VoteClimate: Kevin Hollinrake MP: Climate Timeline

Kevin Hollinrake MP: Climate Timeline

Kevin Hollinrake is the Conservative MP for Thirsk and Malton.

We have identified 19 Parliamentary Votes Related to Climate since 2015 in which Kevin Hollinrake could have voted.

Kevin Hollinrake is rated Anti for votes supporting action on climate. (Rating Methodology)

  • In favour of action on climate: 0
  • Against: 18
  • Did not vote: 1

Compare to other MPs:

Why don't you Contact Kevin Hollinrake MP now and tell them how much climate means to you?

Kevin Hollinrake's Climate-related Tweets, Speeches & Votes

We've found the following climate-related tweets, speeches & votes by Kevin Hollinrake

  • 12 Nov 2024: Tweet

    RT @JamesMelville: Keir Starmer has announced a target to cut UK emissions by 81% by 2035 whilst attending the #COP29 in Baku. This inclu… [Source]
  • 13 May 2024: Parliamentary Speech

    Furthermore, the draft instrument will introduce a fast-track UKCA measure, which will provide manufacturers with more flexibility when using the UKCA marking to place products on the market in Great Britain without compromising on the legal requirements. This instrument will apply to 21 product regulations managed by the Department for Business and Trade, the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, and the Health and Safety Executive under the Department for Work and Pensions. The Government are taking a tailored approach to ensure that regulation works for sectors and consumers covered by different regulations, including those outside the scope of the draft instrument. We have listened to feedback from the industry, and this draft instrument is designed to remove costs and burdens for businesses and to provide certainty on our approach to product regulation.

    Full debate: Draft Product Safety and Metrology etc. (Amendment) Regulations 2024

  • 09 Mar 2024: Tweet

    @Shansford @biztradegovuk @ComputerWeekly @tinamckenz @ElizabethTVega @gov_procurement Now resolved: Following supplier feedback, CCS has conducted a review of the level of liability insurance required for G-Cloud 14 Lots 1-3, and has made the decision to lower the required level of cover. This means that the required liability insurance cover required will be:… https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1766384686719275229
  • 25 Jan 2024: Parliamentary Speech

    The hon. Member raises a very important point. It is something that we look at all the time, and certainly we have had discussions on the matter. We already have programmes in place, including the £12.4 billion that we distribute through the British Business Bank that supports nations and regions funds. Some of that will certainly help businesses to access finance to decarbonise. We look at those measures all the time, and we are happy to work with him on future programmes that we might roll out.

    Full debate: SMEs: Access to Finance

  • 24 Jan 2024: Parliamentary Speech

    The continued recognition of current EU requirements, including the CE and reversed epsilon markings, will apply to 21 product regulations, including the 18 product regulations owned by the Department of Business and Trade, previously announced on 1 August 2023. Following feedback from industry, we are also continuing CE recognition for a further three regulation, which will now include: the Ecodesign for Energy-Related Products 2010 Regulations—Department for Energy Security and Net Zero; the Explosives Regulations 2014—Department for Work and Pensions, Health and Safety Executive; and the Restriction of the Use of Certain Hazardous Substances in Electrical and Electronic Equipment Regulations 2012—Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs.

    Full debate: Product Safety and Metrology: (Amendment) Regulations 2024

  • 20 Nov 2023: Parliamentary Speech

    “(c) the collective interests of consumers include avoiding any detriment that might be incurred by consumers if the United Kingdom does not reach a level of net zero carbon emissions by 2030.”

    This amendment would mean that part of the test of whether a commercial practice had committed an infringement would be whether the commercial practice had failed to protect consumers from any detrimental effects arising from a failure to achieve net zero by 2030.

    Full debate: Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Bill

    On amendment 207, tabled by the hon. Member for Brighton, Pavilion (Caroline Lucas), enforcers can already take action under the Bill to protect consumers during the transition to net zero. For example, they have powers to tackle misleading green claims. We are already making strong progress towards net zero by 2050. The UK has reduced its emissions further and faster than any other major economy.

    Full debate: Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Bill

  • 23 Oct 2023: Tweet

    Good to see this new decarbonisation/energy security/independence measure happening in Yorkshire & Humber ???????? https://twitter.com/kevinhollinrake/status/1716355935122166254/photo/1 [Source]
  • 20 Oct 2023: Parliamentary Speech

    My hon. Friend the Member for Christchurch mentioned some of the legislation that has not necessarily been accompanied by an impact assessment. He may want to ask questions of the different Ministers responsible for the policy areas concerned: net zero, HS2, and renters’ reform. For something as strategic as net zero, for example, it is hugely complex to identify both costs and benefits: there are some things that we simply do not know. While listening to my hon. Friend speak about those issues, a famous quote from the former Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai came to mind: in 1972, he was asked about the impact of the French revolution, and he said, “It’s too early to tell.” There are so many things that we just do not know, which I think was a point raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Shipley. As I used to say in our boardroom, “You can make anything look good on a spreadsheet”, so we have to cast a critical eye over any cost-benefit analysis.

    Full debate: Regulatory Impact Assessments Bill

  • 7 Jun 2023: Parliamentary Speech

    Once again, I thank Members for their important contributions today. We should be focused on ensuring the best outcomes for the Tees valley, so this is an important debate to have. Only a few years ago, the Teesworks site was a burden to the taxpayer and a danger to the public, with a significant price tag merely to maintain its safety and security. We should not lose sight of the fact that investments in that site—public and private—are helping meet our net zero targets, while providing economic opportunity and a sense of prosperity for future generations.

    Full debate: Teesworks: Accountability and Scrutiny

  • 7 Jun 2023: Parliamentary Speech

    In Great Yarmouth there are some fantastic opportunities for the future, not least in green energy. My right hon. Friend pointed out the businesses that are benefiting from that. I am aware of ASCO, which employs more than 100 people, providing services to the North sea opportunity that is green energy—30 wind turbines on the Scroby sandbank. There are many more opportunities in that sector.

    Full debate: Small and Medium-sized Enterprises: Great Yarmouth

  • 18 May 2023: Parliamentary Speech

    The hon. Lady makes an important point. Alongside the Minister for Energy Security and Net Zero, I met energy suppliers and Ofgem recently to discuss the matter. The problem is principally that energy prices have fallen, so businesses entering into new contracts today are getting more competitive rates, but the ones who entered contracts between July and December last year are facing difficulties. The energy suppliers have promised to help, but if the hon. Lady wants to talk to me about any particular instances, I am happy to help.

    Full debate: Topical Questions

  • 6 Mar 2023: Parliamentary Speech

    Our package of measures includes the energy price guarantee, which has saved a typical UK household around £900 since its introduction in October, and a series of cost of living payments worth hundreds of pounds for millions of eligible households on a means-tested basis. Our commitment to a high-skilled, high-productivity, high-wage economy will further address the cost of living, as well as level up every part of the UK and hasten the transition to net zero.

    Full debate: Draft National Minimum Wage (Amendment) Regulations 2023

  • 9 Feb 2023: Parliamentary Speech

    Green trade is a foundational building block of sustainable growth, helping to protect our environment and our energy security, and future-proof UK jobs. In the two years to October 2022, the Government have supported £20 billion of net zero-related inward investment to help grow our green industries.

    Full debate: Green Industrial Sector

    We know that the net zero transition will create new industries worth around $10 trillion to the global economy by 2050. We recognise that the international landscape is becoming increasingly competitive as a result, but we are not dragging our feet. Securing inward investment to the UK’s green economy is a top priority for the Government, and the Department will be working closely with the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, UK Export Finance and the Office for Investment, using all the levers at our disposal to promote the UK offer overseas.

    Full debate: Green Industrial Sector

  • 11 Jan 2023: Parliamentary Speech

    That the Committee has considered the draft Climate Change (Targeted Greenhouse Gases) Order 2022.

    The draft order was laid before the House on 19 October 2022. It updates the Climate Change Act 2008 by introducing nitrogen trifluoride, which I will refer to as NF 3 , as the seventh targeted greenhouse gas, and thereby brings it into scope for the UK’s carbon budgets. NF 3 is a synthetic gas that occurs naturally but not in the volumes we need. It is primarily used in the production of electronics such as solar panels and flat-screen TVs, but is considered a potent contributor to climate change and is estimated to be 16,000 times more potent than carbon dioxide. The order will rightly introduce new duties on the Secretary of State to report on these harmful emissions.

    I assure the Committee that NF 3 emissions have been captured in the UK’s national greenhouse gas emissions statistics and international reporting to the United Nations framework convention on climate change since 2015. NF 3 is also within the scope of the UK’s nationally determined contributions under the Paris agreement. The order will ensure that the Climate Change Act and statutory reporting pursuant to the Act are aligned with our greenhouse gas inventories and international reporting practice, and that our domestic targets continue to align with the latest science.

    The inclusion of NF 3 does not put our domestic targets at risk, as NF 3 emissions represented less than 0.0001%—I think that is a ten-thousandth of a per cent.—of total UK territorial emissions in 2020. Its inclusion in the carbon budgets does not make a material difference to the challenge of meeting them, and it can therefore be included without reviewing the levels of those legislative targets. That view is supported by the Climate Change Committee, for whose support and advice I am grateful.

    Let me turn to the wider impacts of the order. The inclusion of NF 3 in the Act will require businesses to report on NF 3 emissions under the streamlined energy and carbon reporting framework. That is a reporting requirement for all quoted companies and large businesses. Due to the very low use of NF 3 in UK production, and because existing reporting methodologies such as the widely used greenhouse gas protocol only require NF 3 to be included in companies’ inventories, I can assure the Committee that the impact on business from the instrument coming into force will be minimal.

    I thank all the devolved Governments for their support during the consultation on the order. I thank the Welsh Minister for Climate Change for bringing before the Senedd a statutory instrument consent memorandum stating that this order is the most practical legislative vehicle for the provision in question to apply to Wales.

    The Government want to ensure that as we transition the economy to net zero, the Climate Change Act 2008 evolves with the necessary developments in science and our international commitments. It is therefore right that this harmful and extremely potent gas becomes part of our domestic targets and is reflected in our efforts to track progress against them. I commend the order to the Committee.

    Full debate: Draft Climate Change (Targeted Greenhouse Gases) Order 2022

    On the shadow Minister’s point about how we eradicate the gas completely from processes, he will be familiar with the review of the F-gas regulation that was published last month. We intend to consult next year on proposals for change. That process will be used to assess how we can go even further, with a focus on what additional reductions can be made to help us to meet our obligations to meet net zero by 2050. The shadow Minister can be assured that that is the direction we are going in.

    The Climate Change Act requires the Government to ensure that our emissions reporting meets the standards that are set internationally. I am proud that this Government are doing exactly that in bringing forward this legislation. I point out to the shadow Minister and others in the Committee that an international comparison of the efforts of different countries around the world to mitigate climate change is compiled by an organisation called Germanwatch; I am sure the shadow Minister is very familiar with it. It lists every single country in the world, and we are eighth in that list. According to that independent report, the only countries ahead of us are Denmark, Sweden, Chile, Morocco, India, Estonia and Norway. Every other country that the shadow Minister or anyone else in the Committee can name is following our lead in terms of our efforts to mitigate climate change. With that, I commend the draft order to the Committee.

    Full debate: Draft Climate Change (Targeted Greenhouse Gases) Order 2022

  • 20 Dec 2022: Parliamentary Speech

    The Government have exempted more businesses from regulations. Various business regulations have increased from a threshold of 50 or 250 employees to 500, which should lower regulations on many family businesses. We are trying to help family businesses, as well as many other businesses, transition to net zero. We have zero-rated energy on energy-saving products, which is really important. The Help to Grow: Management scheme improves management skills for SMEs. The Government are subsidising 90% of the cost of that scheme, which is hugely important in improving our management skills. Of course, the £4.8 billion levelling up fund and the £2.6 billion shared prosperity fund try to improve the communities that family businesses make such a huge contribution towards.

    Full debate: Family Businesses: Contribution to Local Communities

  • 09 Dec 2022: Tweet

    An illustration of how gas can be part of our net zero future: Development consent secured for planned carbon capture power station | http://TheBusinessDesk.com https://www.thebusinessdesk.com/yorkshire/news/2102887-development-consent-secured-for-planned-carbon-capture-power-station#.Y5LxQEPpX5Y.twitter via @businessdesk_yk [Source]
  • 15 Nov 2022: Parliamentary Speech

    From the aftermath of the global financial crisis to the coronavirus pandemic and, more recently, damaging disruption to worldwide supply chains, there is no doubt that global economic turmoil in the past 12 years has presented significant challenges for manufacturing in the UK. Nevertheless, to the shadow Minister’s point on slow growth, it is good to note that the UK has grown at about the same pace as the United States since 2010, and faster than Germany since 2016. It is important to have the facts. In the same period, we have come to understand the scale of the climate change challenge and the transformation that will be required in every element of our economy.

    I will first touch on some of the contributions from both sides of the House. It is fair to say that there were some valuable contributions on both sides, although I probably have more in common with the comments from the Conservative side of the House. My right hon. Friend the Member for Wokingham (John Redwood) talked about making sure that we have a fair and level playing field in competition with overseas markets. Our “Steel Lady”, my hon. Friend the Member for Scunthorpe (Holly Mumby-Croft), rightly said that steel’s future was part of the solution for net zero, rather than part of the problem. My hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent North (Jonathan Gullis) talked about the 9,000 high-skilled, well-paid jobs created by this Conservative Government.

    The hon. Gentleman made some good points about the opportunities on Teesside. Carbon capture and storage and Net Zero Teesside represent a huge opportunity and something that is on the Government agenda. We are also looking into the life sciences sector in Teesside and the first large-scale lithium refinery in the country, with 1,000 jobs in construction—all these things are happening on Teesside. I recognise his point on the steel sector, but all this carbon capture and storage may well form part of the future for Teesside.

    That this House condemns the Government for its lack of policy on British industry including the steel, automotive and shipbuilding sectors; regrets that after 12 years of Conservative Government, the UK has the lowest levels of business investment in the G7; recognises the large number of high-quality jobs created by British industry, as well as its importance to achieving the UK’s net zero targets; calls on the Government to recognise the unique challenges and opportunities in each of these sectors; and therefore further calls on the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy to urgently bring forward plans to ensure these sectors are supported and to avert job losses that will have a devastating impact on communities and the wider economy.

    Full debate: Britain’s Industrial Future

  • 19 Oct 2022: Vote

    Ban on Fracking for Shale Gas Bill - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: No
  • 18 Jul 2022: Tweet

    Good turn out for ⁦@CEN_HQ⁩ environment hustings and great to hear ⁦@RishiSunak⁩ committing to Net Zero by 2050 and that innovation is key to getting there - Hydrogen, Nuclear, Carbon Capture and Storage, energy conservation https://x.com/kevinhollinrake/status/1549002713056280579/photo/1 [Source]
  • 15 Mar 2022: Parliamentary Speech

    We all know that food security and energy security are really important. I am seeing an increasing amount of my productive farmland—the best and most versatile land—going under solar farm applications. That is equivalent to hundreds and hundreds of acres in what is a very productive part of the country. Our local authorities in their wisdom have declared climate emergencies, and they are using that as a way to get round any requirements to keep the best and most fertile land for farmland. They argue, “Actually, we have a climate emergency, and therefore that overrides the need to keep the best and most fertile land for growing food.” We have energy production imperatives and targets because of the race to net zero, and at the same time we have not got food production targets. Our self-sufficiency was 75% in 1985, but it is now 60%. If we had a target for self-sufficiency to grow to that higher amount, perhaps that would act as a check and balance against local authorities giving consent for solar farms.

    Full debate: Draft Direct Payments to Farmers (Reductions) (England) Regulations 2022 Draft Agriculture (Financia...

  • 14 Dec 2021: Parliamentary Speech

    People may say, “Well, companies do that all the time, don’t they? They exaggerate their marketing claims and it doesn’t sound like too big a problem.” But, unchecked, it is a massive problem because finance has a huge role to play in decarbonising our whole economy, not just the financial part of it.

    I will give some useful examples of greenwashing. BP got into trouble a year or two ago for promoting its green credentials by saying that it was putting solar panels on all its service stations. The reality, however, is that at that time BP was 96% focused on oil and gas exploration in its investment and economic activity. I very much hope—and I am sure that this will be the case—that BP will decarbonise its organisation over the coming years. Nevertheless, its claim can clearly be described as greenwashing.

    Indeed, that is what happened when the Government introduced their green bonds, which were hugely over-subscribed. That was great and it shows that people are keen to invest in things that can contribute to decarbonisation and a cleaner planet. Indeed, the experience has been similar in just about every jurisdiction and nation that has offered opportunities to invest in green companies and funds, with schemes being over-subscribed.

    People choose what to invest in based on their principles. They are keen to support this part of the economy, so they want to be sure that they are investing in something that is green. The difficult with greenwashing, however, is that the investment might not be green; if independently verified, that would result in significant disappointment. Fund managers and finance houses invest cash on behalf of others in these companies. Many people make such investments because they want to contribute to decarbonisation, so it is tremendously important that the cash flows to the right companies—namely, those that are green and that are transitioning to a greener position.

    The UK has a huge role to play in financing the transition to a green zero-carbon future. It is one of the leading financial centres in the world, managing about £10 trillion in assets, contributing about £132 billion to our annual economic activity and about 7% of our GDP. Its role in this area, providing the finance for decarbonisation, is hugely important. That is why this conversation is hugely important,—because we need the cash flow to go to the right places for decarbonisation. The finance sector has a huge role to play, so we need to ensure that those are bona fide green investments.

    The UK Government have done much good work in this area, with the green bonds I referred to earlier and the UK Green Investment Group, which will pump-prime investment into green technologies. Indeed, the Chancellor has set out that the UK will become the world’s first net zero-aligned financial centre, which is very welcome.

    Finally, I have a word of caution about unintended consequences. We want to minimise the risk of stranded assets. We need to make sure that companies and fund managers have a glide path so that they understand the transition period, adjust for the future, make strategic investments and not be left high and dry by a sudden change in policy. It is incredibly important that we take businesses with us. Even businesses that are considered brown today may be green tomorrow, and they need to be given the right period of time to decarbonise, because they too could be a very important part of our future decarbonisation plans and strategy.

    Full debate: Greenwashing in Finance

  • 13 Dec 2021: Tweet

    RT @KwasiKwarteng: The UK's flagship Contracts for Difference scheme starts its biggest ever auction for renewable energy today ???? ???? ???? ⚡️… [Source]
  • 13 Dec 2021: Vote

    Subsidy Control Bill — Schedule 1 - The subsidy control principles - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: No
  • 29 Nov 2021: Parliamentary Speech

    I absolutely appreciate the difficulties that the hon. Gentleman is outlining, including indeed in relation to my constituency. I should say that my constituency is Reading East; Reading West is the COP26 President’s. In Reading and Woodley, which I represent, there are a number of private roads and other shared facilities where residents come together and share the ownership of assets. Certainly in my experience as the local MP and previously as a councillor, that can be done quite effectively. I do appreciate that there may be issues with very large blocks, and the point I was making to the right hon. Lady from Chipping Campden— [ Interruption. ] Sorry, I mean the right hon. Member for Chipping Barnet (Theresa Villiers); there are various interesting places around the country that we come from today. The point I was making is that we really should look at the wide range of jurisdictions overseas and try to work through some models of what is most appropriate in each given set of circumstances.

    Full debate: Leasehold Reform (Ground Rent) Bill [Lords]

  • 25 Nov 2021: Tweet

    ???? Campaigning for climate change action to be embedded in school curriculum in this week's Tidy Britain APPG with @KeepBritainTidy, @peterkyle, @Keep_Wales_Tidy and @NAHTnews Full story here: https://www.kevinhollinrake.org.uk/news/mp-campaigns-climate-change-action-be-embedded-school-curriculum https://x.com/kevinhollinrake/status/1463967228689272838/photo/1 [Source]
  • 13 Nov 2021: Tweet

    RT @COP26: ???? BREAKING: The #COP26 Glasgow Climate Pact has been agreed. It has kept 1.5 degrees alive. But, it will only survive if prom… [Source]
  • 9 Nov 2021: Parliamentary Speech

    I say that because there is another challenge ahead, and this is the second requirement that I am going to refer to—there are only three, Mr Pritchard. This is another APPG initiative—Bankers for NetZero. It is a world-leading initiative; we are now one of the key chapters in international financial regulation in terms of how we decarbonise our economy and how we bring the UK finance industry together with business and provide the capital to decarbonise—that will be a critical part of the conversation. We are going to have to do something at some point to provide capital to businesses so that they can decarbonise, because significant investment will be required in lots of businesses to be able to do that. We do not want to simply pull the plug in terms of SMEs that could contribute towards decarbonisation. We should not be thinking, “Oh, they’re businesses that operate in old ways, using what is probably less green technology, and therefore we’re not interested in them. We’re going to pull finance from those people and go to new businesses.” That would be a significant mistake: the scale would probably be a multiple of two or three times what it was during the financial crisis when we pulled money from certain businesses. We should be allowing these businesses to invest in decarbonisation.

    We will have to ensure that capital is made available, probably at a cheaper rate, a discounted rate, to decarbonise such businesses. For example, a term funding scheme for net zero, which the report on mainstreaming net zero proposes, is something that we should consider. We must get that right to ensure that all lenders can access those things. The Conservative Environment Network, of which I am proud to be a member, is also looking at this, and we had a conversation earlier today. It is very clear that we need finance for environmental reasons as well as for economic reasons. I could not put it better myself. The Conservative Environment Network is also very worried about divestment.

    Full debate: SMEs: Access to Finance

  • 03 Nov 2021: Tweet

    RT @RishiSunak: The clock is ticking. It’s time to finance our future. #COP26 https://t.co/2TTS3AxPio https://t.co/MbZc6chXrj [Source]
  • 25 Oct 2021: Tweet

    Last week I visited a display of zero emissions buses organised by the APPG for Buses and Coaches, including one built by local manufacturer @ADLbus, which supports jobs in Thirsk and Malton with it's Scarborough-based factory. Full story here: https://www.kevinhollinrake.org.uk/news/mp-supports-north-yorkshire-bus-manufacturers-green-vision https://x.com/kevinhollinrake/status/1452585442273021957/photo/1 [Source]
  • 29 Jul 2021: Tweet

    Meeting with 'The Time is Now’ group and local councils on climate change: https://t.co/T8udgK2WOU [Source]
  • 21 Jun 2021: Parliamentary Speech

    The estates in my constituency are Snilesworth, Bransdale and Spaunton. As has been mentioned, they have an important role to play in preventing wildfires, which can be hugely damaging. The Climate Change Committee commented on this issue only this month in a report on climate risk. It highlighted the prospect of increased frequency and intensity of wildfires, stating:

    “Peatlands managed for cropland, grassland, forestry (for example afforestation of moorland) or fuel harvesting emit many times more at around eight to 39 tonnes CO2 per hectare per year”

    versus 2 to 5 tonnes on moorlands, so it is clear that there are climate change benefits here as well.

    Full debate: Grouse Shooting

  • 07 Jun 2021: Vote

    Advanced Research and Invention Agency Bill — New Clause 1 - Human Rights Abuses - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: No
  • 26 May 2021: Vote

    Environment Bill — New Clause 24 - Prohibition on burning of peat in upland areas - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: No
  • 09 May 2021: Tweet

    RT @pow_rebecca: Great new fund just launched to plant and regenerate trees in local communities - so crucial to help tackle climate change… [Source]
  • 13 Jan 2021: Parliamentary Speech

    I have spoken at length about a number of topics that are not directly addressed in the Bill. I will now address amendments relating to some of the measures that make up the Bill itself. I have already said that the prudential measures contain accountability frameworks, and I will begin by addressing a number of amendments that seek to add additional elements to that framework. As I said to the Public Bill Committee, amendments 1 and 2, along with amendments 9 and 12, all add considerations relating to climate change to the accountability frameworks. They are not necessary, as the Bill grants the Treasury a power to specify further matters to the accountability framework at a later date. I can assure Members across the House that the Treasury will carefully consider adding climate change as an issue to which the regulator should have regard, in the future. However, any such addition needs careful consideration and consultation on how it can be best framed. Therefore, the Government cannot support these amendments.

    Full debate: Financial Services Bill

  • 13 Jan 2021: Vote

    Financial Services Bill — Schedule 2 - Prudential regulation of FCA investment firms - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: No
  • 01 Jan 2021: Tweet

    RT @BorisJohnson: Proud that the UK is taking over the 2021 Presidency of the G7 today. Hosting both the G7 Summit and @COP26 will make thi… [Source]
  • 08 Dec 2020: Vote

    Delegated Legislation — Financial Assistance to Industry - Pro-climate vote: No - Their vote: Aye
  • 02 Dec 2020: Tweet

    RT @samuelhall0: CEN's Net Zero Northern Powerhouse essay collection is covered in the @yorkshirepost, where @kevinhollinrake argues for a… [Source]
  • 18 Nov 2020: Tweet

    Raising support for SMEs as we move towards the net zero target. https://t.co/4MtetizKhi [Source]
  • 17 Nov 2020: Parliamentary Speech

    That this House has considered support for SMEs and the net zero target.

    I am very supportive of the push to get to net zero as soon as possible. I absolutely believe that business will help to deliver that solution even faster than 2050. My principal concern in bringing forward this debate is that, in the headlong rush to get to that point, we must not treat businesses as collateral damage. We have done that in the past. When we had a change of emphasis in lending back in 2008, that happened to some good businesses, as well as to some businesses that had probably borrowed inappropriately.

    If we are going to get to net zero, it is absolutely vital that the private sector is taken with us. It will provide the cash and capital to invest in new processes and new techniques. We know for an absolute fact that the private sector is much better at allocating capital than the public sector—I might point to Croydon council in that regard, if Members have seen some of the recent news reports. The private sector is much better at allocating capital; in the past, the public sector has misallocated capital.

    Of course, that investment will contribute towards innovation, and the solutions to climate change are about innovation. The more innovation and the more competitive free markets we have, the more our consumers get a better deal at a better price. We are seeing some interventions from shareholders in banks, who are saying, “We do not want you to invest in these kinds of industries anymore.” Shareholder action groups will get increasingly vociferous, which could be to the detriment of small and medium-sized enterprises, and even bigger companies. This is not just about SMEs: bigger companies will remember that last year, for example, there were some protests by actors from the Royal Shakespeare Company regarding BP’s sponsorship of that organisation, which led to a parting of the ways between the RSC and its sponsor. That is despite the fact that BP is working within our overall regulatory framework, and will be incredibly important in the future in making the investment we need to move from a dependence on fossil fuels to a greater dependence on renewable energy.

    Does my hon. Friend agree that there could be some merit in the UK Government doing what many G7 countries have done, which is to create a development bank that brings in some offer of Government funding to help with the transfer towards net zero that we all want to see, and from which all SMEs could benefit?

    With regard to banking, I mentioned before that banks are seeing some shareholder action in the businesses and sectors they will support in future. Access to capital being the most fundamental requirement of any business, this is a hugely important topic. As such, the APPG has come up with a project called Bankers for NetZero. It is engaging with the banking sector and others. It is supported by Volans, the sustainability think-tank, and Re:Pattern, who specialise in business transformation social impact. It is developing policy recommendations to lead to COP26, looking at the regulatory environment and the part banks play in financing; engaging with businesses on net zero challenges; and looking at opportunities and obstacles for banking, while trying to formulate some evidence-based, targeted policy, and to make recommendations on legislation and regulation, in accordance with the United Nations environment programme finance initiative, or UNEPFI, for short. The key objective is that no willing SME is left behind in this vital change to our economy.

    I welcome the Government’s focus on moving forward to a greener future. The Pension Schemes Bill that was before the House yesterday certainly moves us towards the net zero horizon. Last week, the Chancellor announced a taskforce for climate-related financial disclosure for large companies and financial institutions by 2025 to report on their progress in those areas. We also have the new green taxonomy and a plethora of policies in my right hon. Friend the Minister’s Department on the clean growth strategy.

    We need a sector-specific just transition road map that looks at every different sector. If some of the current provisions for hospitality, such as the VAT cut, were extended or made permanent, that would be welcome. The British Business Bank needs a role in supporting and advising SMEs. We need to standardise just-transition restructuring, so that if businesses are seen as being in a sector that banks do not want to support, there is a proven standardised process for taking those SMEs from where they are today into the greener future. The shared prosperity fund should be used to support SMEs to make the transition and we should have a fiscal policy that is conducive to allowing SMEs to make the transition, with tax breaks, for example, to decarbonise.

    My final point to the Minister—and I know he gets this—is please, please, please let us have no cliff edges, but a strategic approach and a long-term stable framework towards that net zero future.

    Full debate: SMEs and the Net Zero Target

    I love the word “ecosystem”, which the hon. Member for Leeds North West (Alex Sobel) used in this context, to describe this whole situation. What we need is a 30-year ecosystem in order to take the business community with us. There were some great examples, such as the British development bank, through to Papa Pump and whatever else—two ends of the same scale. There are lots of banks that are supportive. There is the Bankers for NetZero project. We have Barclays, Tide, Handelsbanken and Triodos, which are all keen to have a conversation on this issue and try to take businesses with us. It is so easy to look at shiny new innovative businesses, rather than businesses that currently exist and that want to make a contribution. I am very heartened by my right hon. Friend’s comments that he wants to take business with us.

    When someone is in the world of business and has their own SME, it is not just a job and a business—it is their life. It is so critical to everything they do and stand for. I urge again, and I am reassured by the Minister’s comments, that there should be no cliff edges. There should be a stable framework. If we leave no one behind here, the SMEs can lead from the front—if that is not too much of a mixed metaphor—towards a net zero future.

    That this House has considered support for SMEs and the net zero target.

    Full debate: SMEs and the Net Zero Target

  • 16 Nov 2020: Vote

    Pension Schemes Bill [Lords] — Clause 124 - Climate change risk - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: No
  • 21 Oct 2020: Tweet

    Calling for stronger action on climate change ahead of Glasgow summit | Kevin Hollinrake https://t.co/4YKmmgY4TE [Source]
  • 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: Aye
  • 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: No
  • 11 Sep 2020: Parliamentary Speech

    It is great to follow my hon. Friend the Member for St Austell and Newquay (Steve Double); he always speaks with great passion, insight and common sense. I am delighted to be called in this heavily subscribed debate—though it is perhaps slightly less so than it was a few minutes ago. As the hon. Member for Cardiff North (Anna McMorrin) knows, I support the principle behind the Bill and co-operatives and agree that we need to do more on climate change, though I would echo my hon. Friend’s words: we need more consensus. Everyone across the House wants to tackle climate change.

    I do not accept the premise that this country is doing badly compared with other countries. It is not true. We are the leading nation among the G20. We can trade facts, of course—Opposition Members can throw facts at me about the performance of the Welsh Government; Conservative Members could talk about the UK Government—but the best thing to look at is the international comparison. A research document produced every year by an organisation called Germanwatch—hon. Members can google it—is the climate change performance index. It indexes every single country around the world. It does not award the first three places, because it says none of us is doing a good enough job, which I think is absolutely right, but it does list every nation, and the UK is fourth. It is updated every year—the hon. Lady should definitely read it—and the only countries ahead of us are Sweden, Denmark and Morocco. Every other country we can name is doing worse than the UK. We should be proud of that.

    Of course, we need to go further faster, but we should not belittle the UK’s efforts. In the past year, the UK became one of the first countries to set that net-zero commitment by 2050, and brought forward the date for banning the sale of petrol and diesel vehicles. There is some very significant work going on. We should have a cross-party conversation. Of course, we should all be pushing the Government to go further and faster, but there have been many achievements.

    It took us longer to recover from the economic crisis in the UK because of that issue, and the failure of those businesses due to the withdrawal of finance cost us around £40 billion. As I said, during that five-year period, between 2008 and 2013, Japanese mutuals did not reduce finance at all to those SMEs, the German mutuals actually increased the amount of lending to SMEs by 20% and Switzerland’s did so by 30%, whereas in the UK we saw a 25% reduction in lending to SMEs. I can make no more powerful case to the Minister than that for putting the measures in place through this kind of legislation. We should work with the hon. Member for Cardiff North to try to find a way forward for this kind of legislation, which could enable the investments that she and I want to see, whereby the community is investing in renewable energy projects and we are potentially helping to capitalise some of these banks to get them going. I know the Minister has concerns about the regulatory framework and making sure these banks do not cause a systemic risk or endanger investments for deposit holders and the like. Of course we need to work those things through, but there is a powerful case for supporting these regional mutual banks, particularly in terms of SMEs.

    Full debate: Co-operative and Community Benefit Societies (Environmentally Sustainable Investment) Bill

  • 20 Aug 2020: Tweet

    RT @UKGBC: We are excited to announce UKGBC are working with #BankersforNetZero which has chosen the built environment as its first sectora… [Source]
  • 2 Jul 2020: Parliamentary Speech

    In respect of structures and buildings, it is clear that the Government are making an attempt to amend the system to incentivise capital investment, but they can and should go further. At the risk of repeating myself once again, the easiest step they could take is to scrap VAT on building repairs. In my constituency of Aberdeen South, I have been struck by just how many homeowners, who often live in some of the most beautiful granite buildings, are unable to undertake the repairs and improvements that they either want or need due to the high costs involved. As we seek to improve energy efficiency in our homes, particularly in often old and cold buildings, surely the Government should be assessing every measure to incentivise progress, not just to help rid us of fuel poverty, but to protect both the environment and the future of our planet. Cumulative action to combat climate change is needed, and I would welcome a firm commitment from the Minister in this regard.

    Full debate: Finance Bill

  • 01 Jun 2020: Tweet

    The threat of climate change hasn’t disappeared. We need a clean & resilient economic recovery from Covid. The UK,… https://t.co/DbDCSwSbG7 [Source]
  • 07 May 2020: Tweet

    RT @VolansHQ: We recently launched the Bankers for NetZero Initiative in a with an 'all-star’ speaker lineup of Changemakers in the Finance… [Source]
  • 05 Feb 2020: Vote

    Transport - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: No
  • 26 Jun 2019: Parliamentary Speech

    I am grateful to you for granting this important debate, Mr Speaker, because train travel has never been more popular or important. Around 20,000 miles of railway track criss-cross our island, and altogether we made 1.8 billion rail journeys last year—a 3% rise on the previous year. I am a frequent rail user, boarding a train every week at York or Thirsk that whisks me to Westminster to represent my constituents, and then boarding another to return home to glorious North Yorkshire in time for my surgeries and visits at the weekend. Importantly, this week the Government legislated for a target of net zero carbon emissions by 2050. Using public transport is one way that we can help to tackle climate change and improve air quality.

    This week, most Members across the House took the decision to drive for that net zero carbon outcome for the UK, but that can be achieved only if more people make use of public transport. The fact that those who are disabled are precluded from using many railway stations, such as Thirsk, due to the lack of facilities is absurd. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that the Government must, in future policy relating to climate change targets, enable all people to travel on public transport, not just those who are able-bodied?

    Full debate: Disabled Access: Thirsk Station

  • 25 Jun 2019: Vote

    Delegated Legislation — Value Added Tax - Pro-climate vote: No - Their vote: Aye
  • 24 Jun 2019: Parliamentary Speech

    I welcome the Government’s announcement today. Climate change is without doubt the biggest danger to our planet. The UK has a very good record in this regard, but the planet has a very poor one. All of us will have to up our game massively to meet the challenge. Moreover, the next stages of the decarbonisation of our economy will be much more difficult than the progress that we have already made.

    As I have said, the UK has a good record. The climate change performance index, which is collated by the independent organisation Germanwatch, lists it as fifth in the world, behind only Sweden, Latvia, Lithuania and Morocco. We are ahead of every other country that Members may want to mention, so it is not a question of the Government’s marking their own homework. We are a world leader in this area. Ours is the best performance in the G20. We were the first country to announce that we would abolish coal energy production by 2025, and are now the first to announce a net zero target of 2050.

    It has been good to hear this issue debated on both sides of the Chamber today, but if we are to deliver these solutions, we need a fact-based debate. We cannot simply say that we need to decarbonise our energy and that therefore we need to stop using gas, and then stop producing gas. Fracking has been mentioned today. Given that 90% of my constituency is covered by petroleum exploration development licences, we will need gas. The Committee on Climate Change says that the widespread deployment of hydrogen is critical to the decarbonisation of our economy. That can only realistically be achieved by stripping the carbon molecule out of methane. We will need gas for many decades to come. Let us talk facts, and not just base what we say on emotions.

    Full debate: Climate Change

  • 16 Oct 2017: Parliamentary Speech

    It might surprise Members—and certainly members of the wider public—to learn that the UK is the third best performing nation on the planet in the international climate change performance index. We are ahead of every country you could name apart from France and Germany. We have a strategic policy around nuclear and renewables that will continue to put this country at the forefront of the green energy industry. We are also investing in other important areas in relation to nuclear power.

    Full debate: Nuclear Safeguards Bill

  • 06 Sep 2016: Vote

    Finance Bill — VAT on Installation of Energy Saving Materials - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: No
  • 29 Jun 2016: Parliamentary Speech

    All these issues are in play, and there are many positive reasons for remaining part of the European Union. It is about the opportunity to live, work and study right across the continent; it is about peace and prosperity; and it is about tackling some of our huge challenges and economic risks—issues such as climate change, air pollution, drug resistance and tax evasion.

    Full debate: UK Economy

  • 09 May 2016: Vote

    Housing and Planning Bill — Planning obligations and affordable housing - Pro-climate vote: No - Their vote: Aye
  • 03 May 2016: Vote

    Housing and Planning Bill — Neighbourhood right of appeal - Pro-climate vote: No - Their vote: Aye
  • 14 Mar 2016: Vote

    Energy Bill [Lords] — New Clause 8 — Decarbonisation target range - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: No
  • 14 Mar 2016: Vote

    Energy Bill [Lords] — New Clause 3 — Carbon capture and storage strategy for the energy industry - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: No
  • 26 Jan 2016: Parliamentary Speech

    The environmental reasons for moving from coal to gas are compelling. Global carbon dioxide emissions will be found to have declined in 2015, principally owing to reduced coal use in China and the US, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the US Environmental Protection Agency both credit the majority of the US reduction directly to the move from coal to shale. The World Health Organisation recently declared a state of emergency on air quality in many countries. It estimates that the cost of air pollution to the EU alone is a staggering £1 trillion and the human cost is even more dramatic: in 2010, about 600,000 premature deaths in the European region were caused by air pollution.

    Full debate: Onshore Oil and Gas

  • 15 Dec 2015: Parliamentary Speech

    Does my hon. Friend think that Jim Skea, an IPCC lead author and world renowned expert on climate change who spoke recently at the House of Commons, is wrong about the hiatus, as is the Met Office?

    Our television screens have been dominated in recent weeks by the flow of migrants across continents. Perhaps this is a warning of the much greater population movements ahead if we do not tackle climate change. It is a threat to our lives and our livelihoods and to national, global and economic security. I welcome the Secretary of State’s efforts in Paris. She showed great leadership in getting together 190 nations in a single unanimous agreement. There are difficult choices ahead, and I do not envy Ministers who have to make tough decisions many years in advance amid the many voices and choices.

    Credit where it is due, the UK has a proud record on climate change. In the climate change performance index, the UK is No. 2, behind only Denmark and way ahead of most other western countries. We had the world’s first green investment bank and the world’s first tidal lagoon, and we are a world leader in offshore wind. We have trebled renewable energy production to 19%, but we have much more to do. The energy performance of our housing stock needs to be improved. We need to replace the complex, defunct and ineffective green deal. We also need to invest further in renewables and energy storage.

    Let us look at the situation in the US, which is the second biggest emitter of carbon dioxide. According to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the US has made great progress on reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and an important reason for that is its production of shale gas. Environmental campaigners such as Stephen Tindale of Climate Answers and the Labour shadow energy Minister, Baroness Worthington, have expressed support for fracking as a way to reduce carbon emissions but, crucially, only in conjunction with investment in carbon capture and storage and low-carbon energy generation, storage and distribution.

    Full debate: Climate Change and Flooding

  • 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: Aye
  • 14 Jul 2015: Vote

    21. Climate Change Levy: Removal of Exemption for Electricity from Renewable Sources - Pro-climate vote: No - Their vote: Aye
  • 30 Jun 2015: Parliamentary Speech

    Shale gas exploitation will produce harmful greenhouses gases. The natural gas produced is a fossil fuel, and many object to its production because when burned it produces carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas. Some say we should instead focus on renewables, such as wind farms, solar and producing energy from household waste, but most reasonable observers would accept that we are a long way from green energy being able to met all our needs. Natural gas produces 50% less greenhouse gas emissions than coal and can help us to meet our climate change targets more quickly and cheaply. Although renewable energy production is increasing, in 2014 it delivered only 7% of our total energy needs. We need a mixed, and ideally domestic, solution to our energy requirements.

    The Environment Agency, Department of Energy and Climate Change, the mineral protections authority and the Health and Safety Executive regulate operations. Having met the Environment Agency, I am confident that our regulations are strong. Fracking will be allowed only outside groundwater source protection areas. According to one representative of the agency, chances of contamination are entering the “realms of fantasy”, but I would like to see a clearer, more robust and independent monitoring regime for the regulations. The Environment Agency is already stretched and cannot be reasonably expected to carry out truly independent checks on the producers’ operations and any consequential effects on the environment.

    Full debate: Shale Gas

Maximise your vote to save the planet.

Join Now