Oral Answers to Questions
Tom Hayes Excerpts(6 days, 22 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Michael Shanks
The hon. Gentleman is right: we should have many, many more solar panels on rooftops. We agree with him on that. I met the UK Warehousing Association recently to look at some of the technical difficulties around ownership and insurance. We want to do whatever we can to unlock the potential, because we have rooftops across the country that can play a huge part in helping us to achieve our clean power mission.
Tom Hayes (Bournemouth East) (Lab)
Once the political situation is stabilised in Venezuela and foreign companies can be enticed to invest somewhere between £100 billion and £200 billion there, it will take emergency repairs, workforce modernisation and retraining and many more things to get the infrastructure and industry in Venezuela up to historical peak capacity. That could take up until 2040. Is it not easier and speedier for the UK to invest in home-grown renewables and nuclear, so that we can guarantee energy independence, and get off the fossil fuel rollercoaster—
Energy
Tom Hayes Excerpts(2 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Rebecca Paul (Reigate) (Con)
More people are now recognising that all is not well with the current approach to energy policy or net zero. That matters because the cost of energy is deeply tied to the cost of living, the cost of doing business, and the security and resilience of our country. It therefore follows that any energy policy which sees us spend £250 million per month to import energy from Europe because our own production cannot meet demand can only be called a failure and a security risk.
The country urgently requires an energy policy that is realistic, reliable and rooted in the pursuit of prosperity, yet what successive Governments have legislated for has been anything but. The net zero agenda is not working and it is time we were honest about that fact. The target may have been well-intentioned, but the current pathway is unaffordable and unworkable.
What many people will be wondering is, how did we get to this point? To address that, we must look back to the Climate Change Act 2008. When the Act was passed, it was the first legislation in the world to set a legally binding national framework for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but it applies only to territorial emissions; that is, emissions that occur within the UK’s borders. This means that while it can be made to look as though we are meeting our climate targets, with a reported 54% reduction in territorial emissions since 1990, we are in fact exporting an increasing share of our emissions elsewhere. This phenomenon, known as carbon leakage, occurs when UK-based industries shut down or relocate overseas to avoid high carbon costs, only for the UK to continue importing the very same goods, often with higher embedded emissions.
Net zero by 2050 may lower UK emissions on paper, but perversely, it is also driving up global emissions in real terms as we become more reliant on imports.
Several forces contribute to this situation. First, UK electricity prices are now among the highest in the developed world, driven in no small part by net zero policies. Secondly, under the UK emissions trading scheme, firms in energy-intensive sectors must buy allowances for every tonne of carbon dioxide they emit—a cost their foreign competitors may not face. Thirdly, the rise of green finance regulations such as mandatory environmental, social and governance disclosure and climate stress testing has constrained domestic investment into high-emissions sectors, even as our competitors around the world forge ahead without similar constraints.
Rebecca Paul
I am going to continue, but thanks for the offer.
The economic consequences are now plain to see. Since 2021, the output of UK energy-intensive industries has fallen by around 35%. In sectors such as steel, petrochemicals and fertilisers, this trend is not theoretical, and the damage already done to once-proud industries is plain to see. At Grangemouth in Scotland, INEOS recently announced the closure of its ethanol production facility. Its founder, Sir Jim Ratcliffe, issued a stark warning at the time, saying that Britain is offshoring its emissions and onshoring virtue—we close plants here, import the same products from abroad, and claim we are greener.
Nowhere is this more apparent than in the decision to reduce North sea oil and gas output in favour of increased imports. On paper, this slashes the UK’s territorial emissions, but in reality, it leaves us more reliant on volatile overseas markets, increases our net carbon footprint and surrenders billions in domestic tax revenue and thousands of skilled British jobs. We appear to have confused decarbonisation with deindustrialisation.
What do we have to show for years of adherence to the Climate Change Act and everything that came with it? We now have the second highest domestic energy prices and the highest industrial electricity prices in the world, with 12 million families struggling to pay their energy bills. I defy anyone to try to sell that as any kind of success.
The old orthodoxy has been tried and found wanting, and we now need a better way forward. That is what we are offering today with our cheap power plan, which delivers on energy security, supports economic growth and protects the public from unaffordable green extremism.
Andrew Bowie
Yes, I do want to scrap that Act. We will scrap that Act because the cost to the British people is far too high and it is unsustainable. That is why we want to bolster domestic energy security by backing British oil and gas, supporting workers and reducing reliance on imports, which have soared as a direct result of this Government’s policies.
Andrew Bowie
I will not because time is limited, and I want to give the Minister time to respond—oh fine, go on!
Tom Hayes
I thank the hon. Member for giving way. On that same website, he talks about the deep emissions cuts that result from the Climate Change Act’s emissions targets. Does he agree with the website that were it not for the Climate Change Act, those emission reductions would not have happened?
Andrew Bowie
I did not know that my website was such a go-to place for Labour MPs. I recommend they read some of the other things on that website, including the setting out of how our cheap power plan will reduce bills.
Oral Answers to Questions
Tom Hayes Excerpts(2 months, 4 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Katie White
It is slightly above my pay grade to determine the Prime Minister’s diary, but I can assure the hon. Lady that we will proudly launch the carbon budget growth and delivery plan later this month.
Tom Hayes (Bournemouth East) (Lab)
Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)
The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero (Ed Miliband)
In the best traditions of the UK, we see it as our duty to work with other countries to tackle the climate crisis and protect future generations. It was British leadership that saw the Climate Change Act 2008 emulated in 60 countries across the world, and it was the leadership of the UK at COP26 that now sees 80% of global GDP covered by net zero. We will maintain that tradition of leadership into COP30 in Brazil and beyond.
Tom Hayes
The Amazon rainforest is the lungs of the earth, but it is gasping for breath. I am pleased that COP30 will be in the heart of the Amazon. Ella, a school student from my constituency, would like to know what steps the Government will be taking to stop deforestation and back nature-based solutions. On behalf of Ella, may I urge the Secretary of State to go as far as possible and do all he can?
Ed Miliband
I thank my hon. Friend for his question, and Ella for her interest in and enthusiasm for this incredibly important issue. Deforestation is a terrible thing for the planet, but it is also terrible for the people who are affected—the indigenous people who live in the forest. Nature-based solutions and solutions that put indigenous people at the centre make a huge difference. This is a COP in the forest, and I think the Brazilian presidency deserves congratulations on that emphasis. It is developing a number of initiatives, including the so-called TFFF—the tropical forest forever facility—to finance the prevention of deforestation, and we are working with it on that.
Warm Home Discount
Tom Hayes Excerpts(6 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Miatta Fahnbulleh
I can commit to that. The Conservatives tell us that our fight to deliver clean power and our work to upgrade people’s homes is ideological. It is not ideological; it is down to bread and butter issues. We know that there are families struggling across the country. We were not willing to accept what we inherited as the status quo, so we are getting on with the job of reducing energy bills, because improving living standards and delivering the change we were elected to deliver is a core priority for this Government.
Tom Hayes (Bournemouth East) (Lab)
The Minister is right that because the Conservatives left our country exposed to fossil fuel prices, people’s wages are being swallowed up by energy costs. It is right that we are sprinting towards clean, home-grown energy as a long-term solution, and the tensions in the middle east demonstrate why that is so important. We must also get support to people right now in Bournemouth East. I welcome the fact that 220,000 families across the south-west, including my constituents, will benefit from help this winter, but my constituents want to feel a bit of breathing room—to live, not merely survive. Will the Minister confirm that tackling the cost of living is our No. 1 priority as a Government, and set out the ways in which the Government are targeting the cost of living crisis?
Miatta Fahnbulleh
My hon. Friend is absolutely right to talk about the cost of living. He is also right to point out that we have huge exposure to global fossil fuel markets, and at a point where we are seeing tensions and conflict in the middle east, energy security becomes so critical. So we will continue, despite the naysayers on the Opposition Benches, to sprint to deliver clean power, but while we do that we are taking action to reduce the cost of living. So, whether it is the expansion of the warm home discount, or the expansion of free school meals, or increasing the national living wage, or the action that we are taking to roll out breakfast clubs, or the action that we are taking to build record amounts of social housing, the Labour Government are committed to bettering living standards—not talking about it, but getting on and delivering the change that we were elected to deliver.
Oral Answers to Questions
Tom Hayes Excerpts(8 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Tom Hayes (Bournemouth East) (Lab)
Green jobs are great jobs, and I welcome the £43 billion of private investment in clean energy since the election of this Labour Government. In order to bring down our industrial energy prices further, what steps will the Government take to get us on to clean energy that we control and off the fossil fuels that are in the control of dictators?
Sarah Jones
My hon. Friend is right to point out the huge amount of private sector investment that is coming in with clean energy. This is why, in the industrial strategy, clean energy is one of the growth-driving sectors where we have seen 10% growth in the economy. We are also seeing hundreds of thousands of jobs, which the Conservatives now seem determined to oppose. We will introduce the clean energy of the future, and that is why we are pushing for clean energy by 2030. That will bring down bills, give us energy security and create really good quality jobs.
Rosebank and Jackdaw Oilfields
Tom Hayes Excerpts(11 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
The final question is from Tom Hayes.
Tom Hayes (Bournemouth East) (Lab)
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and as this is the final question, may I commend the Minister on taking a measured and pragmatic approach at the Dispatch Box? That is in sharp contrast with the Conservative party, which seems to be continuing its journey from zombie Government to shambolic irrelevance. When I talk to investors and businesses in the energy sector, they stress the importance of a plan, whether it is that of the National Energy System Operator, or of mission control, led by Chris Stark. Will the Minister outline the importance of Great British Energy in the planned transition to the jobs of the future?
Michael Shanks
In terms of the tone of the debate, the Government and the Opposition will of course disagree on many things—by the sounds of it, we increasingly disagree on the importance of tackling climate change and net zero—but generally we all want to see a transition in the North sea that is fair and prosperous, particularly for the workers in that industry, to ensure that they have confidence that they will have well-paid jobs to go into. I spend every day in this job taking that incredibly seriously, and whatever disagreements we might have across the Dispatch Box, I hope that is understood. We want to build a transition that recognises that it is already under way, that thousands of jobs have been lost and that it is our duty and responsibility as a Government to ensure that we put in place the industry and jobs that come next. That is what I will spend every day doing while I am privileged to have this job.
Biomass Generation
Tom Hayes Excerpts(11 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Michael Shanks
After an urgent question and a statement, I hope that I will not still be standing here in 15 years’ time, and I suspect the House will support that. Let me be really clear. I do not remember Drax being the poster child for the clean energy transition. I have outlined clearly why this decision is important in terms of energy security, but we wish that we as a Government had had more options. Unfortunately, those options were not there, so we have made the best of a difficult situation to get an incredibly good deal that delivers value for money, improves sustainability and delivers on energy security. In the 2030s, I want to see our clean power system delivering cheaper bills and industrial manufacturing jobs across the country. I hope that, in 15 years, the right hon. Member and I will have a conversation about how that is delivering for our constituents.
Tom Hayes (Bournemouth East) (Lab)
The shadow Secretary of State talked about being under new management, and I suspect that he will be saying the same thing in a few months after the inevitable bloody coup. I commend the statement, which will do some really important things, including: capping Drax’s output; a windfall tax on Drax; millions saved by halving subsidies paid for by my constituents; and the forcing up of sustainability. It is a pragmatic solution to a disastrous inheritance. Does the Minister agree that this will be a better deal for taxpayers and consumers for our energy security and our environment?
Michael Shanks
My hon. Friend summarises the importance of the deal clearly. We have limited the expected rate of return for Drax to a level below that of monopolies regulated by Ofgem. We have halved the subsidies provided to Drax that were in every single deal from the Conservative party, year after year, saving £170 million each year of the agreement. We have introduced a windfall tax with 30% and 60% rates to be clawed back should Drax have excess profits. We are delivering on energy security and on tougher sustainability requirements, but at the heart of the deal is better value for money for the hard-working people of this country.
Heat Batteries: Decarbonising Homes
Tom Hayes Excerpts(1 year ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Deirdre Costigan
As I have laid out, the Government have already taken steps to increase the funding to transition to heat pumps. I am sure the Minister will have more to say on rural communities and the particular barriers they face.
Although heat pumps are extremely important in the move to wean us off gas, they do not work for every home. An estimated 20% of homes are unsuitable for heat pumps. We need to do more to break down the reasons why people can be reluctant to choose them. Air source heat pumps need outdoor space. Many of my Ealing Southall constituents live in small terraced homes or flats and do not have much outdoor space, so a heat pump is not a viable or attractive option. Many people have repurposed the space that used to house their hot water tank.
That is where innovative British firms such as Kensa in Cornwall and Tepeo in Reading come in. Both companies use heat batteries, using the same science that is behind hand-warmer packs, to store thermal energy until it is needed. Tepeo’s zero emission boiler, ZEB, uses a heat battery that automatically buys energy at cheaper times of day and releases it when required, reducing energy bills. Users do not need an outside pump; they just need a box about the size of a gas boiler. Because of their small size and their ability to plug and play without needing to do replumbing, heat batteries are a good solution for heating homes in built-up urban environments like London, including parts of Ealing Southall.
Kensa uses shared ground source heat loops that are connected to whole streets or blocks of flats. The energy is connected from the ground, is produced in networked heat pumps in each of the linked houses or flats and is then stored in Kensa’s Sunamp heat batteries. No outdoor space is needed, and it replaces the need for a hot water tank.
Esther McVey (in the Chair)
Order. Before the hon. Gentleman intervenes, may I remind Members that interventions should be concise and should not be speeches?
Tom Hayes
I thank my hon. Friend for securing this debate. I was lucky recently to visit Kensa’s air source heat pumps in Sutton Dwellings in Chelsea. I have also visited Tepeo’s factory; it is great to see the chief executive officer in the Public Gallery today. Does my hon. Friend agree that for heat batteries to enjoy the same penetration of the market as heat pumps, it is important that they benefit from VAT relief and the same levels of subsidy so that we can decarbonise our heating?
Deirdre Costigan
I absolutely agree, and I will come on to exactly those points. Kensa’s approach also uses ground source heat technology, aligned with heat batteries—a cheap and efficient way of rolling out heat pumps at scale. My hon. Friend mentions a visit he made; another example is that Kensa has replaced direct electric heaters with shared ground loops alongside heat batteries in more than 270 flats across three tower blocks in Thurrock. Residents’ bills have reduced by more than 60%, which is a huge saving. Both those technologies can wean us off gas. They are examples of the kind of British manufacturing and innovation that we need to support to create good-quality jobs. However, barriers remain, and I hope that the Minister will consider ways of addressing them.
Oral Answers to Questions
Tom Hayes Excerpts(1 year ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Miatta Fahnbulleh
I thank the hon. Member for that meeting. We are working across Government to ensure that we can provide the support that the community requires after that tragic incident.
Tom Hayes (Bournemouth East) (Lab)
I recently visited the zero-emission boiler manufacturer Tepeo in Wokingham. Its owners were thrilled by the Government’s decision that heat batteries can qualify for the warm homes social housing fund wave 3, but expressed concern about whether they could scale up without the same subsidy support and VAT relief as heat pumps. Will the Minister meet me, and representatives of Thermal Storage UK, to discuss how we can support heat batteries, so that households can become more resilient?
Miatta Fahnbulleh
My hon. Friend is a great champion of our clean power mission, and I would be very happy to meet him and representatives of the sector.
COP29
Tom Hayes Excerpts(1 year, 1 month ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Ed Miliband
We do think that Wylfa has very important prospects. There is an important pipeline of nuclear projects that we are moving forward with, and we look forward to discussions about Wylfa in the coming months.
Tom Hayes (Bournemouth East) (Lab)
I commend the Secretary of State for his leadership and his statement, and join him in his bipartisanship. I am happy to recognise the contributions of Theresa May and Boris Johnson, but it says a lot that it takes Labour Members of Parliament to do that because Conservative Front Benchers are running so fast and so far away from those contributions. Does the Secretary of State agree that clean energy is how we achieve energy security, and that energy security is how we achieve national security when our world is in turmoil and this country faces threats like never before?
Ed Miliband
Both the points that my hon. Friend makes are right. I am happy to acknowledge the role of Theresa May in putting net zero into law, as well as that of Alok Sharma and even Boris Johnson, who fought to champion some of these issues. It is a real shame, and it speaks volumes, that we can say those things and the Conservatives do not.