Energy Costs

Mike Reader Excerpts

Tuesday 9th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Hannah Spencer]

I will continue, if that is okay.

Bills have gone up by 79% since the energy crisis began in 2020. That is an extra £5,000, when our constituents’ hard-earned wages are already stretched to breaking point. Yet, from 1 July our constituents face another increase, of £221, when the next Ofgem price cap comes into effect. That is why, on my second day in Parliament, I helped to get the all-party parliamentary group on fuel poverty back up and running, and why I will join Fuel Poverty Action and other campaigners on 1 July to demand that energy costs are brought down for good.

The scale of this crisis for families is enormous. It also perfectly captures what the Green party means when we talk about rip-off Britain. While my constituents are struggling, fossil fuel giants and privatised energy companies are cashing in, and almost a quarter of energy bills are taken as profit. In the first month after the US and Israel’s initial strikes on Iran, the share value of just five North sea oil and gas companies was boosted by £73 billion—£73 billion in one month. The family owners and chairman of the private oil and gas company Perenco are worth £8 billion and are now among the top 25 richest people in the UK.

All of that has happened in a country where a million children under five live in fuel poverty, and where one in three kids in Greater Manchester lives in poverty. Working hard used to get people a decent life; now it is more likely to line the pockets of billionaires, fossil fuel companies and energy giants.

The Green party is clear that things have to change. First, people in my constituency need support immediately, not in three months’ time. The Chancellor is apparently “monitoring the situation” and will intervene if necessary, but on behalf of families dreading the months ahead, and on behalf of disabled people who have high energy use all year round to run specialist equipment, I am telling the Government that today is the day when it is definitely necessary. Does the Minister agree that the Ofgem energy price cap should be frozen to provide universal support for households now? If not, what are the Government going to do to support bill payers with rising energy costs from July and into the winter? Will they increase the warm home discount, which has not kept pace with rising bills? Shifting some policy costs off bills is positive, as are steps to separate electricity and gas prices, but all electricity levies could be paid for more fairly by progressive taxation. We need to be taxing the wealth of multimillionaires and billionaires more fairly. Providers of frontline support, such as community warm spaces—of which there are a lot in my constituency—need immediate support too. Does the Minister agree that those vital community assets should get lower energy rates?

Secondly, it is time to stamp out profiteering. Unite the Union found that UK energy companies made £30 billion in pre-tax profits in 2024 alone. While the Government’s anti-profiteering framework announced in May is welcome, what other steps is the Minister taking to stop billions being transferred from bill payers to the pockets of international shareholders? What assessment has been made of the benefits of taking the grid, which enjoys some of Britain’s highest profit margins, back into public ownership?

Thirdly, we need a fully funded, local authority-led, national home insulation scheme that people trust to insulate homes to an energy performance certificate standard of B or above, and an EPC scheme that cannot be manipulated. Our homes leak more heat than most places in western Europe—trust me, I have seen them.

Real action demands investment and stronger regulations so that every retrofit job delivers proper savings and real improvements. Next week, I hope to meet some of the victims of the Conservatives’ failed home insulation scheme. As a plumber, if I had done a botched job, I would have been forced to fix it or pay up. Why is the Minister’s Department not ensuring that every single victim of shoddy contractors receives remediation?

[Mike Reader (Northampton South) (Lab)]

Will the hon. lady give way?

[Hannah Spencer]

I am going to continue.

Fourthly and finally, we must go further and faster on renewables. New fossil fuel extraction will not bring down bills or improve the UK’s energy security—a fact I know the Minister agrees with. Since the start of the war in Iran, wind and solar have saved the UK from gas imports worth £1.7 billion. Can the Minister provide assurance that the Government will not approve proposed drilling at Rosebank, Jackdaw or Cambo, or allow new oil and gas extraction through tiebacks to existing production facilities? How will the Department use the upcoming energy independence Bill to accelerate the roll-out of renewable energy and reduce reliance on imported fossil fuels?

I am pleased to have secured this debate on my 100th day as an MP. Last Sunday marked the 100th day of the US-Israeli war against Iran, which, as well as inflicting untold suffering and devastating in the region, has triggered the UK’s second major energy price crisis of the 2020s. I recognise all that the Government are doing to bring that international crisis to an end, and I hope the Minister will use this moment to also try to end the crisis of unaffordable energy costs for my constituents and millions of others across the country.

--- Later in debate ---

[Martin McCluskey]

The hon. Member makes a powerful point. We will come forward with the response on community benefits soon. I point him towards what we have already announced regarding a trial of free wind power for communities close to generation, which will be coming later this year. His point about workforce is also really important. That is why I am chairing a workforce taskforce with the TUC to work through those points and make sure that we have good, home-grown jobs that are unionised and pay decent wages, and that local communities are feeling the benefit of that.

[Mike Reader (Northampton South) (Lab)]

The hon. Member for Gorton and Denton (Hannah Spencer) referred to retrofitting in her speech, and the Minister has talked about its importance. In Northampton, one of the biggest concerns people have about committing to retrofit is getting a dodgy builder. The Energy Security and Net Zero Committee recognise that, and we have recommended to Government that they bring forward a licensing scheme for contractors and an accreditation scheme for tradespeople. Could the Minister set out how the Government are progressing on that?

[Martin McCluskey]

My hon. Friend makes a really important point. We are coming forward soon with our proposals for consumer protection. I have said before in this Chamber that the first thing that landed on my desk, when I came into this role in September, was the NAO’s report into the previous Government’s energy company obligation scheme, which was shocking—awful. To answer the point raised by the hon. Member for Gorton and Denton, my driving force behind any consumer protection work that we do is to make sure that no one faces such a situation ever again.

We are working with those affected by the problems with solid wall insulation and internal wall insulation. We are working through a process of audits to reach every single one of those homes by next year and make sure that those people get the support they need. The hon. Lady mentioned that in her remarks, and we are taking action on SWI and IWI to reach every household. In some of the hot spots for poor work, we are sending people door to door to make sure that we reach each household, audit the properties, work out what remediation is required and then remediate it. We will be able to provide a more detailed update on that work soon. Those actions and others will lift 1 million households out of fuel poverty by 2030.

The warm homes plan is an offer for everyone. For those on low incomes and in fuel poverty—those who need it most—we are providing £5 billion of direct grant support for home upgrades delivered by local authorities and social housing providers. Given where the hon. Lady’s constituency is, I pay tribute to the work that the Greater Manchester combined authority has been doing through the warm homes social housing fund and the warm homes local grant—it is leading the way in some of the work that is being done.

We are making it easier for everyone to access low and zero-interest finance for technologies that can bring bills down over time. We have a strategic partnership with the Green Finance Institute to establish low-cost loans, ideally before the end of this year, to make sure that people have access to finance and can take advantage of clean technology; we cannot have a situation, as we have had in the past, where only those people with the deepest pockets are able to access these cost-saving measures.

We are, of course, continuing to support the expanded boiler upgrade scheme available to every eligible household in England and Wales. We have also broadened the range of clean heat technologies supported by the boiler upgrade scheme and continue to work with the industry to make clean heat and home energy upgrades simpler.

As the situation in Iran has developed over the past few months, we have seen that households want the chance to generate and use their own clean electricity. That is why the Government are supporting a rooftop revolution to bring solar technology into more homes; hon. Members may have seen the increase in solar over recent months. Subject to final approvals, we are bringing an additional £100 million of funding to the warm homes social housing fund, to support the delivery of up to 57,000 solar installations in this financial year. Our plan is to make plug-in solar available in this country for the first time, opening opportunities for homes where traditional rooftop installation is harder.

We also know that, in too many cases, the people paying the price of inefficient homes are the people with the least power to change them. Around 1.6 million children in this country live in cold and damp conditions in private rented accommodation, which is frankly a disgrace. That is why, as part of the warm homes plan, we are introducing new minimum energy efficiency standards in the social and private rental sectors. Alongside what other parts of Government are doing on wider housing reforms, such as the Renters’ Rights Act 2025, they will make sure that renters can benefit from warmer homes and lower bills, and that energy affordability is not reserved just for owner-occupiers.

Before I conclude, I want to turn to a couple of other points. The hon. Member for Gorton and Denton raised some issues around taxation. I have already mentioned in response to other Members the windfall tax, which remains in place, opposed by the Conservatives and the SNP. We have also recently announced increases to the energy generators levy and the encouragement to take those generators from the contracts they are on at the moment on to longer-term contracts for difference. Within the price cap is a cap on profit; the earnings before interest and taxes allowance caps profit at 1.9% and ensures that profit is there, but adequately capped.

I agree with the hon. Lady that we need to be going further and faster on the deployment of clean energy, but I draw her attention to the actions of some of her colleagues in local authorities across the country, where Green councillors have opposed clean energy that, on the latest estimate, could power 9.9 million homes. If we believe in clean power and this agenda, we must place our political will behind it to make sure that we move away from fossil fuels as quickly as possible.

The Government’s message here is straightforward: we are acting to deliver support directly to those who need it most. We have a serious, long-term plan to reduce exposure to fossil fuel price shocks, improve the homes people live in and ensure that everyone can reap the benefits of this Government’s clean power mission. Our approach is practical, fair and, above all, rooted in the everyday concerns of households. I thank hon. Members for their contributions to this debate.

Question put and agreed to.

Oral Answers to Questions

Mike Reader Excerpts

Tuesday 2nd June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Chris McDonald]

The hon. Lady raises an important point about managing the transition, and that is certainly what this Government are doing. I just want to challenge the point about the number of jobs being created by the number being lost. I know that the Opposition are always keen to quote the research from Robert Gordon University, but it does point to more jobs being created than lost. Actually, the recent report from the Confederation of British Industry now says that 1.1 million jobs in our economy are now dependent on net zero. But clearly, we do need to support the transition—it will not happen on its own. That is why, through our North sea transition funding and the opportunities through our clean energy technical colleges, we are providing that opportunity for people.

[Mike Reader (Northampton South) (Lab)]

Twenty-five per cent of the manufacturing output of the east midlands is in the food and drink sector, but that sector feels left behind in the clean energy transition without support from Government programmes, such as the British industrial competitiveness scheme. What support can the Minister give to the food and drink sector to ensure that it continues to prosper in the east midlands and to create jobs in constituencies such as mine?

[Chris McDonald]

The Government and I recognise the importance of the food and drink sector. My hon. Friend is right to point out that the sector is not included in the British industrial competitiveness scheme, but our boiler upgrade scheme does apply to these industries. One thing that I am doing is looking at the role of third-party intermediaries. The Department intends to provide a regulatory role for Ofgem, and subject to parliamentary time, we should be bringing forward measures that will benefit the food and drink industry.

Oral Answers to Questions

Mike Reader Excerpts

Tuesday 24th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mike Reader (Northampton South) (Lab)]

Does the Secretary of State share my concern, or dismay, perhaps, that at a time when families are concerned about the cost of energy and the price at the pumps, the Conservatives have become obsessed with oil and gas licensing and not taking any action at all to reduce bills?

[Ed Miliband]

My hon. Friend makes a really important point. The Conservatives come here month after month making the same argument about something that will not reduce bills by a single penny. It was they who said that during the last crisis and when they were in government. This Labour Government are about reducing people’s energy bills, which is the priority of the British people.

Oil and Gas

Mike Reader Excerpts

Tuesday 24th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mike Reader (Northampton South) (Lab)]

I have found this debate quite fascinating. What nonsense from the Conservatives! We are watching a party rip itself up as it worries about more defections to Reform, and Conservative Back Benchers parrot the lines of their Front Benchers. We know from media coverage that the Conservatives are promoting people to the Front Bench based on their social media clout, so I look forward to many more one-liners and AI-generated speeches as they all try to get to the front. We have heard arguments that sound less like a plan for Britain and much more like they are straight from the Reform playbook, talking down our country and creating more uncertainty and worry for families across the UK.

To be clear, I fiercely oppose further oil and gas exploration in the North sea. Expanding new drilling would not address the pressures that families face right now, and it would not give our country long-term energy security and sovereignty. In fact, it would exacerbate the problem. There is a claim that we can simply turn the drilling on, that billions of pounds are available right now without any Government subsidy, and that, all of a sudden, we will get more oil. That is a fairytale—it is nonsense. Drilling and expansion is expensive. The best supplies are already tapped out. Profiteering drillers and exploiters are honest about this. There are other places around the world where they would much prefer to drill, to make much bigger profits for their stakeholders. Drilling is not a magical solution that will benefit British families.

Even if North sea fields were opened today, as the motion proposes, the UK would still depend on imported gas by 2050, but it would make up 94% rather than 97% of the total. It would make almost zero impact on our long-term energy security. Let us consider the two projects mentioned in the motion. Jackdaw would reduce import dependence by roughly 2%, with the UK continuing to be heavily reliant on international supplies. Rosebank would reduce oil dependence by around 1%, and all that oil would be destined for exports, not for the pumps.

[Richard Tice]

Is the hon. Member aware that there is about a decade’s worth of wonderful shale gas in the great county of Lincolnshire that can power this great nation?

[Mike Reader]

The discussion on fracking is perhaps one for another day.

We have heard claims that there are billions of pounds to be invested, but in reality, when it comes to development, it is the public who pay the price. In some cases, taxpayers foot around 80% of the development bill. Modelling on Rosebank and ending the energy profits levy shows that there could be a net loss of about £250 million to the Treasury, while operators would receive about £1.5 billion in profits. That should give us pause for thought. Who are we here to represent—our neighbours who are facing high prices at the pumps and high fuel bills, or multimillionaire shareholders?

There is also the fundamental question of whether the Government will keep their promise to future generations on the climate crisis. International bodies, including the International Energy Agency, have set out that new exploration licences are not compatible with limiting warming to 1.5°C. Last year was the first time in history that global temperatures exceeded 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.

We have a legal obligation, but, more importantly, we have a duty to act in the best interests of our country and our people in the long term. If we expand fossil fuel extraction in full knowledge of the consequences, we are choosing to delay that responsibility and we will feel the effects. We are already feeling the effects in food prices. The No. 1 issue that our farmers are facing is climate change. We will feel the impact of extreme heat and air quality on health, and we will see the effects in global instability, which feeds straight back into costs here at home.

The task ahead of us is to make sure that we stick with the plan, focus on doubling down on renewables, say no to oil and gas, and, ultimately, make sure that we deliver a clean future for our country.

--- Later in debate ---

[Bradley Thomas]

We are increasingly dependent on China because of decisions taken by this Government. The pursuit of renewables-based future energy infrastructure is increasingly dependent on countries that are adversarial to us and pose a risk to our long-term energy security. The hon. Member is right on that point.

This is not just about energy; it is also about jobs and public finances—something the Government know only too well, following their economic choices. The North sea has long been a vital source of revenue for the Treasury, creating billions of pounds that support public services and infrastructure. Analysis by Offshore Energies UK shows that there is £165 billion of estimated economic value in the North sea, should the Government muster the political will to seize it.

[Mike Reader]

Will the hon. Member give way?

[Bradley Thomas]

I will not give way any further.

To accelerate the decline of that sector without a fully viable replacement is not just economically risky but fiscally short-sighted. At the same time, we must consider the livelihoods tied to the industry, as colleagues across the House have stressed. Tens of thousands of skilled workers depend directly or indirectly on oil and gas. These are not abstract numbers; they are engineers, technicians, supply chain workers, families and, more importantly, whole communities. If we move too quickly without a realistic transition plan, we do not simply phase out an industry; we create unemployment, lose expertise and weaken entire regions.

That is happening right now. This is not just a theoretical concern; it is raised by those who are closest to the issue. Trade union leaders have been clear. The general secretary of the GMB has described the Government’s stance on oil and gas as “madness”. Unite the union has warned plainly that such policies will put jobs at risk. Even Juergen Maier said that extracting more gas and oil from the North sea would boost jobs and tax revenues. Those are not voices that the Government usually say are opposed to progress; they are voices that represent working people, so why on earth are the Government choosing to ignore them?

We have to consider the global context. The UK accounts for a relatively small share of global emissions. Even if we were to reach net zero tomorrow, the impact on global temperatures would be limited. Meanwhile, major economies that compete with us continue to rely heavily on fossil fuels as they balance growth, development and transition. That is why we have to get the balance right. True leadership from the Government lies not in symbolic gestures but in practical solutions that can be adopted globally. The pursuit of net zero, as currently framed, risks becoming an exercise in self-imposed constraint—one that weakens our economy, compromises our energy security, threatens jobs, reduces vital tax revenues and lowers living standards for all, while delivering limited benefit.

Heating Oil Support

Mike Reader Excerpts

Monday 16th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Martin McCluskey]

The hon. Member makes an important point. I know Ministers in my Department have been discussing that with the CMA and will carry on doing so. The CMA has started its work looking at the heating oil market and will, I hope, come forward soon with proposals that we can examine, to determine whether further regulation is required.

[Mike Reader (Northampton South) (Lab)]

I welcome the Minister’s statement, which will reassure a lot of families in Northamptonshire. Could he give us a bit more detail on the timeline under which this will be brought in, and assure people across Northamptonshire that the process will be easy to access, without bureaucracy?

Local Power Plan

Mike Reader Excerpts

Tuesday 10th February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mike Reader (Northampton South) (Lab)]

Northampton is one of the towns across the UK that will benefit from the local power plan. Does the Secretary of State agree that my schools, colleges and universities, the four hospitals in my constituency, and my sports clubs, including the Cobblers—one of the greenest football clubs in the country—will benefit from the plan, and that the wealth generated by local power will be kept in our community?

[Ed Miliband]

I congratulate the Cobblers and all the organisations in my hon. Friend’s constituency. He is absolutely right. We think there are huge benefits across the country. GB Energy is, I think, now opening its website so that different groups can register an interest and work with it.

Offshore Wind

Mike Reader Excerpts

Wednesday 14th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Ed Miliband]

That is an incredibly important point, and the great thing about clean power 2030 is that it will mean gas sets the price much less of the time. With contracts for difference, the reduction in prices feeds through to bills.

[Mike Reader (Northampton South) (Lab)]

This is a fantastic announcement for the UK, and it is also fantastic to hear that the Secretary of State is already preparing for AR8. Can he assure the House that his Department is going to focus as much on the mid-term and long-term storage that we need to support all this growth in generation?

[Ed Miliband]

My hon. Friend makes an important point. Battery storage and long-duration storage, for example, are things that we are working on as a Department, as is Ofgem—they are crucial parts of the jigsaw.

Oral Answers to Questions

Mike Reader Excerpts

Tuesday 15th July 2025 Commons Chamber

[Miatta Fahnbulleh]

We are listening to businesses, particularly small and medium-sized businesses. We have heard companies complain, for example, about being locked into expensive fixed-term contracts. That is why Ofgem is working to deliver blend-and-extend contracts so that businesses can benefit from lower prices. We have heard their frustration at the lack of a redress system, which is why last December we expanded the ombudsman service to 99% of businesses so that they can get redress and financial awards of up to £20,000. We have also heard their frustration about energy brokers, which is why we have consulted on introducing regulation of third-party intermediaries. We will respond in due course.

[Mike Reader (Northampton South) (Lab)]

Last week, the Energy Security and Net Zero Committee heard from Make UK and representatives from the chemical, petrochemical, steel and ceramics industries that closer alignment and collaboration with the EU on energy pricing is critical to reducing bills. That is also recognised in the Government’s industrial strategy. What more is the Department doing to bring that forward quickly?

[Miatta Fahnbulleh]

My hon. Friend makes a good point. Industry voices have been calling for that close alignment, particularly on the emissions trading scheme—we have heard that from UK Steel, the CBI, Make UK and the Energy Intensive Users Group—and we believe that those stronger linkages are the right thing to do to cut red tape at the border, to protect consumers from higher costs and, critically, to boost trade and growth, which the Government are absolutely committed to doing.

Electricity Market Review

Mike Reader Excerpts

Thursday 10th July 2025 Commons Chamber

[Ed Miliband]

I thank the hon. Lady for her questions. There is not necessarily a monopoly on good ideas. On the whole idea of new build housing having rooftop solar installed as standard, the last Labour Government were going to do it in 2016, but it got abolished by the previous Government. It is an absolute no brainer. It actually unites people whether they like solar on land or not, so it is really good that we are doing that.

On decoupling, absolutely—that is part of what clean power 2030 will do. Gas will set the price much less often than it does at the moment, and we will be moving to contracts for difference rather than renewables obligations, which means that the reductions in price will feed through to consumers. That is key. We will publish the cost-benefit analysis later in the year, as our document published today states. The hon. Lady is right about the SSEP, which, to be fair, was started under the previous Government and will be published next year. That will be a crucial way in which we guide where the new infrastructure is built, precisely to get over the problem of the disconnect between the generation we need and the network infrastructure.

[Mike Reader (Northampton South) (Lab)]

As a member of the Select Committee, I enjoy that I can give a wry smile every single week when academics, non-governmental organisations, consumer groups and industry say they had so much delay and faffing from the Conservative party and now we are getting on and delivering.

On zonal pricing, it is fantastic to see that we are giving some certainty to the market, and I thank the Secretary of State in particular for setting out that we are going to start tackling excessive transmission charges. In Northamptonshire, Green Hill Solar is bringing forward a massive opportunity for clean power right on my doorstep. Does the Secretary of State agree that that type of investment, and the certainty that the statement brings, will create quality technical jobs locally in Northampton and reduce people’s energy bills?

[Ed Miliband]

On my hon. Friend’s point about certainty, which is really important, global inflation has affected the offshore wind sector. I take it from the comments by the shadow Secretary of State that we should just say, “Well, let’s not bother with offshore wind, then. Let’s just stick to gas.” We just have a difference of view. I think that would be such a mistake. It would leave us so exposed, and we know what happened in the past.

On my hon. Friend’s point about jobs, this is a massive opportunity. I had a chance recently to visit the site of the new Rampion 2 wind farm off the English coast. This is going to create thousands of jobs, as well as jobs in the supply chain. When I talk to hon. Members across the House, I am struck by how many places contribute to the supply chain, and we want more of that. We want those jobs made in Britain. That is the point about GB Energy, the National Wealth Fund and the clean industry bonus, which will be part of auction round 7.

Cost of Energy

Mike Reader Excerpts

Tuesday 11th February 2025 Westminster Hall

[Mike Reader (Northampton South) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Mr Western. I thank the hon. Member for Bath (Wera Hobhouse)—a fellow member of the Energy Security and Net Zero Committee—for introducing this important debate. We have been doing a lot of work over recent weeks in the Committee on energy pricing and the cost to consumers, so it is very timely.

It is clear that the Government have an ambitious plan to achieve clean power by 2030. For families in my constituency and across the country, that mission is really about lowering energy bills. Quadrupling offshore wind, tripling solar, doubling onshore wind and getting projects such as Hinkley over the line and operational are all critical things that will ensure resilience in our energy markets. Importantly, they will also protect UK consumers from volatile foreign markets, taking back control from Putin and petrostates, and placing the power of energy in the hands of British people. Those targets represent the biggest expansion of renewable energy in our history, and could save families hundreds, if not thousands, of pounds a year on their energy bills.

I recognise the great points made by the hon. Member for Bath in her opening speech, particularly on innovation in the sector. I also welcome her thoughts on heat pumps because I, too, believe that more than just heat pumps can solve this crisis, and it was positive to hear her talk about heat batteries. I want to add to the debate by speaking more about the energy cost crisis the Government are tackling, how it started and what we need to do to solve it.

The Select Committee heard evidence that paints a stark picture. Average energy bills are now 43% higher than in 2019, with over 6.1 million people living in fuel poverty. The situation in my constituency reflects the national crisis, with families and businesses struggling under the astronomical weight of energy costs.

However, the crisis did not happen overnight; it is the direct result of years of Conservative failure to properly insulate our homes, diversify our energy sources, reform the energy market and, ultimately, protect consumers. The previous Government’s resistance to onshore wind, their devastating cuts to energy efficiency programmes and their reckless over-reliance on volatile international gas markets has left British taxpayers paying the price.

When the last Labour Government left power, energy efficiency installations were at their peak, with 2.3 million homes upgraded, but the next Government dropped support and the numbers plummeted. As was mentioned, we now have some of the least efficient housing in the whole of Europe. The consequences of those decisions are felt every day by my constituents, who find themselves living in poorly insulated homes. There are 17,000 homes in Northampton South with an energy performance certificate rating of C or below. Those homes waste energy, but also my constituents’ money.

The fundamental issue is clear: we must break our dependence on gas if we want energy bills to come down. As Ofgem’s chief executive officer told the Committee a few weeks ago, unless we transform energy infrastructure we will remain at the mercy of volatile international gas markets. The evidence shows that, in a clean power system, even a major shock of the kind we have seen in recent years would see bills rise by an average of 9%, versus 44% following the gas crisis in 2022. That is why this Government’s mission for clean power is so vital. It is not just about the climate; it is about bringing bills down. Under questioning from our Committee, Ofgem’s representatives agreed that the target, while ambitious, is very achievable. However, they also warned that, without urgent action on planning reform and supply chains, we risk missing that crucial deadline.

We must also acknowledge the historic failures of market regulation. Consumer debt has now reached an astronomical £3.82 billion, which is nearly double what it was two years ago. When we pressed Ofgem representatives on what would trigger serious Government intervention, they could not give a clear answer, but it is clear that something more has to be done. The chief executive admitted that they should have developed much more detailed rules on prepayment meters and market regulation much earlier, rather than relying on broad principles that left vulnerable customers exposed. Even now, Ofgem acknowledges significant gaps in its powers to protect consumers, particularly around data sharing between Government Departments to identify vulnerable households that need support.

The Committee dug into one particular example: the regulator’s handling of supplier failures, which is deeply problematic. We were told that when energy companies went bust, the shareholders were able to walk away with hundreds of millions of pounds of energy hedges, while taxpayers were left picking up the bill. Ofgem admitted to us that it lacks the power to recover those funds on behalf of the taxpayer, so hundreds of millions of pounds have been lost to those who have gambled on our energy market. That is a striking example of how the market has been stacked against ordinary people. The regulator’s director of markets did acknowledge to the Committee that some suppliers are still not compliant with new financial resilience requirements, but he could not assure us as to what actions Ofgem would take if those suppliers fail to meet the deadline by March.

Moving to clean power is essential, and we must take immediate action to protect vulnerable households. That is why I support the move to a social tariff; a discounted energy scheme for low-income households would make sure that we build a fairer, greener and more sustainable energy system for everyone. At its core, a social tariff is a targeted discount on energy for people on low incomes, which would act as a vital safety net and ensure that nobody must choose between heating and eating. A social tariff could provide a guaranteed below-market rate for eligible households, with automatic enrolment for those who qualify. There would be no complex switching around or shopping around, just straightforward help for those who need it.

The evidence shows that 6.1 million households now live in fuel poverty, with many of those who are struggling paying a poverty premium. They are using prepayment meters or are on standard variable tariffs, which is simply wrong. A properly designed and implemented social tariff would be mandated across all suppliers, so that no one misses out; it would automatically enrol eligible households, using existing data to remove barriers to entry; and it would deliver real savings for those most in need.

As one of the richest economies in the world, we should make sure that everyone can afford to keep their homes warm. The technology and the mechanism exist, but now we need the political action to make it happen. Achieving clean power by 2030, combined with proper consumer protection and targeted support, will bring bills down for good. The previous Government’s failures have cost families dearly, and I urge Members on both sides of the House to use their voice to call for greater protection for energy users and greater power for regulators, and to call out the profiteering of energy companies at times of crisis.