Energy Security Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateNusrat Ghani
Main Page: Nusrat Ghani (Conservative - Sussex Weald)Department Debates - View all Nusrat Ghani's debates with the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero
(4 weeks ago)
Commons Chamber
Several hon. Members rose—
To get everybody in, the speaking limit will be dropped to three minutes after Carla Lockhart.
Absolutely. That is a practical step that would make a real difference.
Families are entitled to ask what possible justification there is for support sitting untouched while people struggle. We look at the £81 million given by Westminster to Stormont that is sitting in a Sinn Féin-controlled Department rather than reaching households who desperately need it; I ask the Minister to intervene.
Energy security means affordability and policies grounded in reality. People support protecting the environment, but they also expect realism, and that means recognising the simple truth that energy security begins with producing the energy we need ourselves. The North sea has the ability to help power our economy, support jobs and strengthen our energy resilience for decades, yet instead of backing a strategic national asset, the Government too often appear determined to turn their back on it, with a Secretary of State who is so wedded to a failing, crazy net zero agenda rather than helping those most in need.
At a time of global instability, increasing dependence on imported energy while restricting domestic production raises serious questions. That is not energy security; it is exporting jobs, exporting investment and increasing dependence on others. We should be supporting domestic production, backing strategic industries and ensuring that we are using our own resources wherever possible. We should also stop loading further costs on to households and industry through increasingly unrealistic and punitive carbon taxes, which ultimately make life more expensive for working people and businesses. The cost associated with net zero from 2025 to 2050 is £116 billion—£35 billion per year. Those are eye-watering sums and it is the taxpayer who is paying.
The election results should have been a political earthquake—a warning shot—yet the Government have not listened. Instead, they remain trapped in the Westminster bubble, with a lack of understanding of what life actually looks like outside SW1. Let us look, for example, at illegal immigration. The public were promised stronger borders, tougher action and control; instead, we are seeing expensive failure dressed up as progress. More than 200,000 people have crossed the channel in small boats since records began. In 2025 alone, more than 41,000 crossed, making it the second-highest year on record. I have repeatedly raised concerns around asylum accommodation costs. Rehousing asylum seekers is set to total £15 billion of taxpayers’ money in the next decade, and in Northern Ireland, the figure is set to rise to £400 million. I know that that money would be better spent on our own citizens first.
At a time when pensioners struggle, businesses face pressure and families watch every penny, the Government are more concerned about forcing unwanted and not needed agendas and ideology, such as digital ID and net zero. That money would be better spent on our WASPI women, on our pensioners and on meaningful welfare reforms. Where was the support for businesses and farmers that sustain our rural economy and food security? Where was Northern Ireland? There was no meaningful recognition of the continuing barriers within our own United Kingdom internal market.
What frustrates people most is what was simply not in the King’s Speech: antisemitism, Islamist extremism, and our veterans. And then there is the EU rhetoric. The public sent a message at the ballot box; it is time for the Government to wake up and start listening.
Making or taking interventions will deny another Member the opportunity to make a speech.
Mrs Elsie Blundell (Heywood and Middleton North) (Lab)
I welcome last week’s King’s Speech and the Bills in it, which aim to put the UK on a stronger path for the future. My constituents have been clear with me: if we are to build a future that is fairer, in which they are not just getting by, but thriving, we need to do politics differently. It is not good enough to suggest that someday in the distant future things might get a little bit better. That is not going to cut it any more.
Today our focus is on energy security, an issue that underscores perhaps more than any other how we cannot carry on with business as usual. Looking across the north of England, we can see the consequences of deindustrialisation, the hollowing out of local economies and the impacts of austerity. It is abundantly clear that we need to view achieving energy security as an opportunity to right those historical wrongs. The inequalities they brought about have been eating away at communities and the values that once made them whole. Reframing energy security as a positive opportunity to reverse the fortunes of towns like mine is the only way to proceed.
The poverty experienced by far too many in Heywood, Middleton and the other towns I represent will not be addressed unless we accept that we need to reindustrialise in a way that safeguards our energy security. I therefore express my full support for the provisions in the Government’s energy independence Bill, the next step in tackling the totally unmanageable bills for consumers and businesses and ending our overreliance on global energy markets.
Challenges with the cost of energy are not a consideration only when it comes to how we heat our homes or power industry; as the sole Greater Manchester MP on the Transport Committee, I also want to consider how the cost of energy affects how we get from A to B. Giving local people the ability to reach employment and leisure opportunities both affordably and in a joined-up manner is something we have pioneered in Greater Manchester. We have made those arguments, taken on our detractors head-on and won, and we have done so through a vision-led approach and place-based delivery.
The delivery of the largest light rail network in the country has completely transformed the prospects of tens of thousands of people in Greater Manchester. The tram is arriving in my constituency, with spades in the ground by 2028, and we are closing gaps in provision so that the whole of Greater Manchester can benefit, including Heywood and Middleton North. We are delivering through a responsive, integrated and affordable bus service that reaches all corners of the city region, having been taken back into public ownership. On rail, I also welcome the Government’s Northern Powerhouse Rail Bill, a clear reflection of our region’s ambition and a firm commitment from Government to decarbonisation and delivery across the north.
In closing, I welcome the King’s Speech and what it could mean for my constituents in Heywood and Middleton North. That said, I want to be completely clear: the window that we have to demonstrate that there is another way is rapidly closing. The security my constituents deserve is not a pipe dream; it is entirely deliverable, and in my view—
Connor Naismith
I will not. It is time to bring water back under public control, ensuring that this life-essential utility is managed as a secure public good, not a private commodity.
In the time I have remaining, I wish to talk about high streets. High streets are the visible heartbeat of our towns, and I warmly welcome the steps taken by this Government to date to support local authorities to intervene to fill empty shops. Intervention is only half the battle, however. We must also cultivate an environment where small businesses can genuinely succeed. Hospitality businesses are vital to that endeavour, and I call on the Government to support Hospitality Together and hospitality businesses in my constituency in their call for a sector-specific VAT cut for hospitality.
Although there is room to go further, this King’s Speech delivers a comprehensive framework of security, and it tells the people of Crewe and Nantwich that the state is back in their corner—
Dr Lauren Sullivan (Gravesham) (Lab)
I welcome the Government’s commitment, set out in the King’s Speech, to drive innovation in the energy sector and deliver clean and more secure energy for future generations. Gravesham is stepping forward to meet the challenge. The Northfleet Green Hydrogen Project was one of 11 successful projects as part of the UK Government’s first hydrogen allocation round designed for its ambition of supporting 10 GW of green and blue energy by 2030. For Gravesham, that means it would decarbonise a paper-making process for much beloved household brands such as Andrex at Kimberley-Clark, which has been a part of Gravesham’s businesses for over 70 years.
Now the science part. Having taught it in the classroom in Northfleet schools, we will now be able to see it in action in Northfleet. Hydrogen will be generated through electrolysis—don’t worry, I’m not going to go through electrolysis with you all—that will generate steam to work through the paper manufacturing process. This will be a hybrid process, so it can run on hydrogen or natural gas. That will enhance our energy security, reduce our reliance on fossil fuels and provide clean energy. Not only that, it is about good quality jobs for Northfleet and the wider Gravesham area.
This particular project, which has had £90 million capital investment nationally, has unlocked £400 million in private investment. There is, however, a critical risk, which relates to connection to the national grid. I will therefore be asking the Minister to meet me to discuss how we can ensure this project stays on track. Looking less than a mile down the River Thames, the lower Thames crossing is in my constituency. Gravesham already faces congestion linked to the Dartford crossing, affecting daily life and air quality. Parts of Gravesham have air quality management areas, with increased nitrogen dioxide levels linked to transport.
The fear is that the increased capacity of the lower Thames crossing will lead to increased congestion in and around Gravesham, so it is essential that the delivery is linked to forward-looking transport solutions that genuinely benefit local communities. That is yet to be truly felt be my constituents and local businesses, so there is a lot more work to be done.
The Thames estuary itself can be used to transport people, as with the Gravesend to Tilbury ferry. I encourage the Government to explore sustainable transport modes such as hydrogen or electric-powered ferried across the Thames, removing congestion on roads. Continuing to rely solely on roads is not a viable long-term solution, and more balanced, community-focused transport is essential to getting people around.
Order. We have three speakers remaining and we have gained a few minutes. The last three speakers can have five minutes each if they do not take interventions.
Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)
After the increase to the time limit, I think I will buy a lottery ticket tonight, Madam Deputy Speaker.
Having worked in energy, I am all too aware that it has not always been high on the political agenda, but since the invasion of Ukraine, it has of course seized the headlines, and it is in the news once again because of President Trump’s distraction plan in Iran. I welcome the Government’s focus on energy security, but I hope that we will not narrow our view of what energy security and clean energy mean. Reliance on fossil fuels is a growing drag on our economy, so the Government are right to push for electrification where viable, alongside home-grown renewable energy to get us off that rollercoaster, but zero carbon renewable gas should also be a critical part of our plan for energy independence.
Many aspects of the energy independence Bill are fantastic, such as new obligations on landlords to invest in renewable energy and beefing up Ofgem with new powers that will enable it to step in where consumers have been ripped off. When it comes to the warm homes agency, I welcome the huge investment that will be going into insulation, but remain concerned about the direction of travel on electrification for almost all homes.
Since I first entered the energy industry just over a decade ago, the zealousness in the London-based civil service around heat pumps has not waned, despite years of evidence that the roll-out and cost reduction of heat pumps has not matched optimistic estimates. I say this as somebody who got a heat pump last year. The total cost of my installation was over £14,000 beyond the £7,500 boiler upgrade scheme payment. I am in a fortunate position, but I cannot say to my constituents that they should spend their savings or get themselves into heaps of debt to get a heat pump. With the way things are right now, the vast majority of people in Cannock Chase cannot afford one, and I have not seen anything about the warm homes agency that will fundamentally change that reality.
If we are serious about helping struggling households, we have to ensure that the agency’s immediate mission is to bring bills down. Let us ensure that the energy independence Bill lives up to its name by also kickstarting a revolution in renewable gas production. A boost to biomethane production could support farmers to handle organic waste better and to secure a reliable income stream; it would bring down emissions in sectors that cannot easily electrify, including the potential for carbon-negative gas through the usage of carbon capture and storage; and it would ensure that we are masters of our own destiny when it comes to a critical fuel that will remain part of our energy mix for decades to come.
The extension of the green gas support scheme to 2030 is welcome, but like all energy investment pipelines, producers and investors need longer-term certainty on the Government’s position. I have heard similar concerns from the hydrogen industry. Although there is widespread support for the Government’s investment in CCS and the first round of hydrogen investment, we still do not have the hydrogen strategy. All these strands need to be knitted together as part of a balanced approach on reaching net zero, supporting our constituents and businesses along the way.
In the Government’s focus on clean energy and the jobs of the future, let us not lose sight of the promise of biomethane and hydrogen as other examples of home-grown clean energy. Above all, let us always be on the side of our constituents who want to do the right thing in decarbonising their homes, but worry how on earth they will afford it.