continue to do that, to ensure that we maximise the impact. This will guide how we manage the transition, protect energy security and support jobs and local communities.

We will continue to engage closely with the fuel industry to identify practical measures that can strengthen the sector. That is why, in June, we convened the first ministerial—[Interruption.]

[Matt Western (in the Chair)]

Order. Can I have a certain decorum from other Members while the Minister is speaking?

[Katie White]

Thank you, Mr Western.

That is why, in June, we convened the first ministerial roundtable with the refining industry in more than a decade, providing a clear signal of our commitment to partnership and dialogue. As announced in the autumn Budget, we will shortly launch a call for evidence to inform the UK’s long-term strategy for the downstream oil sector. That will seek industry views on the opportunities and barriers to transition, the risks facing the sector and the types of support needed to deliver and manage a competitive transition. These actions underline our determination to work hand in hand with industry. I thank the Scottish Affairs Committee for its recent report, and my hon. Friend the Member for West Dunbartonshire (Douglas McAllister) for sharing it.

The refining sector has faced long-standing challenges, and recent closures underline the scale of change. Petroineos’s decision to end refining at Grangemouth was disappointing. As my hon. Friend said, while the difficulties there were well known, there was no Government plan in place before we took office. Within weeks of doing so, we worked with the Scottish Government to put together a £100 million package to support the community and invest in the local workforce, along with tailored support to secure good alternative jobs. When we came into government, there was no overall plan for Grangemouth from either the SNP or the Tories. We have put one in place.

We are committed to securing Grangemouth’s long-term industrial future. We are working closely with the Scottish Government, the Office for Investment and Scottish Enterprise to attract future investment and transform the area into a clean energy and sustainable technology hub. This effort is already delivering results. We have received over 100 inquiries to date, and the investment pipeline is supported by the £14.5 million in funding announced at the Budget, alongside the National Wealth Fund’s £200 million for co-investment opportunities at Grangemouth.

Today, I can confirm that, along with the Scottish Government, we have made £3 million available for MiAlgae, an innovative biotechnology company that produces sustainable omega-3 rich products, which will create over 130 direct jobs at the site and 310 jobs across Scotland over five years. These steps demonstrate our commitment to a managed transition by supporting communities, attracting investment and ensuring that sites like Grangemouth—

[Matt Western (in the Chair)]

Order. The Question is—

[Sir Edward Leigh]

On a point of order, Mr Western. You are a fellow member of the Panel of Chairs. Can we make it clear to our colleagues that it is normal courtesy for the Minister to allow the proposer of a motion some time to wind up, if only a minute? That did not happen on this occasion.

[Matt Western (in the Chair)]

The right hon. Member is absolutely right that it is a courtesy, but my understanding—I think he will understand this, too—is that it is not an obligation. On this occasion it was not possible for the Minister to do that, given the number of interventions that we had, as well as the full contributions from all the Members who chose to speak.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered the future of the oil refining sector.

Cost of Energy

Matt Western Excerpts

Tuesday 11th February 2025 Westminster Hall

[Wera Hobhouse]

The hon. Member predicts my next point: it is important to emphasise the Government’s responsibility to look after the most vulnerable in our society and protect them during any efforts to rebalance gas and electricity prices. However, I cannot comment on the council tax bill to which he refers; that is, of course, a local matter.

It is imperative that any policy changes prioritise the needs of those vulnerable households, ensuring that they are not left behind as we look to electrify the UK’s heating system. A more focused way to adjust policy funding could be to collect revenue from levy-funded programmes through a single levy control system. Such a system would have two straightforward rates—one for electricity and one for gas—set by Ministers at an appropriate level. These rates would be based on the cost per kilowatt-hour, so more energy-efficient technologies would have lower taxable amounts, making them comparatively more affordable.

Unlike other rebalancing methods, this approach would allow the Government to directly manage the impact on households. As electricity is always more efficient than fossil fuels, its price would go down, encouraging more people to switch. Policy reform is an essential step towards addressing the unacceptable price disparity that currently exists in the UK between gas and electricity. I hope the Minister has listened very carefully to the proposal that I have just put forward.

The impact of Brexit on our energy system has been somewhat brushed under the carpet. The turbulence of covid and the shockwaves from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine have dominated the conversation and masked the quieter, but significant, effects of our departure from the EU’s energy framework. One of the most pressing issues is passive divergence: not following new EU regulations simply because we are no longer a part of the system.

That is not always a deliberate choice, but it is already creating challenges, particularly in electricity trading. The UK was once part of an integrated, efficient energy market with the EU, where electricity flowed freely, reducing costs and improving security. Now, without alignment, we risk inefficiencies, higher prices and reduced energy security. We need strategic decision making. Not all divergence is bad, but it must be a conscious, informed choice, based on clear evidence, not ideology.

When it comes to energy, the benefits of co-operation with the EU are overwhelming. Shared markets bring stability, common rules ensure fair trade and joint planning strengthens resilience against global energy shocks. The EU and the UK share the same fundamental energy challenges in securing affordable, clean and reliable power for the future. Our interests remain aligned and so should our approach. We must ensure that divergence, where it happens, is a decision and not an accident.

In addition, we need to focus on policies for community energy. We Liberal Democrats have long championed the idea of community energy. Community energy currently accounts for less than 0.5% of total UK electricity generation capacity. However, according to the Parliamentary Environmental Audit Committee, with the right Government support, the sector could grow 12 to 20 times by 2030, powering 2.2 million homes and saving 2.5 million tonnes of CO₂ emissions every year.

I welcome the Government’s inclusion of the local power plan in the Great British Energy Bill, which marks a welcome step forward for the community energy sector. The plan intends to deliver an ambitious target of 8 gW of renewable energy projects by 2030, in partnership with local authorities and communities across the country. To achieve that target, significant scale-up of local and community-owned energy will be required and we will need a support programme in place for community energy organisations in England, drawing on successful models from Scotland and Wales.

Bath and West Community Energy, a community benefit society, has reduced carbon emissions by an average of 3,300 tonnes per year with its around 31 renewable energy projects. Let us make sure every community across the country has something like Bath and West Community Energy in its patch. As we have repeated many times, community energy reduces bills, creates local jobs and accelerates the transition to a low-carbon future.

Home insulation is another key area to reduce energy costs, particularly in my Bath constituency, where much of the housing stock is old and in dire need of insulation. Insulation remains one of the most effective ways to reduce energy demand, lower bills and cut emissions, but the Government have significantly delayed the implementation of their warm homes grants. The scheme was not implemented this winter and will only operate from next winter. The Government must tackle the efficiencies of these schemes head-on, ensuring that residents receive retrofit measures that provide value for money and stand the test of time. The Select Committee on Energy Security and Net Zero will look into those issues tomorrow, and I hope people will listen very carefully.

To accelerate and de-risk delivery of the warm homes plan, the UK Government should create a national expert advice service for England so that households have the confidence to receive tailored advice to upgrade their homes. Doing so would deliver consistent outcomes across the country and end the postcode lottery in advice services.

I hope the Government consider the points outlined today. We need long-term solutions that will make clean energy affordable for all, meet our net zero targets and lift the pressures on families of rising energy costs.

[Matt Western (in the Chair)]

I remind Members that they should bob if they wish to be called in the debate.

--- Later in debate ---

[Luke Murphy (Basingstoke) (Lab)]

From what I am hearing, the hon. Member is making an anti-renewables, anti-action on climate change speech. She mentioned that electricity prices are some of the highest in Europe, but her party had been in government for 14 years when the Government inherited those high prices. Could you confirm on the record that you think it is the Conservative party’s position that all levies on bills to support renewables should be scrapped?

[Matt Western (in the Chair)]

Order. I remind hon. Members to refer to each other as “the hon. Member” as opposed to “you”.

[Joy Morrissey]

I welcome the hon. Member’s contribution. It is wonderful to hear his commitment to the climate change emergency. We need to move forward as a country to make sure that our energy costs remain low. We did not commit to a £300 reduction in energy prices, nor did we commit to scrapping the winter fuel payment for pensioners. We went into the election without making those promises. I am simply holding the Government to account right now.

Oral Answers to Questions

Matt Western Excerpts

Tuesday 8th October 2024 Commons Chamber

[Ed Miliband]

The hon. Gentleman will understand that I have to be careful in what I say about planning issues, but he should rest assured that I have frequent conversations with my counterpart in the Scottish Government and, no doubt, that is one issue we will be discussing.

[Matt Western (Warwick and Leamington) (Lab)]

Warwick and Leamington must be one of the sunniest places in the United Kingdom given the flurry of applications we have had for solar farms. There is a “loss of amenity” caused by one application, but if that community were prepared to welcome onshore wind turbines, of which we have none in Warwickshire, rather than a solar farm, would the Secretary of State or the Minister agree to support that? Will they meet me to discuss the issue?

[Ed Miliband]

Every planning application and development consent order is assessed on its merits. Importantly, the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my right hon. Friend the Member for Streatham and Croydon North (Steve Reed), is polishing a land use framework, which has long been needed in this country. It will set out the balance between food security, the use of renewable energy, the restoration of nature and the role of farming. I hope that will help with some of the issues that hon. Members are facing.