Gareth Thomas MP: Climate Timeline

• Timeline
• Votes
• Speeches
• Tweets
• Contact

Gareth Thomas's Climate-related Tweets, Speeches & Votes

We've found the following climate-related tweets, speeches & votes by Gareth Thomas

• 4 Dec 2024: Parliamentary Speech

  The hon. Member for Eastleigh raised energy costs. We are setting up Great British Energy not only to accelerate the transition to renewable and net zero forms of energy, but to bring down bills, because we recognise that energy costs have risen in recent years. Great British Energy will certainly help us to bring those costs down in due course.

  Full debate: Hospitality Sector: Eastleigh

• 15 Oct 2024: Parliamentary Speech

  If Opposition Members are not convinced by that, I would underline that there was also no plan to help small businesses grow, export or get into new markets. Support in that area was cut back and, in some cases, axed completely. There was no delivery on repeated promises to comprehensively reform business rates and no serious plan to tackle the scourge of late payments, which many small businesses face at the moment. Vital infrastructure projects that were fundamental to growth in many communities were cancelled, sensible measures to open up opportunities for investment in green energy projects were blocked, there was no obvious plan to back the high street—a point made by the hon. Member for South Basildon and East Thurrock (James McMurdock) —and, in particular, there was no serious plan to tackle retail crime going forward.

  Full debate: Business Confidence

• 28 Jun 2024: Tweet

  Great to talk to @harrowonline about housing, child poverty, our NHS, crime, the sewage in our rivers, the climate crisis, the situation in Gaza, Brexit and more! Have a read of how voting Labour next Thursday will change our country for the better ???? https://harrowonline.org/2024/06/28/meet-the-candidates-gareth-thomas-labour-for-harrow-west/ [Source]

• 15 May 2024: Tweet

  RT @LabourSJ: Really important intervention from @IPPR today ???? Net zero gives us the chance to bring 000s of good jobs back to our shores… [Source]

• 1 May 2024: Parliamentary Speech

  Under the Conservative party, business has suffered from endless U-turns and policy changes that undermine investment. There have been constant changes on policies, from net zero to corporate governance. The Government’s failure to address the big challenges facing business, such as skills shortages, infrastructure issues and net zero, have undermined business confidence. Foreign direct investment figures are down nearly 30% since 2016-17, according to the Government’s own figures. Without an industrial strategy, and with constant policy uncertainty, more businesses will not have the confidence to invest in the UK.

  The hon. Gentleman asked about Stellantis, and talked about U-turns. I remind him that the whole House voted for the net zero by 2050 target. It happened under a previous Conservative Government, but with the consent of the whole House. When business talks, we listen. The Opposition criticised us for making the changes that Stellantis asked for, so why is he now raising those comments? The Transport Secretary, the Prime Minister and I had a discussion—we do have discussions—and we extended the zero-emission vehicle mandate to ensure that we were not imposing undue costs on people if they were not ready to take up electric vehicles. We listen; the Opposition do not. Look at their plans for net zero. I assure the hon. Gentleman that businesses are absolutely terrified about what Labour would do with its new green deal, and all the measures that would just put costs on businesses and consumers.

  The hon. Gentleman asked about steel. I am afraid that I need to correct several points. We saved jobs in Port Talbot—8,000 jobs were going to be lost, and we saved 5,000. If we want a net zero transition, we will have to move to electric arc furnaces, which require fewer staff. The Opposition cannot blame the Government for that while demanding a transition to net zero. We saved 5,000 jobs in Port Talbot. We invested £500 million out of a total £2 billion investment made with Tata. It is wrong to say that the Government are not saving steel; we are the only ones who have a plan for steel. The Opposition have no plan. We have a great plan, which will transform and regenerate south Wales.

  I thank my hon. Friend for the meeting he organised yesterday with representatives of the ceramics industry and ceramics producers in his constituency. We understand the difficulties that they face, with energy costs having risen following the war in Ukraine, and we are doing everything we can; I talked about the supercharger, which should help to deliver for those who are electricity users. We understand the changes and burdens that net zero is placing on those businesses, and are doing everything we can to mitigate them as we try to deliver that target.

  Full debate: UK Trade Performance

• 12 Apr 2024: Tweet

  Today, Sadiq has launched a new climate action plan for London, including investing £2 million in 'Net Zero' schools. This election is a two-horse race between Sadiq, who has been a true climate leader as Mayor and the climate-denying Conservatives. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/london-sadiq-khan-ed-miliband-conservative-londoners-b2527534.html [Source]

• 19 Mar 2024: Parliamentary Speech

  The US, Canada and the European Union have all taken steps to revoke the ISDS provisions in some of their major treaties. The average amount—this is just the published cases—that Governments have been forced to pay, from taxpayers’ money, is about $600 million for climate cases. It seems even more noteworthy that the UN Secretary-General’s special rapporteur on environment and human rights expressed concern just last September that the ISDS was a significant threat to the net zero transition, the Paris agreement and tackling climate change.

  Just after Committee, the Government confirmed that they were pulling out of the energy charter treaty, in which ISDS arrangements play a major role, saying that it does not fit with net zero ambitions. The Minister might want to try again to explain why it is essential that we remain committed to the ISDS elements of the CPTPP. It is time for a clear-eyed assessment of the risk that the ISDS poses to our interests. With the leave of the House, the Opposition will press new clause 5 to a vote.

  There continue to be significant concerns about the environmental impact of accession to the CPTPP, and the impact on food standards and on animal welfare. The CPTPP covers two of the 11 deforestation fronts expected to account for 80% of deforestation by 2030. A range of environmental groups are very concerned that when the UK joins the CPTPP, preferential access to our markets will be created as a result of the removal of tariffs on palm oil. That could increase demand for products from threatened zones and exacerbate the risk of further deforestation. Ministers still have not published —never mind presented to this House—deforestation due diligence legislation under section 17 of the Environment Act 2021, so it is difficult to accept Ministers’ claims that they are fully committed to our climate change targets, and to protecting important sources of global biodiversity.

  Full debate: Trade (Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership) Bill [Lords]

  In Committee, we outlined a series of concerns about the inclusion of provisions on the investor-state dispute settlement, and its implications for the NHS, the environment and workers’ rights. We raised concerns about performer’s rights and why on earth the Government chose to launch a consultation on the provisions after the Bill had already begun making its way through Parliament—talk about putting the cart before the horse. We also raised environmental concerns, probing Ministers about deforestation, palm oil, increased carbon emissions, the use of pesticides, threats to indigenous wildlife, and the undermining of the UK’s commitment to combating climate change and preserving biodiversity.

  Full debate: Trade (Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership) Bill [Lords]

• 20 Feb 2024: Parliamentary Speech

  We are particularly wary of how these mechanisms might impede our nation’s progress towards meeting climate targets. Furthermore, the potential jeopardy ISDS poses to public services cannot be overstated. The TUC has raised concerns that the prospect of foreign investors suing over the nationalisation of services, or the introduction of new public health regulations threatens our capacity to govern in the public interest, potentially having dire consequences for essential services such as the NHS and education.

  Historical precedents starkly illustrate the contentious nature of ISDS mechanisms. The shadow Minister for international trade, my hon. Friend the Member for Wigan (Lisa Nandy), proposed amendments, inspired by real world cases like Philip Morris’s challenge against Australia, that highlight the pressing need for stringent scrutiny and limitations on ISDS provisions to prevent corporate interests from unduly influencing national policy. Those instances demonstrate a pattern where ISDS is utilised to contest national policies and regulations, emphasising the need for enhanced parliamentary oversight and public consultation, as proposed in our amendments. Such cases vividly underscore the threat that ISDS poses to environmental policies and actions crucial for combating climate change and protecting biodiversity. Those examples highlight the pressing need for that scrutiny, which is why that enhanced parliamentary oversight is important.

  Full debate: Trade (Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership) Bill [ Lords ] (Second...

• 29 Jan 2024: Parliamentary Speech

  There continue to be a series of concerns about how environmental issues, such as deforestation, climate change and pesticide use are dealt with through the CPTPP. The Government’s record does not encourage confidence that those issues were close to the forefront of Ministers’ minds during negotiations.

  Full debate: Trade (Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership) Bill [Lords]

• 08 Jan 2024: Tweet

  The first new law @RishiSunak & the Tories want today is the Offshore Petroleum Bill. It is a political gimmick that won’t bring down energy bills or improve our energy security. It will though damage our commitments to tackling climate change. I will vote against it tonight… [Source]

• 19 Oct 2023: Tweet

  Great meeting the Norwegian????????????????trade delegation to discuss: ????Labour’s plan to attract more investment into the UK ????Greater collaboration to deliver the transition to Net Zero ????Working together on European issues ⚽️Why Martin Ødegaard is the best Norwegian footballer here! [Source]

• 21 Sep 2023: Tweet

  RT @Ed_Miliband: CLIMATE- Rishi Sunak must know that his decisions mean he will miss his climate targets The OBR says that delaying action… [Source]

• 20 Sep 2023: Tweet

  RT @Ed_Miliband: Rishi Sunak's panicked net zero speech is crumbling in the face of opposition from industry, the public, and his own MPs.… [Source]

• 18 Sep 2023: Parliamentary Speech

  The biggest challenge and opportunity that Britain faces is climate change. British businesses could be at the heart of the race to net zero. Indeed, the global transition to green technologies is projected to create new industries worth £1 trillion by the end of this decade alone. However, when the Secretary of State called net zero targets “arbitrary” and “unilateral economic disarmament” only last year and could not deliver even one new offshore wind farm in last week’s energy auction, we are not exactly in the best place to take the climate science innovation of British businesses, universities and other innovators and export them to the rest of the world. We on the Opposition Benches would create a nationwide network of climate export hubs to support every region in the country to secure new skilled jobs and opportunities from green trade. In particular, we need to make sure of help for trade and exporters in every region of the UK. Only 1.4% of exporters are from the north-east and less than 5% are from the midlands.

  Full debate: UK Export Performance

• 02 Aug 2023: Tweet

  RT @LouHaigh: The transition to electric vehicles is essential to net zero, essential to growth and essential to the future of our automoti… [Source]

• 20 Apr 2023: Parliamentary Speech

  We had a very interesting contribution from my hon. Friend the Member for Oldham East and Saddleworth (Debbie Abrahams). My hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Walton (Dan Carden) spoke in particular about the significance of trade with Mexico and Latin America—a matter that no one else had focused on until that point. We were lucky to have the hon. Member for North East Bedfordshire (Richard Fuller) in the Chamber. The whole House will have cherished his contribution as there was no other Conservative Member available. We were 30 minutes into his speech when he made a particularly interesting point on the trade and geopolitical significance of Africa, which I want to return to, if I can, later in my speech. The hon. Member for Bath (Wera Hobhouse) underlined the fundamental importance of considering the climate emergency for our trade and geopolitical agenda, and she was absolutely right to do so.

  As my hon. Friend the Member for West Ham (Ms Brown) reminds me, the International Monetary Fund says that in just eight years’ time, fully half of all the young people entering the labour market globally will be in Africa. The continent still faces huge challenges, notably on the climate crisis, poverty and conflict, but the establishment of the African continental free trade area is an indicator of increasing African self-confidence, and new partnerships to support mutual growth and development are surely in Britain’s long-term interest.

  Full debate: International Trade and Geopolitics

• 28 Feb 2023: Parliamentary Speech

  Earlier this month, the pan-European EVOLVE project found significantly greater potential for marine energy in British waters, which would obviously help us achieve our net zero targets and offer a quicker route to round-the-clock renewable and carbon-free energy. Why are Ministers being so timid about backing that cutting-edge energy technology?

  Full debate: Renewable Energy Production

• 9 Feb 2023: Parliamentary Speech

  Had the Conservative party negotiated a free trade agreement with the US, as it promised at the general election, British firms would have been protected from new market barriers to green trade that are being introduced by the US Inflation Reduction Act 2022. That means that new investment and jobs here in Britain in green energy, electric vehicles and new technology are at risk. Is it not the truth that the infighting in the Conservative party last year meant that Ministers woke up much too late to the threat and that they have done far too little since to try to ameliorate the damage?

  Full debate: Free Trade Agreement with the US

• 06 Jan 2023: Tweet

  The people of Pakistan have been very hard hit by the climate crisis- we should stand with our Commonwealth allies and continue to help them rebuild shattered lives and communities ⁦@miqdaad⁩ ⁦ ⁦@Muslim_Aid⁩ ⁦@IslamicReliefUK⁩ https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jan/06/pakistan-floodwaters-climate-disasters-international-aid?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other [Source]

• 05 Jan 2023: Tweet

  A truly terrifying prediction underlining the urgency of the climate crisis - again! Half of glaciers will be gone by 2100 even under Paris 1.5C accord, study finds https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/jan/05/half-planets-glaciers-gone-2100-even-under-paris-15c-accord-data-finds?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other [Source]

• 12 Dec 2022: Parliamentary Speech

  New clause 13— Impact assessment: climate change—

  “The Secretary of State must lay before Parliament an assessment of the impact of the implementation of the procurement Chapters on tackling climate change, not less than two years, but not more than three years, after the passage of this Act.”

  Full debate: Trade (Australia and New Zealand) Bill

• 14 Nov 2022: Parliamentary Speech

  The huge giveaway to Australian farmers led Australian negotiators to boast of their success. It is as if Ministers have turned their backs on rural communities and decided that farmers did not matter in these negotiations. There is little on labour rights, even less on human rights and, as my right hon. Friend the Member for Torfaen, the hon. Member for Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey and others have pointed out, little on climate change.

  Full debate: Australia and New Zealand Trade Deals

• 11 Nov 2022: Tweet

  RT @YeadingWalk: Gareth Thomas MP for Harrow West joined volunteers in the park during COP27 week to plant an Ornamental Pear tree to help… [Source]

• 10 Nov 2022: Tweet

  RT @UKLabour: With @Keir_Starmer as PM, the UK will lead in tackling the climate crisis and reaching the goal of net-zero. Our Green Prosp… [Source]

• 02 Nov 2022: Tweet

  RT @Ed_Miliband: The Prime Minister has been shamed into going to COP27 by the torrent of disbelief that he would fail to turn up. He is g… [Source]

• 19 Oct 2022: Vote

  Ban on Fracking for Shale Gas Bill - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: Aye

• 28 Sep 2022: Tweet

  2/4 A Great British Energy Company will capture the benefits generating our own renewable energy, will help create jobs and help to increase green energy exports to the rest of the world. https://x.com/GarethThomasMP/status/1575134417676369926/video/1 [Source]

• 28 Sep 2022: Tweet

  RT @NickTorfaen: As International Trade Secretary I would drive green export growth. Selling British innovation on climate change globall… [Source]

• 26 Sep 2022: Tweet

  RT @NickTorfaen: ⁦@UKLabour⁩ will make the UK a world leader in tackling climate change. As International Trade Secretary I would set up C… [Source]

• 6 Sep 2022: Parliamentary Speech

  I sympathise with the frustration of cross-party Committee members that no cohesive strategy for trade negotiations has been published, making it that little bit easier for Ministers to be pushed and pulled in whatever direction those with whom we are negotiating want. I hope that whoever is confirmed as Secretary of State for International Trade will address that key issue quickly. Why has there been such a contrast between what was promised to the House for such key deals and what has happened? Is it just incompetence, laziness or poor performance from individual Ministers, or is there something more profound here? Is it that the implications for procurement, British agriculture and tenant farmers—the hon. Member for Penrith and The Border (Dr Hudson) and others flagged up that issue—as well as for our food standards, for labour and human rights, for action on climate change, for buying British and for good digital regulation are so significant that Ministers felt it better to try to discourage a sustained look at the provisions in these deals?

  Given the huge concessions Ministers made on access to our agricultural markets, it is frankly also surprising that they did not insist on more protection against competition from food imports produced to lower standards. Human rights, labour rights and climate change have also been largely unmentioned.

  Full debate: Trade (Australia and New Zealand) Bill

• 06 Sep 2022: Tweet

  3 million children at risk as devastating floods hit ????????- climate change is already having a huge impact and it’s children most at risk of being hardest hit - here’s hoping a new Foreign Secretary might care enough to help the people of Pakistan more https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/more-three-million-children-risk-devastating-floods-hit-pakistan [Source]

• 16 Aug 2022: Tweet

  Hugely important moment for the ‘fight’ against climate change (& for US jobs in green energy) and a gentle reminder to the next Prime Minister of what a bit of ambition could achieve for our climate change agenda…. https://twitter.com/nanditab1/status/1559632004110491649 [Source]

• 22 Jul 2022: Tweet

  RT @RachelReevesMP: When it comes to tackling climate change, the Tories are dangerously detached from reality. Labour will provide the l… [Source]

• 21 Jul 2022: Tweet

  Shocking details about just how early Big Oil (Exxon) knew their business model was causing #climatechange and just how far they went to cover up the truth:- ‘Big Oil v The World’ @BBC [Source]

• 20 Jul 2022: Tweet

  RT @DrSimEvans: NEW The UK government's Net-Zero Strategy breached the Climate Change Act, the High Court has ruled I've read the full 59… [Source]

• 12 Jul 2022: Tweet

  RT @GeraintDaviesMP: We need more community-owned energy cooperatives given fair prices by big energy suppliers to ensure sustainable energ… [Source]

• 6 Jul 2022: Parliamentary Speech

  Nepal and Sri Lanka are also, for different reasons, facing huge challenges in making progress towards the SDGs. Due to climate change, too many people in Nepal have had to leave the country for much of the year to go to India or other countries to seek work. It is therefore crucial to do as much as we can to help economic empowerment in Nepal. My right hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Hodge Hill (Liam Byrne) briefly alluded to Sri Lanka, with which a huge number of my constituents have very close connections. If ever there was a country that has made the case for a greater programme of debt relief—I echo his point, too, about China as the lender of last resort—it is Sri Lanka. There are huge human rights and governance concerns in Sri Lanka, as my Tamil and Muslim constituents know only too well, but it is striking that all the peoples of Sri Lanka are suffering hunger, loss of jobs, and real wage insecurity. I wonder whether, in the short term, the Department needs to be doing more to help the people of Sri Lanka.

  Full debate: Strategy for International Development

• 04 Jul 2022: Tweet

  RT @RachelReevesMP: NEW: If we seize the opportunities of the future, we can re-energise our economy, help achieve net zero and create jobs… [Source]

• 01 Jul 2022: Tweet

  All those who recognise that #climatechange is real and that urgent action is needed to tackle global warming will share concern at this…. Unprecedented 32.5C in the Arctic Circle during month of smashed global temperature records ⁦⁩ #climatecrisis https://apple.news/Az3uGBsHoR46lLbbMyhx2Yg [Source]

• 24 May 2022: Tweet

  RT @PreetKGillMP: Devastating to see rations being cut by half. The Sahel is the starkest reminder of the unequal impact of climate change… [Source]

• 10 May 2022: Parliamentary Speech

  Similarly, the shocking level of energy bills only underlines the lack of agency that consumers have in energy markets. Even before the current crisis, it was clear big companies dominated the market too much, so new thinking on how to give consumers more agency in energy markets in the long term is essential to shape energy security, shift patterns of ownership and accelerate that switch to lower-carbon, renewable systems. Indeed, where is the serious plan to tackle the climate crisis? If the Government had backed the Opposition’s plans, we could double our onshore wind capacity to power an extra 10 million homes, back tidal power, triple solar power by 2030 and accelerate energy insulation to reduce the bills of working families and pensioners.

  Full debate: Debate on the Address

• 22 Feb 2022: Parliamentary Speech

  An ambitious agreement on services could support and complement India’s economic development. Indeed, given the UK’s strong comparative advantage in high-value services such as digital finance, a deal that does not support real growth in services exports would be very disappointing. Again, on tech, the UK and India are among the world’s leaders in the development of new technologies. An FTA could help to develop business co-operation in advanced research and manufacturing capacity, in green energy capacity in particular, as well as in artificial intelligence.

  Full debate: India-UK Trade Negotiations

• 07 Jun 2021: Vote

  Advanced Research and Invention Agency Bill — New Clause 1 - Human Rights Abuses - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: Aye

• 26 May 2021: Vote

  Environment Bill — New Clause 24 - Prohibition on burning of peat in upland areas - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: Aye

• 13 Jan 2021: Vote

  Financial Services Bill — Schedule 2 - Prudential regulation of FCA investment firms - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: Aye

• 11 Jan 2021: Parliamentary Speech

  It is also striking that, in the year when the UK will be hosting the world’s climate change summit, not one of the trade agreements that the Secretary of State signed last year saw any progress on the environment and climate change. Also, as other hon. Friends have mentioned, many of the deals that the Secretary of State signed did not include even the most basic provisions on human rights. It was good to hear the right hon. Member for Bournemouth East (Mr Ellwood) briefly require the Secretary of State to mention India. The Secretary of State has been astonishingly quiet on trade with the Indian subcontinent. India’s market is set to be the world’s fifth largest within five years, and given that Britain is bottom of the G7 for growth in our trade with India, a little more effort to open those markets would, I say gently, be timely.

  Full debate: Global Britain

• 16 Nov 2020: Vote

  Pension Schemes Bill [Lords] — Clause 124 - Climate change risk - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: Aye

• 12 Oct 2020: Vote

  Agriculture Bill — After Clause 42 - Contribution of agriculture and associated land use to climate change targets - Pro-climate vote: No - Their vote: No

• 29 Sep 2020: Vote

  United Kingdom Internal Market Bill — New Clause 6 - Economic development: climate and nature emergency impact statement - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: Aye

• 23 Jun 2020: Parliamentary Speech

  To listen to some sceptics about a UK-US deal with Donald Trump’s Administration, our farmers will be undercut, standards of food production will be lowered, the NHS will be on the table, climate change will not feature, big corporates will be even more powerful and labour rights will be undermined. Ministers will say that is an outrageous and scurrilous description of the likely benefits of a UK-US trade deal. Those are the potential downsides, however, so we should be able to consider whether the trade-offs of a UK-US deal, or indeed any deal with any other country, outweigh the benefits and therefore should not be approved, or whether, in fact, the benefits outweigh the downsides.

  Full debate: Trade Bill (Fifth sitting)

• 18 Jun 2020: Parliamentary Speech

  Amendment 25, on climate and carbon considerations, would put us firmly in line with sustainable development goal 13 on taking climate action, to which we have signed up. On 1 May last year, we in this place declared a climate emergency and, as has been mentioned, that was echoed by councils and devolved Governments. Wandsworth, in my own constituency, declared a climate emergency, and we want to see that reflected in the Bill. While our attention has rightly been on responding to the coronavirus crisis, we would all agree that the climate crisis has not gone away. That is why we feel it was important to table the amendment.

  The rush to fill the gap created by leaving the customs union cannot be used as an excuse to undermine and circumvent our legally binding climate change commitments, made under the Paris agreement, or the Government’s own target of achieving net zero by 2050. That is why that issue is listed in new clause 2, along with a whole list of important issues, such as waste, water, quality and biodiversity.

  In February, I was in the Court of Appeal when it ruled in a landmark judgment that the national policy statement underpinning a third runway at Heathrow airport was unlawful, as it was incompatible with the Paris agreement. The decision not to take the Paris agreement into account in that policy statement was deemed by the judges to be legally fatal to the national policy statement. If we do not accept this amendment, we risk having a contradiction between our environmental agreements and our trade deals.

  To date, trade deals have been negotiated separately to climate agreements, but a joined-up policy would be far more effective for both. Not having a joined-up policy is a mistake, as current trade rules place trade promotion and liberalisation ahead of climate goals. The Trade Justice Movement, which we heard from this morning, has identified three ways in which current trade rules can do that. First, investment chapters in trade and investment deals allow companies to sue Governments for measures taken to support climate goals, such as the denial of a permit to construct an oil pipeline, and thus to undermine those goals. Secondly, WTO rules have been used regularly by states to challenge each other’s subsidies to renewable energy industries, and yet not one case has been brought against fossil fuel subsidies. Thirdly, no trade deal that is currently in force contains any binding commitments to ensure that international trade supports climate targets.

  Trade agreements also impede Government implementation of climate commitments. For example, they prohibit the use of local content requirements, which can be crucial in producing domestic support for renewable energy. If trade agreements do not have an explicit commitment towards honouring climate commitments, they can hinder the sharing of green technology, for example by implementing far-reaching intellectual property provisions that threaten to hinder the sharing of green tech.

  Trade rules can also threaten to increase fossil fuel use, which we explicitly decided not to do in declaring a climate emergency. Current trade and investment agreements foster a global culture of fossil fuel dependency, for instance by prohibiting export and import restrictions on fossil fuels, thereby depriving Governments of a tool to limit production of those fuels.

  Unless it is properly regulated, trade can present a huge barrier to alleviating the climate emergency and achieving carbon reduction targets. Indeed, when trade agreements are done badly, they can accelerate a race to the bottom on environmental standards. Therefore, I echo the call of Greener UK in its evidence to the Committee, including its written evidence, that the Bill must include a lock and a legal commitment on carbon reduction targets.

  Our new clauses and amendments would ensure that all trade agreements that the UK negotiates are climate-aware. The UK should use trade deals to show the world how trade and trade agreements can be made compatible with net zero ambitions, including by prioritising goods and services that are low carbon and environmentally sustainable.

  The Government have already shown that they are willing to backtrack on global environmental standards. For example, the Environment Bill fails to include a legally binding commitment to meet World Health Organisation guidelines for fine particulate matter. That is a very big issue for people in Putney, because Putney High Street has one of the highest levels of air pollution in the country, and we look to the EU to set that standard. My constituents would not be encouraged by trade deals that do not include an assessment of the impact on air quality, for example. Amendment 25 would also prevent trade agreements from impeding the UK’s ability to ratify and properly implement international treaties such as the Paris agreement, which would send a message to the world that compliance with international climate agreements are the norm—this is how we can do it.

  Full debate: Trade Bill (Fourth sitting)

• 14 Oct 2019: Parliamentary Speech

  I want to concentrate my remarks on the state of our public services and on Brexit. As a proud Co-op MP, I am disappointed, but not entirely surprised, to see once again nothing in a Queen’s Speech about how the Government might want to help the co-operative movement expand. There is nothing to help energy co-operatives expand to grow the usage of renewable energy still further, which is essential if we are to get our emissions down quicker. There is nothing to help housing co-operatives expand to tackle the housing crisis, particularly, but not exclusively, in London. There is nothing to help co-operative schools either.

  Full debate: Debate on the Address

• 25 Jun 2019: Vote

  Delegated Legislation — Value Added Tax - Pro-climate vote: No - Their vote: No

• 22 Jan 2019: Parliamentary Speech

  In October last year, the Select Committee on Environment, Food and Rural Affairs suggested that an independent review to determine whether the water industry was fit for purpose was required. The Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management went further, suggesting that such a review needed to examine the ownership of water companies. The Select Committee also raised concerns about the powers available to Ministers and Ofwat to improve governance and prevent pollution. With climate change approaching and a creaking infrastructure, the Committee argued that the need for change was urgent.

  Full debate: Water Industry

• 6 Mar 2018: Parliamentary Speech

  I do not hold the dogmatic view that public ownership through nationalisation might be a sensible way forward. I can see that there might be a case for some of the transmission network to be publicly owned, and I can see the argument for some public ownership of crucial, strategically important power stations to keep the lights on while a broader transition process is taking place. Fundamentally, however, I would like to make the argument for more co-operative, community-owned not-for-profit energy companies. They would own and supply energy, help to decarbonise our existing energy supply, be properly regulated, and, crucially, help to keep in the local community some of the wealth that is generated by energy, which I gently suggest should be strongly encouraged and allowed to emerge. Robin Hood Energy in Nottingham is a great example of that, as are Bristol Energy and Westmill Solar Co-operative.

  Full debate: Domestic Gas and Electricity (Tariff Cap) Bill

• 9 Feb 2017: Parliamentary Speech

  I can think of a number of areas—I return to the example of Allerdale Borough Council—that need significant investment in infrastructure from time to time and where the power to introduce an infrastructure levy could make a significant difference to economic growth in the area. Let us take the example of flooding. In the past, Allerdale Borough Council has had a number of significant floods in its area, and it has been fortunate to secure grants to help with flood prevention measures. However, given the pace of climate change, one could easily imagine a scenario in which funding for further work is required to prevent flooding and to allow businesses to operate effectively. Without the infrastructure investment, the local authority might become less attractive to businesses. It is not impossible to envisage a situation in which businesses wanted to move out of the area. Indeed, one area that was the victim of significant flooding in Allerdale is the area that most large businesses are attracted to as a base.

  Full debate: Local Government Finance Bill (Eighth sitting)

• 06 Sep 2016: Vote

  Finance Bill — VAT on Installation of Energy Saving Materials - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: Aye

• 03 May 2016: Vote

  Housing and Planning Bill — Neighbourhood right of appeal - Pro-climate vote: No - Their vote: No

• 26 Oct 2015: Vote

  Finance Bill (Ways and Means) (Payment of Corporation Tax) — Chapter 5 — Supplementary provisions - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: Aye

• 08 Sep 2015: Vote

  Bill Presented — Devolution (London) Bill — Clause 45 — CCL: removal of exemption for electricity from renewable sources - Pro-climate vote: No - Their vote: No

• 10 Dec 2013: Parliamentary Speech

  Perhaps the Minister, like me, might draw inspiration from the example of Brixton Energy, also in London, which comprises three energy co-operatives—community-owned solar power schemes taking inspiration perhaps from the better known Baywind and Westmill energy co-operatives in Cumbria and Oxfordshire. The Brixton solar-power initiative has created co-operatively and community-owned renewable energy, the revenues from which stay within the local community. It is an innovative energy solution leading the way in generating sustainable sources of energy and it is jointly owned and operated by people in the community for their mutual benefit. As democratic enterprises, they operate with a one member, one vote policy and are surely a great example of the kind of mixed economy of energy ownership that we need to challenge the big six and move on from today’s problems in our energy market.

  Full debate: Co-operatives and Mutuals

• 04 Jun 2013: Vote

  Energy Bill — Clause 10 — Direction to offer contract - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: Aye

• 04 Jun 2013: Vote

  Energy Bill — Clause 1 — Decarbonisation - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: Aye

• 19 Dec 2012: Vote

  Charities Act 2011 (Amendment) — Energy Bill - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: Aye

• 17 Oct 2012: Vote

  Relationship, Drug and Alcohol Education (Curriculum) — New Clause 22 — Interpretation of the green purposes: duty to assess impact on the Climate Change Act 2008 - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: Aye

• 6 Mar 2012: Parliamentary Speech

  To secure a licence and to raise the finance for generation schemes, the energy companies would establish new, separate wholly-owned companies. The Bill would require shares in those new companies to be made available to local people wanting to invest in new energy generation projects in their area. For example, why should not local people who are seeing a new wind farm go up have the chance to get a direct personal benefit from a new business which, important as it is for bringing down carbon dioxide emissions, will nevertheless inevitably have some impact on their community? Why should local people not have a say, through their ownership of a stake in the new business, in how it is run? Why should local people, whose ever-rising energy bills have helped to pay for the new energy business, not see a direct financial return too? That could help the finances of people in the local community and make them feel more secure.

  I believe in the power of markets and the benefits of strong competition, but markets have to be regulated properly if the benefits of competition are not to be captured by the few. My Bill therefore seeks to spread the benefits from new investment in energy markets to the many. The squeeze on finances up and down the country, which has been caused by the Government’s economic policies, is exemplified in part by Ministers’ failure to tackle rising energy prices. I support the need for action on rising prices, which my right hon. Friends the Leader of the Opposition and the shadow Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change have rightly championed. My Bill would help to increase the number of winners from the energy market. It would also accelerate the slow process of decentralising the generation and supply of energy, which bolder Governments than ours are embracing with enthusiasm.

  Full debate: Energy Generation (Planning and Right to Invest)

• 10 Jan 2012: Parliamentary Speech

  There have been a series of initiatives to consider the post-2015 framework. Early suggestions included the roll-over of existing MDGs to 2020 or 2025, or an “MDG plus” agreement that could take some existing core goals in education, health or nutrition, and add three or four new, locally defined, goals. The so-called one world approach would have new goals based on issues such as resilience and climate change. More recent proposals include a gross national happiness index, such as that currently used by Bhutan, for measuring national progress; the UN General Assembly has expressed qualified interest in that. Measuring happiness has begun to be of interest in the UK and in France, and in a series of state governments in the US. A Sri Lankan economist has proposed a series of consumption goals to target under-consumption by the poorest countries and over-consumption in richer countries. The Colombian Government have proposed a series of sustainable development goals that I understand also have the support of Brazil. Those are due to be discussed at the forthcoming Rio plus 20 meeting in June, and focus on addressing global climate change and development. I would be interested to know what the Minister thinks about those ideas.

  The ODI’s second principle is that of building resilience and reducing vulnerability. That could provide a focus for the use of renewed G8 and G20 development interest in growth and infrastructure to help tackle inequality and address issues such as capital flight and tax avoidance, as well as other critical environmental issues such as climate change, which reduce a community’s resilience and increase vulnerability. Finally, the ODI suggests a principle of building national economies—a key concern of Governments in developing countries, and one that increasingly reflects debate in many developed countries about what should be the priorities for overseas aid.

  Full debate: Millennium Development Goals

• 14 Sep 2011: Vote

  Prime Minister — Clause 42 — Domestic energy efficient regulations - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: Aye

• 14 Sep 2011: Vote

  Prime Minister — New Clause 1 — Energy efficiency aim - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: Aye

• 30 Jun 2011: Parliamentary Speech

  The hon. Member for East Hampshire raised the issues relating to social ISAs. I would be interested in the Minister’s response to the view expressed by the hon. Member for East Hampshire about their potential. The Minister may be aware of the Big Lottery Fund’s launch of a social impact bond—a particular model that it has backed. Again, I would welcome hearing from the Minister the Government’s view on whether that bond has considerably more potential and in particular whether it has the potential to help co-operatives to expand, perhaps in the way that my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Wavertree (Luciana Berger) alluded to in the context of renewable energy.

  My hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich West identified the traditions of collective self-help and the entrepreneurial spirit as driving influences in setting up effective co-operatives. As we heard, the UK has almost 5,000 successful co-ops, with almost 13 million members. The turnover of UK co-ops has risen by some 25% over the past three years. Perhaps the best-known example of co-ops in the UK is the Co-op Group, of which the Co-op bank is an essential part. Its move into renewable energy was mentioned by others. There is also, of course, the excellent John Lewis Partnership. If I may crave your indulgence, Mr Amess, I praise also those who are part of the Rainbow Saver credit union, in which I declare an interest, and those who run the excellent Harrow and Hillingdon credit union.

  My hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Wavertree talked about the failure of the Government to encourage community energy projects. Given that the Minister is a member of the same political party as the person who is responsible for that dismal record, will he pledge to take back to the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change the concern of the Chamber over his lack of commitment to co-operative energy projects?

  Full debate: Co-operatives and Mutuality

• 8 Mar 2011: Parliamentary Speech

  Nevertheless, what happened in Haiti is one reason why approximately 263 million people were devastated by natural disasters in 2010—110 million more than in the year of the tsunami. Experts predict that by 2015, some 375 million people will be affected as climate change increases the risk of natural disasters, the vast majority of them living on less than $1 a day. Many will also be affected by conflict, but although the needs of people affected by conflict and the agencies involved in responding can both be similar, in this debate I want to focus on purely natural disasters.

  Full debate: Humanitarian Disasters

• 12 Oct 2010: Parliamentary Speech

  A growing population will also have profound implications for our transport needs, with some forecasts predicting one third of London traffic travelling on very congested roads by 2025. Aviation demand is forecast to more than double by 2030, with a considerable increase in pressure on the capacity and performance of London’s airports. As a country, too, we are committed to an 80% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 levels by 2050. That has considerable implications for our future energy usage and how we live our lives. In particular, it raises the challenge of dramatically increasing sustainable energy levels and making buildings across the capital vastly more energy efficient, and doing so rapidly, over a comparatively short period.

  Full debate: Royal Commission (London)

• 1 Jul 2010: Parliamentary Speech

  Under this Government, the Department should be at the centre of development thinking, but it simply is not yet. It could champion reform of the World Bank, which, despite doing a lot of good, needs to evolve quickly, get its staff out of Washington and into the African countries that it is supposed to help, and continue the reform of its governance. However, there has been nothing from the right hon. Gentleman on that issue yet. Under him, DFID could champion reform of the UN development system in order to help all developing countries, including those with whom we do not have bilateral aid programmes. It could continue to demand a change to how the UN humanitarian system works—or, in the case of Haiti, did not work anything like well enough. The Department could demand that UN agencies work together better in developing countries, but we have heard nothing from the right hon. Gentleman on that topic, either. He could certainly lead the development community on highlighting the finance that is necessary to help developing countries deal with the impact of climate change, but there has been radio silence on that issue, too.

  Full debate: Global Poverty

• 8 Jun 2010: Parliamentary Speech

  Can the hon. Gentleman tell the House who in the Government will have the final say on whether and which regional development agencies will survive? Will it be the Business Secretary—once a supporter of RDAs—or will it be the Chancellor? No one expects it to be the Chief Secretary. Is not the real truth that RDAs such as One NorthEast are playing, and could continue to play, a key role in helping to deliver new jobs in new industries crucial to Britain’s economic future, such as renewable energy and advanced engineering?

  Full debate: Oral Answers to Questions

• 8 Apr 2010: Parliamentary Speech

  The 2001 Bonn Declaration committed signatories to providing $410 million per year, from 2005-08, for developing countries to respond to climate change. The European Community was one of these signatories and the UK Government agreed to contribute approximately £30 million ($61,467 million) per year. The following table provides the amount spent through each budget heading, which has exceed that original commitment.

  The Department for International Development (DFID) contributed through the Special Climate Change Fund, the Clean Energy Investment Framework, the Global Environment Facility, the Least Developed Countries Fund and through Bilateral aid.

  Full debate: International Development

  The 2001 Bonn Declaration committed signatories to providing $410 million per year, from 2005-08, for developing countries to respond to climate change. The European Community was one of these signatories and the UK Government agreed to contribute approximately £30 million ($61,467 million) per year. The following table provides the amount spent through each budget heading, which has exceed that original commitment.

  The Department for International Development (DFID) contributed through the Special Climate Change Fund, the Clean Energy Investment Framework, the Global Environment Facility, the Least Developed Countries Fund and through Bilateral aid.

  Full debate: International Development

• 15 Mar 2010: Parliamentary Speech

  The Department for International Development (DFID) helps developing countries deal with the effects of climate change through a number of multilateral and bilateral channels. For example DFID has:

  Provided \xA350 million to the Chars Livelihood Programme in Bangladesh to support livelihoods resilient to climate change.

  Committed to invest \xA3100 million in climate research over five years.

  We are not currently able to disaggregate all of our spend on climate change. DFID is working with other donors, through the Development Assistance Committee of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, to agree how climate change spending should be reported. We expect to begin reporting against agreed requirements later this year.

  Full debate: Developing Countries: Climate Change

• 2 Mar 2010: Parliamentary Speech

  The UK announced up to \xA3100 million of funding for forestry at Poznan in 2008. So far we have allocated \xA350 million to the Forest Investment Program (FIP), one of the multi-donor Climate Investment Funds, of which \xA312 million has been deposited. The FIP trust fund sub-committee is currently considering expressions of interest from 44 countries and regions, before selecting five pilots for funding. The UK is a member of this committee and will play a role in the deliberations. The remainder has been provisionally allocated to the FIP, and will be deposited in the next financial year, subject to good progress.

  Full debate: Poland: Forestry

• 1 Mar 2010: Parliamentary Speech

  Officials of the Department for International Development (DFID) are in regular contact with representatives of the Government of Bangladesh. A senior official represented DFID at the Bangladesh Development Forum meeting, held in Dhaka on 15 and 16 February. During this meeting the Government of Bangladesh confirmed their wish to establish a Multi-Donor Trust Fund for Climate Change. Decisions on how the fund will be allocated will be led by the Government of Bangladesh, which will also be responsible for implementing projects supported by the fund. The World Bank will provide technical advice and financial management. The UK, the European Union and Denmark will provide grants to the fund.

  Full debate: Bangladesh: Floods

• 22 Feb 2010: Parliamentary Speech

  All fast start finance will contribute towards the existing Government Official Development Assistance (ODA) target of 0.7 per cent. of Gross National Income (GNI). In order to reach this target the UK’s aid programme is growing and fast start will be financed from part of this growth. All of the £1.5 billion fast start finance is additional to spending on climate change in 2009-10.

  Full debate: Overseas Aid: Climate Change

• 8 Feb 2010: Parliamentary Speech

  The UK is committed to providing additional post-Fast Start financing after 2012-13 on top of the Government’s commitment to achieve an official development assistance (ODA) level of 0.7 per cent. of gross national income (GNI), and to limiting the share of ODA for climate change finance to no more than 10 per cent. Fast Start finance, which is for the period 2010-11 to 2012-13, will be counted as ODA.

  Full debate: Overseas Aid: Climate Change

• 3 Feb 2010: Parliamentary Speech

  The UK remains committed to providing additional post 2012 financing on top of the 0.7 per cent. official development assistance (ODA) commitment and to limiting the share of our ODA for climate change to no more than 10 per cent.

  Full debate: Climate Change: Finance

• 27 Jan 2010: Parliamentary Speech

  Thirdly, we have increased the frequency and intensity of our discussions with the Government of Kenya. Last year the Kenyan Government allocated more of their own resources to dealing with the consequences of drought than ever before. Frankly, they could do still more. Kenya has substantial domestic resources and should be perfectly able to prioritise the plight of its most vulnerable citizens. We shall continue to take every opportunity we can to make that point. We have also encouraged the Kenyan Government to develop their own longer-term strategy. We are working with Ministers and officials in Kenya to help them to appreciate the economic consequences of climate change, which is clearly an increasing factor in some of the difficulties that the people of Kenya face. It is particularly important that they are able to take advantage of the opportunities offered by new climate finance, including the resources committed at Copenhagen. I therefore hope that the hon. Member for East Londonderry will agree that a lasting solution to food insecurity does not lie in humanitarian aid, however crucial it might be in the short term, and that the Department needs to focus on not only the immediate humanitarian needs of the people of Kenya, but how to help them to avoid a repeat of the present situation in the longer term.

  Full debate: Kenya (Drought and Famine)

• 26 Jan 2010: Parliamentary Speech

  I will now respond to some of the specific points that other hon. Members have made. The hon. Member for Mid-Dorset and North Poole, who usually chairs the all-party group that I mentioned, highlighted the important contribution that microfinance can make to the achievement of the millennium development goals, and I completely agree with her point. If we want to achieve the principal millennium development goal of halving the number of people living on less than a dollar a day, we must substantially increase access to financial services. Microfinance has a key role to play in that. She also made an important point about micro-insurance. That is one small part of helping communities and the world’s poorest to be better able to withstand the rising impact of climate change globally, and that is one of the areas that we are working on.

  Full debate: Microfinance

• 20 Jan 2010: Parliamentary Speech

  My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has committed £1.5 billion over the next three years to help developing countries tackle climate change. Half of that will be spent on helping poor and vulnerable countries adapt to the effects of climate change.

  Full debate: Oral Answers to Questions

  My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister’s announcement was part of an effort at Copenhagen to galvanise fast-start finance and help developing countries, such as those that my hon. Friend has just described, to get the funding that they need immediately in order to make their countries more resilient to the impact of climate change. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and other Ministers helped to secure commitments worth some $10 billion a year by 2012 to help with that challenge.

  Full debate: Oral Answers to Questions