Ed Miliband
MP for Doncaster North · Labour · United Kingdom
“Gentleman raises the issue of arms, and I talked in my statement about the double lock. I want to take on his point on the F-35s. To be clear with the House, we stopped providing direct parts to Israel’s F-35 programme in October 2024, under my right hon. Friend the Member for Tottenham (Mr Lammy) when he was Foreign Secretary.”
“I thank the shadow Foreign Secretary for his response. It is our first time opposite each other at the Dispatch Box, so let me congratulate him on his appointment—he has a proud record in Parliament as Security Minister and Chair of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee, and brings great expertise to this House.”
“Israel has the right not to live in fear of vile terrorism, and the Israeli state has the right to protect its people and defend its territory, but that cannot justify what has happened in Gaza. Over 70,000 people have been killed, at least 20,000 of them children—20,000.”
“Our extension of the global human rights sanctions regime will enable us to target those responsible for violations of international humanitarian law, whether in Gaza or anywhere else in the world.”
“The right hon. Gentleman has an honourable record on this issue. I will quickly clip through his questions, knowing the constraints on time, Madam Speaker. I agree with him on the World Central Kitchen. It is appalling that the investigation has been closed down.”
“Iran must never have a nuclear weapon, so we are also acting this week, alongside our allies, to report Iran to the UN Security Council for its nuclear violations, and I can announce today that we are reimposing major economic sanctions on Iran in line with the European Union and the United States.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,382 lines we hold for Ed Miliband, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 10 of 48.
“My hon. Friend makes a really important point. We will be setting up five technical excellence colleges in clean energy, and they will be incredibly important in training young people for this clean energy future. There is a huge number of opportunities out there. Part of this is about the training, but another part is about young people getting to know about these opportunities. I was at an amazing jobs fair in the north-east—organised by Kim McGuinness, the mayor of the north-east—which brought together some of the developers with young people, and the excitement among those young people about this future was so palpable. We need to do more of that.”
“Those are incredibly important technologies, and we need to do more to help bring down their cost. Tidal schemes will be in the next auction pot, and we are continuing to look at how we can deploy more of them in our country.”
“My hon. Friend speaks so well on these issues and he is so right. This is about energy sovereignty and our security as a country. When the Conservatives were in government, at least under Boris Johnson, they seemed to understand that. That is why it is so regrettable. Of course, this is about the climate crisis, good jobs and lower bills, but it is also about security in an uncertain and dangerous world. The Opposition are, frankly, surrendering our security and what they are proposing is incredibly dangerous.”
“My hon. Friend speaks very knowledgeably on these issues and he is absolutely right. We changed the auction design not just to be able to see the so-called bid stack, which they could not under the previous regime, but to allow more projects in to increase competitive tension to get a better deal for the bill payer and the taxpayer. He is absolutely right: we should keep innovating for both fixed technology and other technologies to maximise value for money and deployment.”
“It was worth waiting for. I will let the right hon. Member for East Surrey (Claire Coutinho) speculate on her own future and whether she is going to join another political party. In all seriousness, I do think it is sad. The truth is that we used to pride ourselves as a country on competing, between political parties, to succeed when it came to building our clean energy future. It is deeply regrettable. There are many sensible voices on the Conservative side who shake their heads when I talk to them about the direction their party has taken. Fundamentally, my hon. Friend is right: this is central to tackling the affordability crisis, central to tackling the climate crisis in our country, and central to giving us energy security.”
“The 2023 generation costs report published under the previous Government shows the levelised cost of electricity to build and operate a new gas-fired power station to be significantly higher than the cost of onshore wind, solar and offshore wind in the most recent renewables auction round. Renewables are a cheaper technology to build and operate than new gas-fired power stations.”
“My hon. Friend asks an important question. In our 2030 clean power plan, we talk precisely about the importance of low-carbon dispatchable power as a way forward. I am really proud of what is happening with our carbon capture and storage plans and Net Zero Teesside. Additionally, it will be an important part of our forthcoming hydrogen strategy, as he says.”
“My hon. Friend is right. The figures that came out from NESO over Christmas show that we had extra renewable power in 2025 equivalent to powering 2 million homes; that is 2 million homes that will not be powered by imported gas. That gives us the price stability that we never had under the previous Government. The fundamental lesson at a time of geopolitical instability is that home-grown clean power is what gives us the certainty we need.”
“The hon. Lady has just done a good job of highlighting the importance of this matter, and she gets to the crucial point. The Opposition parties that reject solar, onshore wind and offshore wind are rejecting cheap, clean, home-grown power for the British people, which we on the Government Benches are in favour of.”
“We have regular discussions with the Northern Ireland Assembly and the Executive on a range of issues. On the hon. Gentleman’s point about nationally significant projects, it is absolutely right that communities have input into these questions. Certainly in the case of home-grown low-carbon power, we want communities to see the benefit, because by hosting infrastructure, including low-carbon infrastructure, communities are doing a service to the country.”
“I do not really understand what the question was about, but we are in favour of AI and we are working with our colleagues on AI. I have to say that I am glad the right hon. Lady rose to speak on this question, because she has been rumbled by the figures I produced; they came out when she was the Energy Secretary. She goes around saying how much more expensive renewable power is, but the figures that she produced show that renewable power is cheaper to build and operate than gas-fired power stations. She used to believe that, until she jumped on the latest passing bandwagon to suddenly be a net zero sceptic.”
“The decision by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor to take an average £150 of costs off people’s energy bills from April is a reflection of this Government’s commitment to tackling the cost of living crisis. It will make a difference to families across the country and is estimated to reduce by over 1 million the number of people paying more than 10% of their income in energy costs.”
“I really enjoyed my visit to Kensa—I would recommend that all Members go—which is a really innovative company that is leading in heat pump manufacture. As my hon. Friend knows, we will shortly be publishing our warm homes plan, which will be really important in driving forward heat pump uptake and helping companies such as Kensa, because there is also a massive jobs story that is part of this.”
“I will tell the hon. Lady. We are proud of the fact that in the Budget we raised taxes on the wealthy so that we could cut bills for millions of families across this country. I am so grateful to her for her question, because it illustrates the difference between our parties. This was not an easy thing to do; it was a decision made by this Government, because for too long this country has been run for the wealthy and powerful by the Conservative party. We are changing that and cutting bills for millions of families across Britain.”
“I can tell the hon. Gentleman that bills are going to be lower. [ Interruption. ] If he just listens, I will tell him. If we compare 2025 to 2024, energy bills are lower in real terms than they were in 2024, and the price cap is also lower. Because bills are still too high, we will make that situation better by taking £150 off bills. The Conservatives opposed every measure in my right hon. Friend the Chancellor’s Budget, yet they also say that they want £150 off bills—they cannot have both. It is this Government who are delivering on the cost of living crisis.”
“The Government inherited a legacy of huge under-investment in the grid, which piled up constraint costs and created a chaotic system for grid connection, which left crucial projects facing decade-long delays. We are tackling this with a programme of investment and reform, include sweeping changes to the grid connections process, which saw the National Energy System Operator last month set out a massive overhaul of the queue, cutting its size by two thirds and giving priority to the generation projects that we need.”
“My hon. Friend makes a crucial point. There was this terrible backlog, where the queue had something like five times as much capacity as was required and the wrong priorities. We also had massive problems for demand connection. Our significant reform to overhaul the queue, which had not been done for years and years, will free up demand projects to connect, and I very much hope that projects in his constituency can benefit.”
“I know that my hon. Friend the Minister for Energy has had discussions with the hon. Member for Horsham (John Milne), and it is important that we have those discussions with Members. One of the important things for this year—it is slightly for the trainspotters, or energy-spotters—is the strategic spatial energy plan, which will set out a pathway for where we need power in the coming years well beyond 2030. As part of that, we should definitely be looking at where in the country are the right places to put the power we need.”
“Our clean energy mission offers a transformative opportunity to deliver thousands of high-quality jobs and drive prosperity across the country. In Yorkshire and the Humber, we estimate that there will be up to 20,000 additional jobs by 2030. There are opportunities in offshore wind, hydrogen and nuclear, as well as in many other areas.”
“I congratulate York College on its work. I know from my constituency in Doncaster, where we are to get a second university technical college specialising in green skills, the importance of that and the excitement of young people about this future. By turning their backs on clean energy, the Opposition turn their backs on young people. Clean energy is the future—it is one of the fastest growing sectors. We want it for Britain, we want it for York and we want it for Doncaster, and we will make it happen.”
“First of all, what happened at Lindsey—we should be clear that the responsibility lies with the owner, which ran the business into the ground—is tragic for the workers and their families, and I have talked to those workers. The hon. Gentleman will know—my hon. Friend the Energy Minister has spoken to him about this—that the process involved the official receiver, who looked for the best and most viable bid, but there was no viable bid to keep refining going at Lindsey. That is why P66 was chosen, and we are determined to work with the company to maximise the number of jobs that it can deliver for the local community.”
“The affordability crisis is the No. 1 issue facing families across our country. That is why we have acted to take £150 of costs off bills for all families, with an additional £150 through the warm home discount for 6 million households this winter. Thanks to our decisions, last year was a record year for wind and solar power, and we have embarked on the biggest nuclear building programme for half a century. That is what it means to deliver on lower bills, good jobs and energy security.”
“I wish the hon. Lady a happy new year, but I find that question a bit churlish. We have produced a world-leading plan for the North sea, which combines the just transition—the just and prosperous transition—with environmental leadership, while keeping to our manifesto commitment not to issue new licences to explore new fields. It is absolutely right that we have tiebacks to ensure that existing oil and gas fields are kept open for their lifetime. Obviously, the North Sea Transition Authority will consult on the details of how that will work, but it is absolutely the right thing to do for jobs and the environment.”
“I congratulate Hackney council—Labour-led Hackney council—on the brilliant job it is doing on green energy. Unlike some who just talk about it, the council is actually delivering, and I congratulate it. I see Hackney as being at the forefront of our local power plan, which will be coming out in the coming months.”
“I can absolutely rule out that we are going to introduce new levies to the energy system in the warm homes plan. Those reports are complete nonsense. I can tell the shadow Secretary of State that the warm homes plan is going to turn the page on a decade of the Conservatives’ failure, because we are going to invest where they did not, we have a plan where they did not, we will have proper oversight and regulation where they did not, and we will tackle the cost of living crisis they caused—”
“Don’t tempt me, Mr Speaker—don’t tempt me! I want to briefly make one point. In the warm homes plan, which will come soon, we will be making £15 billion of public investment to help people cut their bills. The Conservatives can oppose that if they like, but I think it will be supported across the country, because they were an absolute failure on energy efficiency and all of that, and we are going to succeed.”
“The hon. Lady makes an important point, which is that we need to make sure we take advantage of co-operating with our European neighbours. One way we can do that is the internal electricity market, and we will be negotiating on that basis. We will obviously look at the costs and benefits for the UK, but anything we can do to lower costs, lower bills and co-operate with our European neighbours to our advantage is what we should be doing.”
“It sounds like a really interesting project. My hon. Friend is absolutely right that there are huge opportunities. Opportunities abound when it comes to co-operation with our near neighbours and across the world to help our energy security, deliver clean power and bring down bills.”
“The hon. Lady asks an important question. As part of the warm homes plan, we are putting in an additional £1.5 billion of public investment and replacing the ECO scheme, which I am afraid had failed in a number of different ways—no disrespect to some of the installers. That will be designed to help bridge the transition for companies like the one that Andrew runs.”
“The hon. Gentleman is wrong, if he listened to my answer earlier, because actually bills across 2025 were lower than in 2024. He should welcome our measures to cut bills by £150, but I am afraid that those on his Front Bench do not support us.”
“My hon. Friend is a brilliant advocate for his constituency, and indeed for Blackpool. I would be very happy to meet him to talk about how we can ensure that the jobs that those young people want come to Blackpool.”
“I do not understand the hon. Gentleman, if I am honest. The truth is that he would give up on young people. He would sell them down the river, as he would today’s generation, the future generation, and all generations to come. I do not think that is a very good platform to stand on.”
“Absolutely. This is about delivering what we promised when we were elected: home-grown clean power, so that we can get bills down, create jobs, get energy security and, crucially, do the right thing for future generations.”
“Our team would be happy to meet my hon. Friend. That question, and so many others, shows the huge opportunities arising from home-grown, clean power, including in fantastic Southampton.”
“Further to that point of order, Mr Speaker. I am happy to respond, because we are going to deal in the facts. Bills were lower in 2025 than in 2024 in real terms, and the price cap was lower—and, of course, making a seasonal comparison makes no sense. We are going to trade in the facts.”
“That is not fair or right, and it is bad for our country.”
“These are people working all the hours God sends, working hard, trying to do the right thing: the very people the Conservatives claim to stand up for. How dare she!”
“The inescapable fact that the Opposition want to run away from is that around 60% of families impacted by this policy are in work, not out of work. These are people for whom work simply does not pay, like in the case—highlighted by the Child Poverty Action Group—of Shauna and her husband, who have three children. Shauna’s husband works full time and she says, “This will make a big difference because we’ve had to incur debts. Hopefully it will mean I can cover the last bills that come in each month instead of being in the red. I could buy a new mattress for two of my children. They can feel the springs on the mattresses they’ve got that they’ve had for many years.” That is the condition-of-Britain question. How does the Leader of the Opposition describe Shauna and her husband? She calls them “Benefits Street”.”
“That is the equivalent, as the document says, of 100 children every single day—more than three primary school classes each day being pushed into poverty. It is also part of a wider picture. According to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, 7.1 million low-income households—one in four across the UK—have gone without essentials in the last six months, in one of the richest countries in the world. That is why we have acted on the two-child limit. Two million children will be helped, and 450,000 fewer children will be in poverty by the end of the Parliament. As I understand it, the Conservatives oppose the policy change because they claim it is about helping people out of work who are undeserving. We need to unpack this false claim.”
“It shows that every decile will be better off as a result of her measures, except the richest 10%, with the greatest gains as a percentage of income to lower and middle-income families. That includes raising the national living wage and the national minimum wage, freezing rail fares for the first time in 30 years and freezing prescription charges, as well as two measures I want to focus on. The first measure is lifting the two-child limit in universal credit, which goes to the heart of the affordability crisis that so many face. I think we need to have a debate about this issue. According to a Department for Work and Pensions document published on the day of the Budget, since its introduction in 2017, the two-child cap has put 300,000 children into relative poverty.”
“Secondly, we must invest in and rebuild our public services and infrastructure so that we never return to austerity, which was such a disaster for the social and economic fabric on which so many people rely. Thirdly, we must endeavour to change our economy so that it produces more good jobs at good wages that sustain a decent living for people, ending the hollowing out of our economy and our communities. That is what this Government are about; that is what this Budget seeks to deliver. First, then, I want to talk about fair choices. An illuminating chart—I love charts—on page 33 of the Budget Red Book shows the impact of decisions since the 2024 autumn Budget. It shows the progressive approach of my right hon. Friend the Chancellor.”
“Each of those on their own would cause people to doubt whether this country really works for them. Together, they represent a perfect storm that makes people question their basic assumptions about our economy, society and country. This is the condition-of-Britain question of our time, and it is the backdrop against which this Government were elected 17 months ago. The mission—the driving purpose of this Government and this Budget—is to tackle that crisis. That starts from an understanding that this crisis is due to not accidental circumstances but a governing ideology, and that our response must be to change course in three ways. First, we need to make fair choices that favour ordinary working people, not the rich and powerful, who have been favoured for too long.”
“It is a privilege to open this Budget debate on a theme of paramount importance to our country: the cost of living crisis facing Britain’s families. Whatever our party, we should take a step back and think about the history of the last two decades since the financial crisis, during which we have seen: the stagnation of real wages, only this year getting back to their 2008 levels; the worst progress on living standards in the last Parliament since records began in the 1950s; an epidemic of in-work poverty such that, according to the Resolution Foundation, seven out of 10 families with children who live in poverty now have someone in work; home ownership falling from two thirds of young people in the early 1990s to less than half today; and the biggest rise in energy bills in generations earlier this decade when Russia invaded Ukraine, on top of public services facing strains as never before.”
“Well, the hon. Gentleman’s question is out of date, because, in case he had not noticed, we changed the policy on winter fuel payments. Let me just say this to him: he will have to answer to his constituents. Some 1,500 children in his constituency will be helped by our changes to the two-child cap, and he is saying, “Rip that help away.” Let us have the argument about this.”
“I will in a moment. On the one hand, 60% of these people are working—and the Conservatives do not really want to explain why they want to cut help for those people. But let us discuss the 40% of households that are not working and will be impacted. What we are seeing here—I am old enough to remember—is a re-run of the last Tory Government and their attempt to blame the poor for their poverty. Leaving that aside, however, what the Conservatives are actually saying is, in truth, that they believe in punishing the children of people who are out of work and on benefits—”
“I will give way in a moment—let me make my point. The Conservatives believe in punishing children for having another brother or sister. Children with only one sibling—two children in total—get the full amount, but if they have two siblings, they do not. How is that fair? How is that right? As the Chancellor said very powerfully in her Budget speech, is that good for our economy and our society? Of course it is not.”
“This is all about working people, as I tried to explain earlier in my speech. Sixty per cent of people— [ Interruption. ] Please listen for a second. Sixty per cent of families who will benefit from the measure are in work. If the right hon. Lady wants to ask about the Chancellor’s wider Budget strategy, let me say that I absolutely fully support it, because it was a fair Budget. Yes, it did raise taxes on those with expensive homes—a policy that I advocated for 10 years ago, as a matter of interest—as well as on gambling companies and on landlords. [ Interruption. ] Members should read the Red Book. The measure is part of a fair Budget. By the way, the Conservatives will have to explain to people up and down the country why they want to leave hundreds of thousands of children in poverty.”
“I will make a bit more progress. The second policy I wish to focus on is the Chancellor’s decision to take £150 off the cost of energy bills—that will be important for families across the country. It has been possible only thanks to a principled decision that she made to shift the cost of some levies into public spending, which is itself possible only thanks to her Budget decisions, including raising taxes on the wealthiest, moving into public spending 75% of the cost to households of the renewables obligation, and abolishing the energy company obligation, with £1.5 billion extra allocated for the warm homes plan. I notice that the Conservatives now seem to claim that that was their idea in the first place, but there is a crucial—”
“I will in a moment—let me develop my argument. The Conservatives say that this was their idea in the first place, but there is a crucial difference: they proposed abolishing the renewables obligation—”
“But they had with no way of paying for it. “Yes”, says the hon. Gentleman. This is quite extraordinary—all the sins of opposition combined into one. The Conservatives had 14 years to do it, but they never did, and suddenly it is such a great idea to just abolish the renewables obligation.”