← LEADERSHIP TERMINAL

UK PARLIAMENT · SITTING

Pippa Heylings

MP for South Cambridgeshire · Liberal Democrat · United Kingdom

IN THEIR OWN WORDS

“Local authorities, many in dire financial positions following years of under-investment, have spent time and money in good faith preparing these proposals according to the Government’s criteria and timetable, only for that timetable to shift repeatedly.”

House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

“Families across Cambridgeshire have been waiting years for the two new special schools in Gamlingay and March. Following meetings with two Ministers, we finally had confirmation from the Government that they will be built, and we were thankful for that.”

House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

“Liberal Democrats support genuine devolution and shifting power out of Westminster, but we have been shocked by the Government’s botched handling of this process.”

House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

“Finally, following the chaos of decisions being withdrawn, reorganisation being paused and the programme being reviewed following updated legal advice, can the Secretary of State even guarantee that what is being announced today is legally sound? Will she now publish the legal advice to demonstrate that?”

House of Commons29 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

“Today’s approval of Jackdaw, in the midst of a climate crisis, is proof that Britain has not moved forward nearly fast enough on reducing our reliance on gas and oil.”

House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

“About a quarter of UK gas demand is supplied by imported liquefied natural gas. Our energy security is not strengthened by the fact that 70% of that comes from the US, given that Trump is prepared to turn that gas off. Let me be clear: Jackdaw will not bring down bills. It will meet about 2% of UK gas demand.”

House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

The complete record

575 held · 560 searchable for Pippa Heylings. The searchable lines are below in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 8 of 10.

This is not an official version of UK Parliament proceedings. It reproduces the published record and links to it; the official version is the one UK Parliament publishes.

  1. “GB Energy has to consider economic, environmental and social needs, ensuring that future generations can meet their needs. I would have liked to discuss amendment (a), in the name of the hon. Member for Rotherham (Sarah Champion), and amendment (b), in the name of the hon. Member for Leeds Central and Headingley (Alex Sobel), both to Lords amendment 2. Modern slavery is a barbaric practice that should have been eradicated long ago. We look to the promise of our green energy transformation, but it cannot take place at the cost of human rights abuses across the world. Research from Sheffield Hallam University has directly linked China’s labour transfer programme to the global solar panel supply chain.”

    House of Commons25 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  2. “This means that a controversial large-scale solar project in my constituency, such as the Kingsway solar farm, could provide £2.5 million annually to the local community. That is the scale we should be talking about, and it has to be the community that determines how and where that money is spent. Lords amendment 12 is also a vital addition to the Bill, requiring GB Energy to keep its impact on sustainable development under review. Credit is due to Baroness Hayman, who fought tirelessly in the other House to ensure that sustainability is embedded in our energy transition through that amendment. We welcome the assurances we have received that in the updated framework agreement, not only will the local economies of coastal communities be taken into consideration, but there will be an explicit climate and nature duty for GB Energy.”

    House of Commons25 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  3. “I completely agree. The Great British Energy Bill gives a statutory steer that helps us have those long-term plans. The clean energy transition has to be done with communities, not to communities. I commend the Government for committing an additional £5 million to the community energy fund, bringing certainty at least to its short-term future. Lords amendment 1 also addresses community benefits, which are critical for taking people with us on this pathway to the energy transition. If communities are to host energy infrastructure, whether for onshore wind or large-scale solar farms, those benefits have to go beyond token gestures such as roofs for scout huts or some apprenticeships. In Scotland, for example, community benefit is worth £5,000 per installed megawatt per year.”

    House of Commons25 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  4. “I completely agree. That is why the Liberal Democrats will continue to call for restrictions on trade with regions where abuses take place, including Xinjiang, and advocate for Magnitsky-style sanctions against individuals and entities involved in Uyghur persecution. This is about more than Britain. It is about playing our part conscientiously in a global movement to see all human rights abuses stopped.”

    House of Commons25 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  5. “12. What recent assessment she has made of trends in the number of school exclusions of pupils with special educational needs and disabilities.”

    House of Commons10 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  6. “Too many children with SEND in South Cambridgeshire are out of school, due not only to exclusion but to the long waiting times for specialist or alternative provision when mainstream schools cannot meet their needs. I was shocked to hear about Harry, a constituent of mine who has been receiving just two hours of forest school a week for the past 15 months as his only education—15 months! What urgent action is the Minister taking to increase specialist and alternative provision, so that children like Harry can get the full and adequate education they need and deserve?”

    House of Commons10 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  7. “I ask the Government to reassure us with, first, a clear and public renunciation of President Trump’s Riviera proposals as ethnic cleansing—the forcible transfer of the over 2 million people of Gaza would constitute a crime against humanity; secondly, the UK Government’s recognition of a Palestinian state and commitment to a two-state solution, because everyone needs a political horizon to have hope; and thirdly, extending the sanctions that the UK already has to regional councils in the west bank, which are responsible for funding the construction and the supply of services to illegal and violent outposts.”

    House of Commons4 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  8. “The suffering we witnessed compels us to act, speak out and ensure that the rights of those who have long been marginalised are protected. The face and future of Nasser’s daughter at the mercy of marauding extremist settlers haunts us. We also heard from Roni Keidar, as the right hon. Member for Gainsborough mentioned, whom we met at Netiv HaAsara. On the day we met, Roni had just received the English translation of her new biography. I remember her words so vividly—that either the Israeli and Palestinian people find a way to live together, or they will die together.”

    House of Commons4 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  9. “They were then in Jerusalem with a two-week ban on visiting the west bank. There is impunity for the perpetrators, and the removal of the equal rights of Israelis and Palestinians in the law and in the protection of the police. In fact, since 2005, only 3% of investigations into ideologically motivated crime against Palestinians in the west bank led to a full or partial conviction. It is not just the violation of Palestinian rights through the actions of a few extremist settlers. There has been a huge increase in settlement and settler violence since the Hamas attacks on 7 October. With attention focused on Gaza and the hostage crisis in Israel, it has given settlers an opportunity to attack with increasing impunity. At least 1,860 incidents of settler violence in the occupied west bank were recorded.”

    House of Commons4 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  10. “As anyone can imagine, however, for Nasser’s daughter and the families in the village, it is a terrifying ordeal. That is why many people, Israeli and international, offer to provide what is called a protective presence for Palestinian schoolchildren in the rural areas in their villages to try to ensure that they have the basic right of safety as they walk to school. They also provide a protective presence for Palestinian farmers to harvest their crops. That same night, after we left the village, between 3 am and 5 am there was a settler incursion during which the neighbour’s car was torched with a petrol bomb. The police attended at the request of the village, but the main outcome was that two of the internationals, staying overnight as a protective presence, were arrested.”

    House of Commons4 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  11. “Just a couple of nights before we arrived, late at night, she heard the sound of stones being thrown at the window of her home. That night, the settlers also smashed the window of her father’s car and slashed the car tyre. She can name them, describe them and point to where they live. We visited the nearby primary school, built with UK and European aid funding, that had been completely demolished by the settlers. Desks were mangled and educational picture books were strewn in the rubble. Through a remaining window, we had a clear view of the settler outpost. From there, a quad bike came rushing towards us with two settler youths, grins on their faces, swagger in their steps and a sub-machine-gun slung over their shoulder. For us, it was just harassment.”

    House of Commons4 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  12. “On the other hand is the brutal war in Gaza, killing 45,000 Palestinians, including 18,000 children, displacing thousands and imprisoning many. A different kind of violence extends to the west bank. It is not new and it did not start on 7 October. It has been ongoing and escalating since the ceasefire agreement. During our visit, we were witness to the impacts of daily violence by extremist settlers in the occupied territories and of the policies that continue to erode the rights and dignity of the Palestinian people. That includes the rights of the young Palestinian schoolgirl and her family, whom we visited in their village of Susya. She told us how, on a nightly basis, she is woken up terrified by marauding settlers who have set up their outpost nearby.”

    House of Commons4 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  13. “It is an honour and privilege to serve under your chairship, Sir John. I thank the Father of the House, the right hon. Member for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh), for securing this critical debate. Together with other Members speaking today, I have just returned from a cross-party visit to Israel and the west bank—a journey that brought us face to face with the human cost of war and violence for Israelis and Palestinians. We met so many people of all ages, from all sides and at all levels of power, who are working daily to try to bring about the conditions for a lasting peace in spite of the unspeakable and ongoing trauma. On the one hand are the atrocities perpetrated by Hamas on 7 October, killing over 1,200 people and taking hundreds of hostages, with 60 still held captive.”

    House of Commons4 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  14. “Last year, the Lib Dems discovered that water companies had discharged sewage over 100,000 times in areas designated as current bathing waters, putting public health and local ecosystems at risk.”

    House of Commons4 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  15. “It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Sir John. I thank my hon. Friend the hon. Member for Taunton and Wellington (Gideon Amos) for securing this critical debate. While covid-19 undoubtably brought on many challenges, one positive outcome was the surge in open-water swimming. More people than ever before enjoyed blue spaces for recreational activities, reaping significant benefits for both their physical and mental wellbeing. However, many were more cautious about diving into freezing cold lakes, rivers and streams when they were aware of the level of bacteria and pollution present in our waters. As Liberal Democrats, we have long and passionately campaigned on this issue.”

    House of Commons4 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  16. “They are rightly pushing for bathing water status because it is a vital tool for driving cleaner, healthier rivers. We should be supporting these efforts, not hindering them.”

    House of Commons4 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  17. “However, had core reform 2 been in place when the Cam Valley Forum began its journey in 2020, there would have been no bathing water designation for Sheep’s Green. Without that designation, there would have been no investigation by the Environment Agency, no identification of Haslingfield sewage works as the source of the pollution and no legal requirement for Anglian Water to take action. The WINEP funding would not have been available and we would have lost the opportunity for water improvements and nature restoration in South Cambridgeshire. In short, core reform 2 would have inadvertently blocked the clean-up of hundreds of rivers. Local organisations like the Cam Valley Forum are not just highlighting a problem with their concerns around core reform 2—they are demanding action.”

    House of Commons4 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  18. “That triggered a statutory obligation for improvements to clean up the source of the pollution—the Haslingfield sewage works in my constituency. For years, local citizen scientists had suspected it was the culprit. Now, finally, Anglian Water was legally required to act. Bathing water status also unlocked funding from Ofwat under the water industry national environment programme. Tens of millions of pounds vital for the infrastructure improvements needed to reduce the sewage discharges were made available for Haslingfield, with work expected to begin in the next two years. These improvements will not just benefit swimmers at Sheep’s Green, but have a wider impact on the ecological health of the River Cam.”

    House of Commons4 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  19. “That came after three years of hard work by local volunteers, which is truly commendable, and was based on the success of the River Wharfe. Sheep’s Green had been used for decades without official recognition, and the idea of getting it designated bathing status had widespread public support. Over the course of a 10-week consultation, the Cam Valley Forum received more than 500 responses, with an overwhelming 93% in favour of the designation. South Cambridgeshire district council and Cambridge city council also formally backed the proposal. Anglian Water, with whom I worked, also fully supported the designation application. Once designated, as predicted by local volunteers and citizen scientists, Sheep’s Green was classified as having poor water quality.”

    House of Commons4 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  20. “The second core reform says that we should “Include the feasibility of improving a site’s water quality to at least ‘sufficient’ as a criterion for final designation. This would avoid poor value for money, by limiting expenditure where water quality improvement is not feasible or proportionate.” To best demonstrate why that reform would not only fail but could also damage water quality in our rivers, it is worth sharing the story of Sheep’s Green in my constituency. For centuries, people have been enjoying Sheep’s Green—a popular spot on the River Cam. It was at Sheep’s Green that we worked to bring in a bathing site designation, because of the poor quality of the water. In October 2023, the Cam Valley Forum, a local voluntary organisation, submitted an application to DEFRA to grant Sheep’s Green designated bathing water status.”

    House of Commons4 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  21. “I completely agree. I emphasise what my hon. Friend the Member for Taunton and Wellington said: that is why we need tougher action on the water companies. We also need to take action on combined sewers and make improvements to the small sewage treatment works on many chalk streams, like in my constituency. However, today’s debate is about bathing site designation, which is one of the effective levers that can be used. We are talking about the proposed reforms by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to bathing site designations. I would like to talk about the second core reform being proposed, which I am concerned would lead to a real reduction in the number of bathing sites being designated, rather than the increase that we should see, particularly for inland waters.”

    House of Commons4 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  22. “So we are not subjecting people to unsafe water; we are recognising that these are key bathing areas and have historical, cultural and ecological importance—now and in the future.”

    House of Commons4 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  23. “I wanted to clarify that there are two bodies of argument here. Given that there has been a complete lack of regulations and ways to enforce the “polluter pays” principle with water companies until now, status has been seen as one of the only mechanisms to do it. However, I would like the Minister to recognise that these are already bathing sites because the criteria is that they have to show that they are already being used as bathing sites—that they are recognised as culturally and ecologically important. Given that, even though they are poor we should be investing in them to ensure that they continue. We know that if they are declared poor, people are warned of that and therefore do not swim.”

    House of Commons4 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  24. “I thank and congratulate the headteachers and staff at Meldreth, Great Wilbraham and Stapleford primary schools in my constituency. Will the Minister explain to them how important it is that the learning that takes place in those schools will ensure the roll-out of breakfast clubs to all schools in my constituency and across the country?”

    House of Commons24 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  25. “The Bill presents a trident of opportunity—it can enhance energy security, create jobs and bring us closer to achieving our net zero targets—but we cannot afford to lose sight of the need for financial accountability, the duty to protect nature, and the need to ensure that all communities are included in the crucial journey to net zero.”

    House of Commons24 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  26. “That is why we have also tabled new clause 4. While the appointment of commissioners for Wales, England and Northern Ireland is a positive step, Wales still lacks the legal and financial control over the Crown Estate that Scotland enjoys. Welsh communities must also stand to benefit from the changes introduced by the Bill. I hope that the Government and the Opposition will join the Liberal Democrats in supporting amendment 2 to ensure that sustainable development within the Crown Estate’s framework agreement is clearly defined and includes a climate and nature duty.”

    House of Commons24 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  27. “The Crown Estate must work closely with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs’ marine spatial prioritisation framework and the MMO’s expertise, as well as other relevant consultees such as heritage. The Government amendment requiring ministerial approval for seabed sales is an important and positive step, recognising its national importance. However, that highlights the broader need for transparency and oversight in marine planning. The new clause seeks to avoid potential conflicts of interest in prioritising and decision making arising from the Crown Estate’s new borrowing and investment powers. Members may have noticed a theme running through the Liberal Democrats’ amendments: that of ensuring that local communities both benefit from and have a real say in decisions that will affect them as a result of the Bill.”

    House of Commons24 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  28. “We have other amendments, too—we were busy in Committee. New clause 2 focuses on marine spatial planning co-ordination and would ensure that the Crown Estate duly collaborated with the Marine Management Organisation, which has the mandate to make decisions about marine spatial planning, and that fishing communities were fully consulted. That aligns with work going on for years as Liberal Democrats have called for comprehensive land and sea use frameworks to resolve conflicts, determine priorities and improve co-ordination. With growing pressures from offshore wind, marine conservation, fishing and tourism, decision making must be joined up. Marine plans balance economic, environmental and social interests.”

    House of Commons24 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  29. “It would require a proper assessment of community benefits before investment decisions are made, and mandate that at least 5% of net profits be reinvested in affected areas. Coastal communities need to see both jobs and a fair financial return from large-scale developments around them and off their shores. The Crown Estate generates billions from offshore wind, marine industries and land developments, yet local people often see little direct benefit. The new clause would redress that imbalance, ensuring that such communities impacted by change actively benefit from it. It is about fairness and economic regeneration. If the Government are serious about levelling up, they should back the new clause, which would ensure that the Crown Estate’s success was shared by all, not just a privileged few.”

    House of Commons24 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  30. “It seeks to enshrine the assurances given to the Lords, ensuring that the framework agreement would indeed include a climate and nature duty, aligning the Crown Estate’s responsibilities with the UK’s legally binding climate targets under the Climate Change Act 2008 and nature restoration goals under the Environment Act 2021. It is about more than environmental stewardship; it is about future-proofing the Crown Estate’s decisions against the economic risks of climate change and nature loss. I strongly support new clause 3, which would ensure that the Bill brought local communities along with it. That is essential. We tabled the new clause to guarantee that coastal and rural communities would see real benefits from Crown Estate activities.”

    House of Commons24 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  31. “The amendment builds on Baroness Hayman’s concession in the other House. She said: “What matters is the impact we have and how much we have shifted the dial in terms of what the Crown Estate achieves in support of the Government’s climate and nature objectives.” —[ Official Report, House of Lords, 5 November 2024; Vol. 840, c. 1448.] By clearly defining sustainable development in the Crown Estate’s framework agreement, the amendment would establish a benchmark for accountability in line with existing legislation. In contrast with the amendment tabled by the hon. Member for Mid and South Pembrokeshire, this amendment mentions nature, too, and builds on the agreements in the other House.”

    House of Commons24 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  32. “It would ensure that sustainable development was clearly defined in the Crown Estate’s framework agreement, explicitly including a reference to a climate and nature duty. The Crown Estate plays a crucial role in managing our land, seas and natural resources. It is central to offshore wind expansion, biodiversity conservation and sustainable land use. Given its influence, merely requiring its commissioners to “keep under review” their impact on sustainable development is insufficient without a clear definition and accountability of what that entails, as the hon. Member for Mid and South Pembrokeshire (Henry Tufnell) mentioned. That is key to ensuring that there are social and economic considerations in all investments and that the costs and benefits—in particular to local communities and local economies—are taken into consideration.”

    House of Commons24 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  33. “It is important to note that our discussion coincides with the third anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and its consequences not only for the Ukrainians suffering the war, but for families here in the UK with volatile, skyrocketing energy prices due to our reliance on fossil fuels from authoritarian regimes like Putin’s: a stark reminder of the need to secure the production of our energy here in the UK. The last Conservative Government set the UK back both in meeting our climate targets and in seizing the opportunity to be global leaders in green energy due to indecision and broken pledges. We have the chance to be global leaders in offshore floating wind, which is why the Bill is so important. I speak to amendment 2 to clause 3, which I hope we will vote on tonight.”

    House of Commons24 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  34. “I extend my thanks to colleagues in the other place, the Public Bill Office staff and those in this House who served on the Bill Committee. Their efforts have been invaluable in scrutinising and refining the Bill. I support the Bill. However, the Liberal Democrat amendments seek to ensure that it delivers for both people and the planet. While the Bill presents opportunities—it aims to enhance energy security, create new jobs and bring us closer to achieving our climate targets—we must not lose sight of the need for financial accountability, proportionate borrowing caps, the duty to protect nature in the marine environment and the necessity of taking communities with us and providing them with clear, tangible benefits.”

    House of Commons24 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  35. “We will not be pressing this new clause to a vote, but the new investment and borrowing powers change the context for the 2020 memorandum of understanding. I ask for reassurance that we might seek a new memorandum of understanding between the Marine Management Organisation and the Crown Estate.”

    House of Commons24 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  36. “Given those serious concerns, can the Minister guarantee that any further investment in Scotland will increase both our energy and our national security?”

    House of Commons12 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  37. “I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh West (Christine Jardine) for securing this important urgent question. Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine, as the Minister has rightly said, “energy security” has been a key term in this Chamber. There are two ways of looking at energy security. First, it is about generating our own renewable energy to avoid price volatility and exposure to authoritarian regimes, ensuring that we have the jobs here at home for design and construction. Secondly, it is about the national security issues around our energy infrastructure, which is also a form of energy security. A former MI6 chief has warned of the vulnerabilities, either deliberate or inadvertent, posed by foreign-controlled software embedded in our energy infrastructure.”

    House of Commons12 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  38. “Business leaders agree that a fair transition away from oil and gas will boost our economy, create jobs and attract investment. The Liberal Democrats oppose the oilfields at Jackdaw and Rosebank. Instead of pouring money into an energy source that is not consistent with our climate commitments, we should be calling on the Government to invest in renewables and an ambitious green energy strategy that lowers costs, creates jobs and secures our future. What assessment will the Minister make of our climate commitments?”

    House of Commons10 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  39. “The decisions that we make in the next decade on energy will make or break the planet, and this is also key for the Jackdaw and Rosebank oilfields. Should the proposed developers apply for a new development consent, the ruling gives the Government the opportunity to take a rational, science-based approach and make a decision on the future of the field based on what is best for the planet, the people of Britain and the UK’s international leadership. Contrary to what has been said by the hon. Member for West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine (Andrew Bowie), approving these oilfields this will not protect UK workers. Despite promises of jobs, not a single UK design or construction role has been created. Instead, that work has been outsourced to Dubai.”

    House of Commons10 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  40. “We therefore call on the Government to release the 2022 KPMG report into Drax’s subsidy claims, which should have been released under the Conservative Government. Transparency is crucial and the public deserve to know if their money has been misused. I will end by asking: are we looking for home-grown clean energy—”

    House of Commons10 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  41. “We are told by the Minister that NESO advised that Drax was a necessity between 2027 and 2031 to prevent supply risks. That is due to the reckless rowing back by the former Government, the absence of accelerated investment in renewables and the continued investment in Drax as part of their strategy, but what kind of future are we building if it depends on burning forests rather than investing in real renewable energy sources? On costs, the Minister tells us that biomass at Drax is cheaper than gas-fired power, but we must not forget that past subsidies by the former Government allowed Drax to profit excessively at the expense of bill payers. Even today, despite halved subsidies, Drax’s shares have surged, suggesting that even this deal remains a good deal for Drax and potentially a bad one for taxpayers.”

    House of Commons10 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  42. “I thank the Minister for sharing his statement with us in advance. Climate change and nature loss are undoubtedly the greatest twin threats we face. While pursuing the clean power by 2030 goal, the Government need to reconsider their decision to indeterminately extend the burning of biomass as part of the energy mix, despite overwhelming evidence that it is neither sustainable nor truly renewable, especially with the threat to virgin forests. The Minister says biomass is vital for energy security, supplying 5% of the UK’s electricity. However, he fails to mention that biomass emits 18% more carbon dioxide than coal and that it takes nearly a century for new trees to absorb those emissions. That is not energy security; it is a carbon ticking time bomb.”

    House of Commons10 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  43. “Given the Crown Estate’s unique status and the importance of its revenues to the public purse, it is only right that Parliament retains a say over any significant increase in borrowing capacity. The amendment would only confirm assurances that were provided in the other House by Lord Livermore. In his work with Baroness Kramer, we were assured that there would be a cap on borrowing to 20% of the loan-to-value ratio in the updated framework agreement. Amendments 4 and 7 reflect those promises, and I urge the Government to support amendment 7 to safeguard the financial integrity of the Crown Estate and ensure that borrowing powers are used wisely and with proper oversight.”

    House of Commons6 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  44. “Without a clear borrowing limit, we could risk unchecked debt accumulation, which could ultimately undermine the Estate’s financial sustainability and reduce the returns it provides to the Exchequer. A 25% debt-to-asset ratio is a reasonable cap and allows for investment and growth, but prevents excessive leveraging that could put the Estate’s finances at risk. Crucially, the amendment also ensures parliamentary oversight. Any changes to the limit must be debated and approved by both Houses, rather than left solely to the discretion of the Treasury. This is not about preventing the Crown Estate from borrowing; it is about ensuring that borrowing is responsible, transparent and aligned with the long-term interests of the nation.”

    House of Commons6 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  45. “Amendment 7 is similar to amendment 4, and is supportive of its essence. It is about introducing a sensible borrowing limit for the Crown Estate commissioners by capping their net debt-to-asset value ratio at 25%, with any change to that limit requiring parliamentary approval. As we have just heard, clause 1 as it stands grants the Crown Estate significant new powers to borrow and access financial assistance from the Treasury. Although investment in the Crown Estate’s portfolio—particularly in areas such as offshore wind—is welcome, it is vital that we ensure fiscal responsibility and protect the long-term value of these assets for the nation. Amendment 7 is about introducing proper safeguards. The Crown Estate manages over £16 billion in assets, and its revenues contribute directly to the Treasury and public finances.”

    House of Commons6 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  46. “Climate change and nature loss are economic risks, as well as environmental ones. Embedding clear, enforceable sustainability duties in the Crown Estate’s framework, according to our existing legislation, will ensure that its investments and operations support long-term resilience and prosperity. This amendment strengthens the existing clause. It does not seek to define it on the face of the Bill, but assures us, as happened in the other House, that the definition is within the framework agreement.”

    House of Commons6 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  47. “1448.] This amendment seeks to provide clarity and accountability for what was agreed verbally in the other House—that the definition would not be on the face of the Bill, but would be in the updated framework agreement. We need that to ensure there is a consistent benchmark against which decisions can be assessed, in line with the public duty to our climate and nature targets. As the definition within the framework agreement would specifically refer to, those are the climate targets under the Climate Change Act 2008 and the nature restoration goals under the Environment Act 2021. This would mean that the Crown Estate cannot simply pay lip service to sustainability; it must actively contribute to decarbonisation, biodiversity protection and the UK’s broader environmental goals.”

    House of Commons6 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  48. “Therefore we need reassurances, as were obtained in the other House, that clause 3 does not just require commissioners to keep under review their impact on sustainable development without clearly defining what that means in practice. I must acknowledge where this amendment started in life, which is with Baroness Hayman’s work in the other House. After much debate, it was agreed that sustainable development must be kept under review by the commissioners, but with a reference to the framework document in which a definition would be provided. Baroness Hayman said: “What matters is the impact we have and how much we have shifted the dial in terms of what the Crown Estate achieves in support of the Government’s climate and nature objectives.” —[ Official Report, House of Lords, 5 November 2024; Vol. 840, c.”

    House of Commons6 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  49. “I will speak to amendment 8, which is similar to amendment 6. It would strengthen clause 3 by ensuring that sustainable development is properly defined within the Crown Estate’s framework document and that this definition explicitly includes a climate and nature duty. The Crown Estate plays a pivotal role in the management of our land, seas and natural resources. It is well known for its ambition around nature recovery. It is a key player in our offshore wind expansion, biodiversity conservation and sustainable land management, but in areas in which there are multiple competing uses and values, including fishing, marine protected areas, and even highly protected marine areas.”

    House of Commons6 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗

  50. “To seek clarification, is the Minister saying that, unlike what seemed to be the agreement reached in the other House, we will not seek, through this legislation or any burden put on the Crown Estate, to ensure that it has a climate and nature duty, such as other bodies have? That will not form part of the definition of sustainable development he said will be published on Royal Assent.”

    House of Commons6 February 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗