Luke Murphy
MP for Basingstoke · Labour · United Kingdom
“Those communities deserve not just respect but full and genuine engagement, shaping and driving the future of their own areas. That is at the heart of the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government’s 2016 guidance on estate regeneration, although I will go on to say that that guidance needs to be refreshed and strengthened.”
“I thank the Minister for her response. I particularly want to recognise the points she made about repairs and maintenance. I would welcome her passing on my request to the Housing Minister, and I acknowledge what she said about residential ballots.”
“I am afraid that we hear the story all too regularly: complaints ignored, wait times running into months or years, missed appointments, and wrong jobs or poor repairs that mean starting the whole process all over again.”
“Does the Minister agree that accountability for such schemes should be crystal clear? There needs to be clarity on which body is accountable, alongside greater democratic accountability.”
“Does the Minister agree that it is good practice to explain such decisions in an accessible way? On the point about uncertainty, the Sovereign Hill Partnership has acknowledged that wide-scale regeneration would take multiple decades.”
“Member for Taunton and Wellington (Gideon Amos), and his agreement with the point about minimum standards and what community consent can help to deliver. I thank the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Orpington (Gareth Bacon), for what he said about my speech.”
The complete record
Every one of 379 lines we hold for Luke Murphy, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 8.
“I recognise the role that estate regeneration can play in restoring civic pride, breathing new life into communities and improving quality of life, but it must be done with communities—with them shaping and directing the change, with clear accountability, with trust between all parties, and with the provision of as much certainty as possible. I will continue to fight for the residents of Buckskin and South Ham for as long as is needed. I look forward to the Minister’s response.”
“Residents tell me repeatedly that they struggle to believe SNG can deliver a regeneration of this scale when it is struggling to deliver day-to-day repairs. Let us remind ourselves that this is one of the largest regenerations in the country. Does the Minister agree that improvement is needed on repairs and maintenance? Does she recognise that the record erodes residents’ trust in SNG’s ability to handle a scheme of this size? Might there be scope to update national guidance on estate regeneration so that minimum standards on repairs must be met? In conclusion, how does the Department monitor adherence to its 2016 guidance, and what plans are there to update it and make it statutory for both local authorities and housing associations?”
“These are just samples, but the pattern is borne out in both tenant survey data and the judgment of the Regulator of Social Housing. In the tenant satisfaction measures headline report, published last November, SNG performed worse than the national average across a range of measures, including overall satisfaction, repairs service, time taken to complete repairs, home maintenance, listening to residents and complaints handling. The regulator has found weaknesses in SNG’s delivery of an effective, efficient and timely repairs service, and a related failure to meet complaints handling timescales. I am aware that improvement plans are said to be in place, but the record points to a real issue of trust.”
“I am afraid that we hear the story all too regularly: complaints ignored, wait times running into months or years, missed appointments, and wrong jobs or poor repairs that mean starting the whole process all over again. Recently, an elderly constituent had scaffolding on their SNG property from November 2025 until this month for a roof repair that never took place. They were unable to open their windows for eight months, including during the recent heatwave. The work has now been cancelled, the scaffolding has been removed, and the problem has been left unsolved. Likewise, a constituent whose depression and anxiety leaves them almost entirely housebound reported a roof leak last November. It remained unresolved until March, despite multiple SNG visits confirming the property was extremely damp and infested with mould and woodlice.”
“Three years on, do residents not deserve clarity and a clear timeline as soon as possible? I urge the SHP to give that clarity quickly. Updated national guidance should set out what a realistic timeline for such schemes looks like, and I would be grateful for the Minister’s view. Perhaps most prominently, many residents are deeply fearful about the potential use of compulsory purchase orders. I do not believe that the widespread use of CPOs is justified, and their potential use only strengthens the case for resident ballots. The third area of concern revolves around a lack of trust, driven in large part by Sovereign Network Group’s performance on housing repairs. Put simply, that is the largest single source of casework in my office.”
“Does the Minister agree that it is good practice to explain such decisions in an accessible way? On the point about uncertainty, the Sovereign Hill Partnership has acknowledged that wide-scale regeneration would take multiple decades. In the meantime, thousands of my constituents have no idea whether they will be asked to move next year, the year after, in 10 years or not at all. I have spoken to residents unsure whether to redecorate, lay patios, redo gardens and kitchens, or make other home improvements. They do not know whether they will see any return on improvements already made, including significant accessibility works for disabled residents. Those considering selling have also raised concerns about their ability to get a fair price. In short, too many people are having to put big life decisions on hold.”
“My next point is about the significant uncertainty caused to both social and private tenants, as well as to homeowners, by the regeneration proposals. Following nearly two and a half years of consultation, the Sovereign Hill Partnership confirmed in February what it calls the priority areas for redevelopment and refurbishment, as well as areas of limited change, the latter covering around a third of homes—roughly 1,500—in Buckskin and South Ham. That clarity is welcome for those residents, but it leaves nearly 3,000 households in areas of further study with no certainty at all. Residents have told me that they are unclear as to why and how these boundaries were determined—another example of a lack of clarity and transparency over decision making.”
“We must also consider the financial model for the regeneration. SNG is a not-for-profit with a social purpose, but it has formed a joint venture with private house builder the Hill Group to help deliver this regeneration. Many residents want greater clarity on how any surplus will be reinvested, and on the details of the financial model underpinning the regeneration. Given the scale of the proposals, it is essential that residents can understand whether the benefits will be retained locally, particularly for housing, affordable housing, infrastructure and community provision. Does the Minister agree that transparency over the financial model is crucial for resident confidence, and will the Department consider updating the national guidance to that effect for all regeneration schemes?”
“Does the Minister agree that accountability for such schemes should be crystal clear? There needs to be clarity on which body is accountable, alongside greater democratic accountability. In London, regeneration projects involving more than 150 dwellings or the demolition of any social homes that seek Greater London Authority funding require a resident ballot demonstrating support. In Basingstoke, even though direct funding is not involved, a partnership with the local authority still exists. The parties should look at measures to introduce greater democratic accountability, including the use of resident ballots, as increasingly is normal practice. I ask the Minister whether the Government would consider including resident ballots or similar mechanisms as standard in updated guidance for schemes with or without Government funding.”
“The memorandum of understanding was updated in 2025, in the council’s own words, to “reflect updated ambitions, aims, objectives and working arrangements of the partners.” That means the council and Sovereign Network Group. I am not aware that any version has ever been made widely available, which itself raises questions over transparency. That speaks to a broader issue that residents raise with me time and again. If the council agreed the memorandum of understanding with the Sovereign Network Group, and they are working in partnership together, but the Sovereign Hill Partnership, which is a partnership between the Sovereign Network Group and a private house builder, is delivering the regeneration, who exactly should residents hold to account? Many tell me that they feel left in the dark.”
“The Sovereign Hill Partnership says it has held 33 events, knocked on 1,200 doors and received 1,800 survey responses as part of the regeneration process. I know that staff at SNG and the SHP, many based locally, have tried hard to engage with residents; this is not about them. In my surgeries, at the SHP’s own drop-ins and on the doorstep, too many residents remain frustrated, uncertain and anxious about the future. Issues raised with me focus on three key areas: accountability and transparency over finances; uncertainty; and trust linked to performance on repairs and maintenance. First, on accountability and transparency over finances, residents are frustrated with what they see as a lack of accountability in this project.”
“In 2023, Basingstoke and Deane borough council and Sovereign Network Group signed a memorandum of understanding to take forward, in their words, “transformation plans, covering community engagement, master planning, working with Hampshire county council on transport and infrastructure, land assembly, partnerships and funding.” The housing association, Sovereign Network Group, then partnered with the Hill Group to form the Sovereign Hill Partnership to deliver the scheme. There is no doubt that change is needed for parts of Buckskin and South Ham, and the flats in Pinkerton Road have been identified as a particular priority. I and many residents recognise that there are clearly homes and areas in need of investment; that is not in doubt.”
“The Westside Community Association, following the much-mourned closure of its premises, now runs the Ridgeway centre and the Russell Howard pavilion, hubs known across Basingstoke. They have hosted countless birthday parties, christenings and events, including my coffee afternoons, but they are so much more than a space for hire. They house nurseries and run clubs for the over-55s at risk of isolation. I have seen at first hand the work they do, such as the food bank at the Ridgeway centre, which supports people in Buckskin and South Ham when they struggle to make ends meet. Today, both areas contain more than 4,600 households and 10,000 residents. A regeneration proposal was first identified for development in the 2016 local plan.”
“Those communities deserve not just respect but full and genuine engagement, shaping and driving the future of their own areas. That is at the heart of the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government’s 2016 guidance on estate regeneration, although I will go on to say that that guidance needs to be refreshed and strengthened. Buckskin and South Ham are proud, strongly knit communities where many have lived for decades and neighbours look out for each other. They were transformed when Basingstoke became a London overspill town post-war. By 1973, more than 3,250 homes had been built in South Ham alone. With new housing came new schools and the associations and religious groups that bind an area into a community, each with its own congregation, and that now run projects such as the community pantry in Buckskin or the street pastors.”
“I beg to move, That this House has considered estate regeneration. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Murrison. I want to use this debate to talk about the principles of estate regeneration, its real-life impacts and the process through which it should be handled. I will speak specifically about the current regeneration in Buckskin and South Ham in my constituency. First, I want to cover what good regeneration looks like. When done right, good estate regeneration has the power to breathe new life into communities, restore civic pride and improve quality of life through better infrastructure such as schools, GP surgeries and green spaces. In all cases, there is a community that lives there, often close-knit and deeply rooted across generations.”
“I completely accept that, as the Minister said, residential ballots are not the answer in and of themselves, but they do drive the behaviour that helps to build community consent. Will she extend my request to the Housing Minister, our hon. Friend the Member for Greenwich and Woolwich (Matthew Pennycook), to meet me about this issue following this debate?”
“I recognise the need for investment and more homes, and many residents do too, but it has to be done in the right way, with the accountability needed to build trust. I will always be a strong voice for my constituents and the residents in Buckskin and South Ham. Thank you, Dr Murrison, for presiding over the debate. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered estate regeneration.”
“Member for Taunton and Wellington (Gideon Amos), and his agreement with the point about minimum standards and what community consent can help to deliver. I thank the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Orpington (Gareth Bacon), for what he said about my speech. However, I am old enough to remember when the Conservative Government cut the budget for affordable housing by two thirds, introduced the unaffordable rent model and decimated the building of social housing, so I might gently disagree with some of the points he made about the Conservatives’ record on housing. I put on record my thanks to the Minister for her response and to all Members for contributing. I am having conversations with the SNG, the Sovereign Hill Partnership and the local council, and I want to work constructively with them.”
“I think that we all agree that there should be a UK-wide approach on that. I heard the pride of my hon. Friend the Member for Putney (Fleur Anderson) in the Alton estate, and I share that pride in representing Buckskin and South Ham. She mentioned a number of things that are also really important locally in Buckskin and South Ham, including the need for a permanent community centre as part of the regeneration and the role of co-design. She also mentioned the way that the residential ballot worked—I was very interested to hear that. My hon. Friend the Member for Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme (Lee Pitcher) made a powerful argument about pride in place and resident action groups, which I would like to speak to him more about. I appreciated the response of the Lib Dem spokesperson, the hon.”
“I thank the Minister for her response. I particularly want to recognise the points she made about repairs and maintenance. I would welcome her passing on my request to the Housing Minister, and I acknowledge what she said about residential ballots. I fully agree that it is just one part of the process, but it would be a useful mechanism to drive some of the engagement she was referring to. I also thank other Members for their contributions. My hon. Friend the Member for Mid Cheshire (Andrew Cooper) made a point about the value of estate regeneration to both the economy and pride in place. I fully recognise that community needs to be at the heart of any proposals. The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) made the point that communities are not just a number on a spreadsheet and spoke about the need for a holistic blueprint for renewal.”
“Can the Minister confirm that Ministers will be considering representations from councillors and MPs on the interim warding arrangements? There is some concern in Basingstoke and across North Hampshire that urban areas could be disadvantaged by having a smaller number of councillors, as has been proposed.”
“Yesterday, I was proud to host members of Basingstoke’s Nepalese community here in Parliament, including a number of Gurkha veterans. One of the issues we discussed was Gurkha pensions, and I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Aldershot (Alex Baker) for all her work on that—I have been proud to work alongside her. Does the Deputy Prime Minister agree that it is time to resolve the long-standing issue of Gurkha pensions, recognising the service and sacrifice of Gurkha veterans to our country?”
“Third-party brokers will rightly be regulated through the energy independence Bill, but the market is complex, and time-poor business owners still find it hard to find the right deal. Is the Secretary of State willing to explore measures to standardise business energy bills, and will he look at new data rights under smart data powers, so that small and medium-sized enterprise owners can take back control?”
“I welcome the defence investment plan and the additional investment announced today. Too many defence SMEs locally tell me how difficult it is to navigate the defence procurement system and to win contracts. Will the Secretary of State set out how they will be able to benefit from this investment and how we will then be able to benefit from their skills and expertise?”
“The right hon. Lady’s argument would have a lot more credibility if she had not said, in 2023: “Nothing will distract us from achieving net zero or driving forward renewables…I want people to feel nothing but unadulterated optimism…We are absolutely committed to our targets.” The facts about climate change have not changed, yet the right hon. Member has changed her mind. Could that be because of those Members sitting on the Reform Bench?”
“Point 299 of the impact assessment says: “The transition away from fossil fuels will lead to a net increase in job creation”. I believe the right hon. Lady said a moment ago that it does not mention at all the impact on jobs. I invite her to correct the record.”
“Does the hon. Member not think that we would give more credence to the scrutiny that the Conservatives are providing if some of their claims could be found in the carbon budget on which we are voting? Could he tell the House where it says that everyone will need to walk and will not be able to use a vehicle?”
“Member for East Surrey (Claire Coutinho), in 2023, because she rightly argued—I did not agree with everything she said, but she made this central point—that while she agreed with the target for net zero, policy would be crucial to shaping whether it worked for families and business. However, rather than doing the hard work of designing policy to ensure that, the Conservatives have abandoned the target completely. We still have time, and we have the framework, the evidence and a national habit of leading when it counts. We should not duck this moment just because it has got difficult, and I urge the Government to keep Britain leading from the front.”
“So to those who say we cannot afford this, I say that the reverse is true. The Conservative party rightly talks about scrutiny, but scrutiny works both ways. I heard very little about the costs of inaction—flooding, wildfires and heatwaves—or the cost of not capturing the huge economic opportunities. Indeed, the impact assessment, as we have discussed, shows that transitioning away from fossil fuels will lead to a net increase. It mentions not being able to quantify exactly the impact on jobs post 2030, but it very clearly says that that is because of the context: it depends on things such as automation, AI and, crucially, policy. I agreed with the speech of the shadow Secretary of State, the right hon.”
“That is the whole point of the seventh carbon budget that we are debating, and it is in that spirit that I support it. This is something Britain is good at. We were the first major economy to write a binding climate framework into law. We have cut our emissions faster than almost any comparable nation. This is not a burden we should carry grudgingly, but a race in which we are leading from the front and, indeed, bringing on other countries to act as well. A child starting school in my constituency this September will be in their 20s when this budget period ends, and what we decide in this Chamber writes the world that they grow up in. We must leave things better than we found them, and we cannot hand the next generation a wrecked inheritance and a bill, and call it prudence.”
“As many Members have mentioned, the temperature outside the Chamber has been climbing towards 40°C and a red heat health alert is in force. Fifty years ago, the summer of 1976 left a mark that many people still remember. We are living through that kind of summer again, except that now we know it is not a freak, but a pattern. We are seeing the impact in that schools have closed, transport has been disrupted and hospitals have cancelled appointments. Indeed, we have already seen a critical incident declared at a hospital in Portsmouth. None of this is a forecast; it has already happened, and it is happening faster than we were told, but I do not believe that we need to trade in despair, because it is not warranted and it is not useful. We still have time to act and we know what to do.”
“May I echo what hon. Members have said about Jo Cox? One Palestinian child has been killed every week in the west bank since January 2025. Hundreds remain in detention, and many more face significant disruption to their education. What steps are the Government taking with international partners to improve the safety of children in the west bank and to ensure that they can enjoy an education free from violence?”
“I want all our successors here in Parliament to stand in future Pride Month debates to celebrate the progress made under this and future Governments for the LGBT+ community.”
“Many trans people, their friends and families, and people in the wider community are profoundly concerned about the recent draft guidance on the Equality Act, its implementation and its practical effects, which my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North ably set out. I assure my constituents that, with colleagues in this House, I shall present their concerns to the Government and seek reassurance, and that as their MP I will continue to stand with them, not just in Pride Month but every day of the year. We will stand strong against those who would turn back the clock. Yes, we will celebrate progress made by this Government, but we will also push them to go further, because as the Minister said, progress and equality are not permanent; both must be safeguarded, nurtured and renewed.”
“The Government are making progress by equalising the law so that LGBT+ hate crimes attract sentencing of the same severity as those motivated by race or religion; providing nearly half a million pounds of specialist funding for domestic abuse services; establishing a £21 million fund to support LGBT+ rights globally; improving the experience of our community’s armed forces personnel and veterans and delivering financial recognition to LGBT veterans; working to tackle HIV transmissions and improve access to healthcare; and delivering—hopefully as soon as possible—a full, trans-inclusive ban on conversion practices. Nevertheless, I know from emails and conversations I have had locally that many LGBT+ people in Basingstoke remain incredibly worried about what the future holds for our community in this country.”
“There has been a shocking rise in homophobic and transphobic hate crime in the past few years. That is why, as many speakers have mentioned, I was proud to stand with colleagues to support the amendment to the Crime and Policing Bill tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for North Warwickshire and Bedworth (Rachel Taylor) to make such hate crimes aggravated offences, ensuring that they are treated with the seriousness they have always deserved. It is also why this Labour Government must remain committed not just to defending the progress made by previous Governments, Labour or otherwise, but to building on our proud legacy in LGBT+ equality.”
“We removed the shameful section 28, passed the legislation that allowed trans people legally to change their gender, introduced the Equality Act and civil partnerships, made progress on adoption, and much more. It is a legacy that made our country a far more open and tolerant place to live, but as many hon. Members have said, we all know that the battle is not won—in some respects, it is never won. That is especially the case as hateful and divisive rhetoric creeps back into our public discourse. Far too many follow that up with real-world actions of hatred. Hate crime and abusive conversion practices are still happening, and much of the rhetoric directed at LGBT+ people today, in particular at trans people, echoes the hatred that was commonplace in the era of section 28.”
“Members have said, in contributing to this debate, it feels like I am a world away from the scared and sometimes ashamed little boy that I was growing up. That shows the huge progress we have made as a society. As such, I look forward to taking part once again in the Basingstoke Pride parade in August. It is always wonderful to see everyone taking part in that parade, joyful, proud and defiant, and to have people from across the community in Basingstoke lining the streets in celebration and solidarity. I pay tribute to all the organisers and volunteers who make it possible. As the Minister set out, it is important to recognise just how far we have come, and to celebrate this and previous Labour Governments’ records in advancing LGBT+ rights. The last Labour Government did more for LGBT+ equality than any Government in history.”
“I am grateful to follow the hon. Member for Brighton Pavilion (Siân Berry). I welcome the speeches made by the Minister and the shadow Minister, which were warm and deeply personal, and I recognise the really powerful speech made by the Chair of the Women and Equalities Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen). It is a privilege to speak in the debate to mark and celebrate Pride Month. It is the first time I have had an opportunity to do so since I was elected. It is a particular privilege to do so not just as Basingstoke’s first ever Labour MP but as its first openly bisexual and LGBT+ MP. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Aberdeen North (Kirsty Blackman) for focusing on the B in LGBT. As other hon.”
“I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention. I pay tribute not only to those organisations but to him for the work I know he did with many colleagues to secure that money. Ghana and other countries rolling back on LGBT rights is a demonstration that the battle is never won. The action we take is about not just protecting our community here in this country, but sending a signal about advances that need to be made abroad. Nobody should be made to feel scared, ashamed or excluded because of who they are or who they love. It is the duty of everyone in this House and outside it to ensure that that is the case, standing with pride as part of or with the LGBT+ community and, as my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North said, ensuring that love always wins.”
“T6. Basingstoke is home to a number of vibrant and successful cadet forces—air, Army and sea cadets, as a well as a number of combined cadet forces at the Costello and Vyne schools. Will the Minister join me in paying tribute to those fantastic cadet forces, set out what she and the Government are doing to support them, and perhaps commit to a visit to meet some of the wonderful cadets in Basingstoke?”
“I recognise that the streamlining and abolition of NHS England will put more services on the frontline. As I said earlier, that is still badly needed in Basingstoke. It will help to improve GP access, deliver the health centre at Winklebury, ensure that there is a neighbourhood health centre across the constituency and further improve the A&E wait, for which there is plan in place.”
“While the single patient record will bring about safer and more efficient care, the most important thing for me, as many other Members have mentioned, is the reduction of the burden, anxiety and stress placed on both the patient and their carer. When my dad was in hospital, I remember vividly that my mum carried around several sheets of A4 paper with his medical history and medications written on them. She did not just have to present that record to different parts of the NHS—she often had to present it to different units within the same hospital. Rather than worrying about my dad, she was worrying about whether she had brought that record. Clearly, that record should be held by the NHS. I know that many patients will recognise what an advance that will be both for their care and for hospital efficiency.”
“We have seen 3,500 fewer people waiting for healthcare at Basingstoke hospital under a Labour Government, more GP appointments delivered across Hampshire than ever before, money to upgrade the practice at Chineham surgery from the Government’s upgrade fund and, after significant pressure from my office, the local council providing developer contributions of nearly £1.4 million for the same surgery. But we do need to go further; we have made progress, but there is so much more to do. I particularly want to recognise in the Bill the importance of bringing about the single patient record. Before my dad died at the end of last year, he spent many days, weeks and months, over many years, in hospital, including in diabetic foot clinics and dialysis units, and in far too many intensive care units and wards.”
“I welcome the NHS modernisation Bill as the next step in improving our NHS. When I was elected as the Member for Basingstoke, access to GPs, dentists and mental health services was not good enough. There were unacceptably long waits for elective care and at A&E, poor conditions of our hospital building and an overstretched primary care estate, so I welcome the progress made since my election, nationally and locally, through the investment, reform and hard work of NHS staff.”
“I welcome the Chancellor’s statement and the announcements made by her and the Energy Secretary. We have seen two fossil fuel shocks in just the past five years, which have done untold damage to our economy. Half the recessions since the 1970s have been caused by similar fossil fuel shocks. It is clear that the move to clean, home-grown energy is good for the economy, good for security and good for household bills. What conversations have she and the Energy Secretary had with organisations that might be taking up voluntary agreements? When might those agreements be made, and when will we see the benefit of breaking the link between gas and electricity prices?”
“I am grateful to the Chancellor for her statement, and in particular for setting out the long list of interventions this Government have made on the cost of living, which stands in stark contrast to the record of the Conservatives, who left behind the worst legacy on living standards in a generation. Can the Chancellor confirm that in the weeks and months to come, as she takes decisions on encouraging regulators to take action and in contingency planning, she will keep in mind the need to protect our constituents’ living standards while ensuring economic stability?”
“They ignore the fact that even if we increased oil production today, it would take five to seven years before any new oil supplies became available, far too late to help families facing costs right now. Even then, UK-produced oil would still be sold into global oil markets, where international supply and demand set the price. Similarly, increasing gas production would not offer short-term relief. Any additional UK-extracted gas would also take years to come online and would represent only a tiny fraction of the global gas market, leaving gas prices effectively unchanged. Of course, oil and gas will be used in the UK for many years and decades to come, but the idea that expanding oil and gas exploration would cut bills or materially improve our energy security is a fantasy. The impact would be marginal.”
“We see the consequences in our communities every day, with rugby and football clubs across the country unable to open daily as their energy bills rise, local pubs struggling to keep the lights on and established industries and start-ups alike struggling to cope with energy costs, yet there are those inside and outside of this House who argue for yet more dependence on this broken system. They call for us to slow down our action on climate change—to slow the sprint to clean energy or, worse, to hit reverse gear. They believe that more oil and gas will solve our problems, ignoring the fact that our reserves are heavily depleted and extracting what remains is far more expensive than it is in other North sea nations.”
“That crisis caused household energy bills to soar by 80% and inflation in the economy to increase to 11%, and resulted in a taxpayer bail-out of nearly £60 billion. These crises are not new—history is repeating itself. Since 1970, half of our country’s recessions have been caused by oil and gas price shocks. The truth is that the UK is paying the price for a broken global energy system, upon which every household is dependent. Indeed, research has shown that the cost of cutting UK emissions to net zero is less than the cost of a single fossil fuel price shock.”