Matt Rodda MP: Climate Timeline

• Timeline
• Votes
• Speeches
• Tweets
• Contact

Matt Rodda's Climate-related Tweets, Speeches & Votes

We've found the following climate-related tweets, speeches & votes by Matt Rodda

• 23 Oct 2024: Tweet

  Solar power is a key component of the UK’s transition to Net Zero. I spoke during this week's debate about my experience with local solar energy, the diversification of income this offers farmers, and methods of reducing the impact on the rural landscape. https://x.com/MattRodda/status/1849091406247125335/video/1 [Source]

• 13 Oct 2024: Tweet

  My weekly parliamentary update: - Tackling the climate emergency - Reading Football Club - Paddington rail crash tribute https://x.com/MattRodda/status/1845410149307122112/video/1 [Source]

• 07 Oct 2024: Tweet

  I asked the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero about the new government’s investment in green energy and the potential for job creation across the country. https://x.com/MattRodda/status/1843363600167252207/video/1 [Source]

• 06 Sep 2024: Tweet

  Please watch my weekly update on my work in Parliament and locally including: - Challenging the mismanagement in our water industry - SEND provision - Investment in Green Energy https://twitter.com/MattRodda/status/1832087110616002930/video/1 [Source]

• 19 Jul 2024: Parliamentary Speech

  I would also like to make a point in support of GB Energy. The Government are absolutely right to look at a new way to increase investment in green energy. We face an unprecedented crisis in the form of the climate emergency, and we must take action. It is simply vital that we move forward on this matter.

  Full debate: Planning, the Green Belt and Rural Affairs

• 17 May 2024: Parliamentary Speech

  Space technology is not just for those involved in advanced manufacturing. It is for all of us. Whether it is combating and measuring climate change, using and deploying rural broadband or supporting transport and agriculture, space is vital for security and resilience. Satellite communications play an important role in communications across the world, and space provides opportunities for crucial economic growth, as the hon. Member for Woking mentioned, from Cornwall all the way to Shetland. Indeed, aerospace research and development is a long-term endeavour, and our industrial strength in the UK is the result of decades of support by successive Governments. We would seek to build on that legacy, including by developing spaceports and centres such as the North East Space Skills and Technology Centre, which has created over 350 jobs and injected around £260 million in the north-east economy.

  Full debate: Space Industry (Indemnities) Bill

• 26 Mar 2024: Parliamentary Speech

  I understand that the Government have not achieved their target of about six charging points in each service area—that seems a low bar—and that we may have something like four per service area on average at the moment. Even if six were achieved, that would be way below the potential needed for vehicles if they are truly to be electrified quickly and effectively so that we can hit our targets for tackling the climate emergency and boost British production of electric cars, which is a success story in our motor industry.

  Full debate: National Networks National Policy Statement

• 25 Mar 2024: Tweet

  RT @vaughangething: Great to welcome @Keir_Starmer to Ynys Môn today to discuss the massive green energy opportunities on the island. Our… [Source]

• 10 Mar 2024: Tweet

  My weekly update: - Response to the Budget - Meeting with the Canal and River Trust - Local planning issues - Reading Football Club - Care International & the climate emergency https://twitter.com/MattRodda/status/1766768458799423604/video/1 [Source]

• 16 Jan 2024: Tweet

  Today in Parliament I questioned the Government’s lack of progress insulating older homes, and how this is affecting many residents’ energy bills. If the Government had tackled this earlier not only could it have helped lower costs, but also helped reduce CO2 emissions. https://twitter.com/MattRodda/status/1747349150058864779/video/1 [Source]

• 9 Nov 2023: Parliamentary Speech

  The opportunities from AI are limitless, and they can transform our public services. In fact, that is already happening. We see our doctors detecting cancer earlier, and we see us utilising the technology to try to tackle things such as climate change more quickly. In relation to jobs, my hon. Friend is quite right that AI, like any technology, will change the labour market. If we look back to 1940, we see that 60% of jobs we have now did not actually exist back then. AI will create new jobs, and jobs we cannot even think of, but it will also complement our jobs now, allowing us more time to do the bits of our jobs we actually train to do—for example, assisting teachers to have more time in the classroom and doctors to have more time with patients.

  Full debate: Artificial Intelligence Safety Summit

• 01 Oct 2023: Tweet

  ????Constituency Update???? Parliament isn't sitting at the moment because of the Party conferences, but I've been continuing my work, including: -Challenging Rishi Sunak and this Government's careless decision to backtrack on Net Zero targets 1/3 https://twitter.com/MattRodda/status/1708471408756506922/video/1 [Source]

• 28 Sep 2023: Tweet

  I remain committed to green initiatives in Reading, such as the rollout of public electric car charging points, the switch to renewable energy, and the safe insulation of our homes and buildings. 2/3 [Source]

• 28 Sep 2023: Tweet

  Rishi Sunak’s backtracking on Net Zero targets is short sighted and weak. The climbdown has been criticised by the public, by many vital industries for threatening long-term plans, and even by members of his own party. 1/3 https://twitter.com/MattRodda/status/1707418614175768832/video/1 [Source]

• 24 May 2023: Tweet

  Across the UK, the Labour Government will combine our commitments to net-zero and economic growth to create the new high-skilled jobs that will make the UK a clean energy superpower. https://twitter.com/UKLabour/status/1661299749641945090 [Source]

• 8 Mar 2023: Parliamentary Speech

  The dashboard is clearly an important aspect of pensions policy, and we support it. We understand why the Government are proposing these changes, but I have a series of questions about the specifics of the charge cap and related matters. I will also say a brief word in support of illiquid investments, which are hugely beneficial to the country in terms of the transition to net zero in the future. I visited a solar farm with the former pensions Minister, the hon. Member for Hexham (Guy Opperman), and I put on the record my thanks to him for the cross-party way in which he worked with me on the issue.

  I support greater illiquid investment, but to what extent have the Minister and her colleagues considered the interests of savers in this change? Clearly, higher charges have an impact on pension savers. I am also interested in what the Government are doing in other aspects of pensions policy to encourage greater illiquid investments, whether in green energy infrastructure or other matters that come under the same heading. There may well be a range of other policy levers that could be used to encourage this type of investment.

  Full debate: Draft Occupational Pension Schemes (Administration, Investment, Charges and Governance) and Pension...

• 22 Feb 2023: Parliamentary Speech

  I am grateful for the opportunity to speak in today’s debate about this important subject. I want to start with a moment’s reflection. All of us here today are lucky to live in the developed world, and in the United Kingdom in particular. So many people around the world face such enormous challenges, and it is important to remember that many of those challenges are getting worse, as far too many people struggle with the effects of the climate emergency, war and natural disaster. It is our responsibility in the developed world to help those who have not had the same opportunities that we have had. Indeed, that is a duty for all of us.

  We need to take a sensible and strategic approach to this important issue. First, the UK should lead by example, not break our word or commitments. That means not reducing our development spending or asking others to do more in our place. It also means not preaching about net zero without a credible plan to get there. Secondly, our strategy should mean rediscovering our core principles, which should always guide us, and our commitment to human rights, democracy and the rule of law. Thirdly, our approach to development needs to reflect the world we live in—a world that, as I said, is quite clearly changing. We should focus on where we really can make a difference, and our approach should be grounded in an understanding of the wider world and of how aid can be delivered in partnership with local communities and developing countries.

  Full debate: Overseas Aid: Child Health and Education

• 21 Feb 2023: Tweet

  Renewable energy is a key part of Labour’s Green Prosperity Plan and will help turn the UK into a growth superpower. 2/2 [Source]

• 21 Feb 2023: Tweet

  We urgently need to expand renewable energy. I put pressure on the Government to support solar farms nationwide. Better connectivity for solar farms is a key part of reducing our reliance on oil and gas, bringing down energy prices and helping fight the climate emergency. 1/2 https://x.com/MattRodda/status/1627981935774511111/video/1 [Source]

• 30 Jan 2023: Tweet

  RT @ed_hawkins: Climate change conversations during live commentary of tonight’s @ManUtd vs @ReadingFC football match because of the ‘warmi… [Source]

• 18 Jan 2023: Parliamentary Speech

  When it comes to the environment, many of our standards started here, and we should be proud of them. We have the world-leading Environment Act, which has dramatically strengthened environmental regulations. Moreover, the EU model has not stopped the decline in our natural world. Of course there is much more that we need to do, and we will: we have our own legally binding targets, we are committed to halting the decline in nature by 2030 and we are among the first countries in the world to commit to net zero by 2050.

  Full debate: Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill

• 30 Nov 2022: Parliamentary Speech

  There is the potential for a win-win: pension savings can be invested constructively in an industry that offers great long-term returns for savers. The industry is aware of that and is working with the Government. What is needed now is a firmer steer from the Government, particularly on the benefits of onshore wind and solar in the UK. They need to make that clear to the industry to help in its planning process and thinking ahead. This area of investment needs a long-term perspective, and greater reassurance from Ministers would be helpful. I urge the Minister to respond to that point. I also reassure Government Members that such sites are plentiful. There is a lot of brownfield land in the UK. There are lots of other sites where solar and wind need not be a visual intrusion to local communities, which may well welcome them as a source of green energy.

  On the contribution to pension savings, some funds are actively looking for illiquid long-term investment that can provide a reliable return in the future, and investment in the sector is just what they are looking for. They are looking at similar sectors such as social housing and other forms of infrastructure, but I believe there is particular value in investing in green energy. It would be wonderful if the Minister could do more to reassure the sector when he responds today and, in particular, to move on from the rather negative comments made by some of his colleagues about onshore wind and solar, which have an enormous contribution to make. They are cheaper to deploy than offshore solutions. They also have the advantage of greater accessibility, and are often nearer to the grid. The site that I mentioned was right next to a line of pylons running across the country, so it was easy to plug into the grid, and other sites in other parts of the UK are similar. I hope the Minister will come back on that point.

  Full debate: Greening the Financial System

• 26 Nov 2022: Tweet

  ????CONSTITUENCY UPDATE ???? This week: ???? COP27 Questions ???????? Joint address by the President of South Africa ???? Autumn Statement debate Keep up to date with my work in #Reading, #Woodley and #Westminster by signing up to my weekly newsletter. ???? https://mattroddamp.com/content/sign-form https://x.com/MattRodda/status/1596451196012740609/video/1 [Source]

• 19 Oct 2022: Vote

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

• 12 Oct 2022: Parliamentary Speech

  I appreciate that there is pressure on time, so I will move on and highlight a potential future policy. As many Members have rightly said, there should be much greater emphasis on redeveloping brownfield. We have some interesting and positive examples of that in our town, in which attractive, red-brick terraced houses or low-rise flats have replaced industrial sites near the town centre, often reusing land that had been derelict for some time and providing a benefit to local residents by removing an ugly site. Also, the environment is protected by the reduction in traffic and the increase in cycling, walking and public transport use. All those are for the greater good, at a time when we are trying to address the serious challenges of climate change and other related environmental challenges. That, surely, should be the way forward.

  Full debate: New Developments on Green-belt Land

• 02 Aug 2022: Tweet

  ☀️ WORKING ON CLIMATE CHANGE ☀️ The heatwave showed climate change is happening now & having an impact on us all. I have been pushing the Govt to stick to the net zero pledge & do more to tackle climate change. #Reading & #Woodley are leading the way but the Govt must do more. https://x.com/MattRodda/status/1554399103530016770/video/1 [Source]

• 04 Jul 2022: Tweet

  RT @jreynoldsMP: Labour’s plans will bring down bills, create jobs and help achieve net zero A Labour government will re-energise Britain’… [Source]

• 03 Jul 2022: Tweet

  RT @jreynoldsMP: Labour will re-energise our economy with good jobs and investment to meet our climate objectives We will create 30,000 j… [Source]

• 8 Jun 2022: Parliamentary Speech

  I am very much in favour of a sensible approach to this issue that balances the importance of energy security and tackling the climate emergency with not creating eyesores in the countryside. I am proud of our record in my area of central Berkshire. I represent an urban seat, but we have a strong tradition of solar power from our borough council and neighbouring local authorities, and in land nearby. Much of it is on the roofs of buildings and on brownfield land. I want to get across the positive message about using those types of land. There is a large amount of brownfield land in southern England, although I appreciate the points made by colleagues from slightly further west. There is also the issue of developers looking for land in the south, where sunlight is slightly more plentiful.

  Full debate: Solar Farms and Battery Storage

• 07 Apr 2022: Tweet

  Our transition to renewable energy is key to meeting our Net Zero commitments and providing energy security for the UK. https://twitter.com/UKLabour/status/1511992314176192514 [Source]

• 01 Mar 2022: Tweet

  I visited Pingewood Solar Farm in Burghfield to learn more about the work that goes on at this renewable energy plant. I was pleased to learn that not only does the site supply clean, renewable energy in the UK, but is also a site of significant pensions investment. (1/2) https://x.com/MattRodda/status/1498699031488434177/video/1 [Source]

• 13 Dec 2021: Vote

  Subsidy Control Bill — Schedule 1 - The subsidy control principles - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: Aye

• 18 Nov 2021: Tweet

  Watch me discuss COP26, Parliamentary standards and migration on 'The Last Word', ITV Meridian this afternoon: https://t.co/066Mi8jgVe [Source]

• 15 Nov 2021: Tweet

  RT @SeemaMalhotra1: SMEs are urgently calling for a clear roadmap from the Govt with steps they should take to transition to net zero. A… [Source]

• 07 Nov 2021: Tweet

  RT @CllrJennis: Great to support the excellent climate change event at St Lawrence’s Church today. Collaboration to make change locally, na… [Source]

• 03 Nov 2021: Tweet

  RT @UKLabour: The Conservatives are undermining the fight against the climate crisis. #COP26 https://t.co/o2GocSkAag [Source]

• 01 Nov 2021: Tweet

  To hear about issues ranging from the Government's climate responsibility at #COP26, to local environmental action in Reading East, sign-up to my environmental newsletter at: https://mattroddamp.com/content/environmental-issues-sign-form https://x.com/MattRodda/status/1455223637271842823/video/1 [Source]

• 01 Nov 2021: Tweet

  RT @UKLabour: The Conservatives’ https://t.co/iYCxhJKffR approach to #COP26 doesn't work. This is the decisive decade to tackle the climat… [Source]

• 26 Oct 2021: Tweet

  I'm calling on the Government to step up its efforts in tackling the climate emergency and do all it can to achieve a successful outcome at #COP26Glasgow. https://x.com/MattRodda/status/1452954682129780745/video/1 [Source]

• 13 Oct 2021: Tweet

  RT @UKLabour: The climate emergency is a real threat. We must take action against it, now. #COP26 cannot be a greenwash summit. Here's L… [Source]

• 20 Sep 2021: Parliamentary Speech

  Today’s broken promise is the third breach of trust in just a few months. This is starting to become a pattern of behaviour. First, there was the cut in overseas aid that the Government made despite a wide range of opposition. We are the only G7 country to cut aid, breaking a manifesto commitment to support the world’s poorest and most vulnerable people, and this Conservative Government are retreating from our moral duty. This has already weakened the UK’s position at the G7 summit and it will continue to do so at the upcoming summit on education and COP26. Parliament has repeatedly made it clear that it does not support aid cuts and that Britain must not turn its back on the world’s poorest. I would add that a Labour Government will build partnerships with other Governments, civil society groups and communities to overcome global challenges by using the aid budget to tackle poverty and inequality.

  Full debate: Social Security (Up-rating of Benefits) Bill

• 05 Aug 2021: Tweet

  A Green New Deal that creates jobs while tackling climate change will give us both economic and environmental prosperity. The time for talk is over, we now need actions. https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1423020476511756290 [Source]

• 10 Jul 2021: Tweet

  RT @ReadingCouncil: @ReadingCouncil has submitted an official expression of interest to the Government’s Zero Emission Bus Regional Area fu… [Source]

• 5 Jul 2021: Parliamentary Speech

  I would like to start by reflecting on the existential threat of climate change and the climate emergency. We are facing the most serious threat to humanity that we have ever seen. If allowed to carry on unchecked, the rate of temperature increase will dramatically change the world and will unleash a series of geological and environmental processes that will take us on an unsustainable trajectory to massive change to the climate.

  So far, the Government’s response has been weak. The Prime Minister’s words have not been backed up by action on the scale that the emergency requires. The Government’s 10-point plan has failed to meet the scale of ambition needed. The Government are veering significantly off course to meet their legally binding 2050 net zero target. Quite simply, it is not good enough, yet it is all the more important in the year of COP26. The world is looking to the UK to show global leadership, but we must start at home if we are to do anything. We need credible action to increase the pace if we are to achieve the substantial majority of our emissions reductions by the end of this decade. That requires leadership, both at home and on the world stage.

  A Labour Government will replace the Government’s piecemeal approach with a green new deal—a comprehensive plan for the transition to a low-carbon economy. Last week, after our questioning, it emerged that the Chancellor’s final report into the net zero review will be further delayed. The report was first due to be published in autumn 2020, and then in spring 2021. It has still not been published.

  To show even further the scale of the slippage, last week the UK’s independent adviser on tackling climate change, the Climate Change Committee, which is headed by Lord Deben, a former Conservative Minister, revealed that the Treasury has not fully achieved a single one of the Committee’s 2020 recommendations. That is the context in which we are working.

  I must move on to the scope for tackling climate change through pensions. It is worth noting—the Minister hinted at this—that it is a £1 trillion industry, with enormous potential to make real and lasting change and to protect us from the worst effects of climate change. Even on a tiny scale, a single pension has the ability—if invested properly—to take an amount of carbon out of the air equivalent to several cars being taken off the road. One individual person’s pension can make a difference. Imagine that scaled up across thousands or even millions of pensions. There is real potential to do some real good. The industry itself recognises that. The Path, a fund that advises on environmentally friendly investing, recently told the Financial Times that investing only a small amount in a more sustainable way could make a huge difference.

  I want to reflect on the Pension Schemes Act and climate change, and putting those two parts together. When the Bill was introduced, instead of a net zero provision we saw no mention of net zero—a gaping hole that had to be dealt with on Second Reading. The Minister put a rather favourable gloss on that. The Government introduced amendments in Committee, which had to be strengthened through cross-party agreement and negotiation to ensure that trustees or managers had to take account of the Paris agreement and domestic targets such as net zero. Climate change was then mentioned for the first time in domestic pensions legislation. We should all be proud of that, but there is so much more to do.

  I would like to stress that the Act could have gone a lot further. It could have been more ambitious but, sadly, the Government voted against the Labour amendment to allow regulators to mandate occupational schemes to develop an investment strategy aligned with net zero. Instead, we have this much less assertive statutory instrument in its place. Clearly, there remains a wide gap between the Government’s rhetoric and their actions on climate change, both in pensions and across a much wider field of policy.

  Although the SI is worthy and necessary, I want to ask the Minister a series of questions that I hope he will respond to. First, does he really think that the Government are doing anywhere near enough to tackle climate change?

  To sum up, the country, and indeed the world, faces an enormous challenge. Government policy is failing to address that and, as their own former Minister said only last week in the Climate Change Committee, the Government are seriously off track. The official Opposition have challenged and pressed for more action, some of which has been forthcoming. Today’s SI is helpful, but we need to see much more.

  Full debate: Draft Occupational Pension Schemes (Climate Change Governance and Reporting) Regulations 2021

• 24 Jun 2021: Tweet

  RT @Keir_Starmer: This report is damning. This is the decisive decade in the fight against climate change. We simply can’t afford more co… [Source]

• 23 Jun 2021: Tweet

  RT @RachelReevesMP: You cannot have a climate strategy without a sustainable economic plan behind it. The Chancellor must publish the fin… [Source]

• 09 Jun 2021: Tweet

  I was pleased to speak in the Environment Bill on the need to tackle climate change. We must ???? - plant more trees to support the local environment ???? - reduce our carbon output ♻️ - reduce our plastic uses Watch the speech here: https://fb.watch/60NB5qlZQe/ [Source]

• 07 Jun 2021: Vote

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

• 05 Jun 2021: Tweet

  RT @UKLabour: Today is #WorldEnvironmentDay. We can, and we must do more to protect our planet. Labour will tackle the climate emergency… [Source]

• 26 May 2021: Tweet

  Important to speak in today's debate on the Environment Bill. We face a #ClimateCrisis and an #EcologicalCrisis urgent action is needed, sadly the Government is failing to tackle this existential crisis #Rdguk #Woodley #Caversham [Source]

• 26 May 2021: Vote

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

• 22 May 2021: Tweet

  RT @PreetKGillMP: We are in a climate emergency. The UK must show leadership at home and abroad to galvanise global action. This year, as h… [Source]

• 05 May 2021: Tweet

  RT @RDGLabourCllrs: Andrew Hornsby-Smith is Redlands' greenest response to Reading's Climate Emergency. Advocating for sustainable transpor… [Source]

• 16 Apr 2021: Tweet

  The community of parents, climate change groups and the school have come together to create something really specia… https://t.co/RkZF03qGUP [Source]

• 1 Mar 2021: Parliamentary Speech

  I should also say that Labour supports the pensions triple lock as a way of ensuring a fairer state pension, and that we will be working hard in the coming months and years to continue to push the Government to take bold steps to use the economic might of pension funds to support the fight against climate change. I have raised these points to emphasise that there is much to do in the pensions and savings sector, and because I believe that it is important to consider the whole picture when taking big decisions such as the one being made today.

  Full debate: Pensions

• 13 Jan 2021: Vote

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

• 20 Dec 2020: Tweet

  RT @UrbanToGarden: @COP26 @MattRodda @AlokSharma_RDG Will you retweet & follow to help us raise funds so we can teach our children, familie… [Source]

• 04 Dec 2020: Tweet

  We face a climate emergency, which the Prime Minister promised to help address by funding 4,000 zero-emission buses… https://t.co/LdfBVbgr7b [Source]

• 03 Dec 2020: Tweet

  The Prime Minister promised 4000 zero emission buses - yet the Government's own Spending Review only committed to 5… https://t.co/PDbXOWJw1R [Source]

• 30 Nov 2020: Parliamentary Speech

  Free travel is not only about ensuring that children can get to school or training on time and safely; more than half of young people who use the scheme would have relied on it to visit cultural and other activities in central London, and to visit friends and family—all important parts of our shared life in the capital city and around the country. Indeed, if we want families and friends to see one another and reduce social isolation, which is obviously increasingly important during the pandemic and our recovery from it, we should encourage young people to be able to get around in the coming months, as the restrictions are eased. We should also not forget the truly important objective of promoting the use of public transport to reduce air pollution and carbon dioxide emissions, as several Members quite rightly said with reference to their constituencies. Surely, in that context alone, this is a very important scheme.

  Full debate: Transport for London: Funding

• 26 Nov 2020: Tweet

  Labour's Climate Change Act came into force on this dat we years ago. @UKLabour supports more determined action - t… https://t.co/L8B9m2j5a1 [Source]

• 25 Nov 2020: Tweet

  Disappointing back tracking by the Government on zero-emission buses @transportgovuk had been promising 5billion fo… https://t.co/to2akaLWVn [Source]

• 25 Nov 2020: Tweet

  Disappointing roll-back by the Conservative Government on zero-emission buses. @transportgovuk had been promising £… https://t.co/xSYpRM2IXP [Source]

• 16 Nov 2020: Vote

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

• 12 Nov 2020: Parliamentary Speech

  I thank you, Ms Rees, and the Minister. Brexit and climate change are two serious issues that we must deal with properly. The statutory instruments cut across both issues and so require scrutiny, especially in the light of approaching deadlines, political pressure and the demands of dealing with the coronavirus pandemic. As the Government move to enshrine EU regulations in UK law, I take the opportunity to emphasise the need to maintain truly and equally ambitious CO 2 reduction targets and high vehicle safety standards.

  I have more serious concerns about the second and third instruments that relate to important aspects of the Government’s environmental policy and, I believe, clearly show that Ministers are seeking to water down their commitment to tackling the climate emergency. The Department for Transport’s explanatory memorandums on the two instruments on carbon dioxide emission performance standards say that the Government aim to introduce standards to UK law that are

  First, the regulations use the average mass of cars in the EU to set targets for future UK carbon dioxide emissions, rather than the average mass of cars in the UK. That amounts to watering down the regulations and setting lower targets for the UK, because UK cars are on average heavier. Secondly, the regulations allow manufacturers to use an additional 3.5 grams of carbon dioxide per kilometre of super-credits as an additional allowance for producing CO 2 for some battery and plug-in hybrid vehicles that, in many cases, also have internal combustion engines.

  That is a significant change in policy that will hamper the UK’s ability to meet vital targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Last year, the Government declared a climate emergency and promised to take climate change much more seriously. If the instruments are passed in this watered-down form, however, it will clearly signal that the Government’s actions do not match their words.

  Reducing the carbon dioxide produced by road transport should be the central priority for any Government. We cannot reduce our efforts to tackle the climate emergency and we will therefore vote against these regulations.

  Full debate: Draft Road Vehicles and Non-Road Mobile Machinery (Type-Approval) (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations ...

• 12 Oct 2020: Parliamentary Speech

  The central point that has been raised with me is that the Bill as it stands will open a backdoor to food that is produced to lower environmental and animal welfare standards. I wish to address both of these related issues in turn. On environmental standards, it is very important to remember that agriculture is responsible for a significant proportion of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions, including methane, and that there are also a series of other issues associated with the industry however hard farmers both here and around the world are trying to address them. The same also applies to animal welfare, which has been led by British farming. As my right hon. Friend the Member for Leeds Central (Hilary Benn) said earlier, there are opportunities for us in this country to influence animal welfare standards around the world by asserting our own rights now as an independent trading country.

  This pandemic has also underlined the importance of healthy eating and good nutrition for our general health and wellbeing, yet we risk exposing hundreds of thousands of families to low-quality food, undermining the Government’s own obesity strategy. We must be mindful, too, of the agricultural sector’s role in getting to net zero. Lower food standards encourage poor production practices, and the result is massive damage to the environment. Unless these standards are legally enshrined, the risk remains that this Government will compromise on environmental protections and food and welfare standards, as they head out in a desperate search for trade deals after Brexit. Just last week, the US Agriculture Secretary said:

  Full debate: Agriculture Bill

• 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

• 2 Jul 2020: Parliamentary Speech

  I wish to speak to new clause 29, which has been tabled in the name of my hon. Friend the Member for Oxford East (Anneliese Dodds), the shadow Chancellor, and other hon. and right hon. colleagues. Yesterday afternoon, I addressed the Government’s poverty of ambition on climate change. This afternoon, I want to address their poverty of ambition on tackling poverty itself.

  Full debate: Finance Bill

• 30 Jun 2020: Tweet

  RT @Mark_Laynesmith: Lobbying @MattRodda MP online now as part of #TheTimeIsNow virtual #ClimateChange lobby https://t.co/e8rAbtmxeu https:… [Source]

• 30 Jun 2020: Tweet

  Good to listen to constituents concerned about #ClimateEmergency #wildlife and #fair-trade #TheTimeIsNow [Source]

• 12 Mar 2020: Parliamentary Speech

  As we have heard, rail passengers throughout the country are struggling with the exorbitant cost of train travel, with fares having risen by a staggering 40% since the Conservatives took office. In stark contrast, Germany has recently cut rail fares, and in Luxembourg public transport has been made entirely free, thereby both supporting families and helping to tackle the climate crisis. The Government used yesterday’s Budget to prioritise once again unsustainable and expensive new roads ahead of support for public transport. When will the Government finally treat this issue seriously and take the urgent action that is needed?

  Full debate: Rail Fares

• 12 Mar 2020: Tweet

  RT @serauk: SERA asked Labour’s Leadership & Deputy Leadership candidates for 60 seconds on why the environment & climate emergency's so im… [Source]

• 5 Feb 2020: Parliamentary Speech

  It is an honour to close today’s debate. There can be no doubt that tackling the climate change emergency is the most pressing problem facing our country and, indeed, the wider world. Today’s debate has reflected both the urgency and the overriding importance of that issue, and I want to highlight a series of contributions from colleagues across the House.

  Above all, I remind the House of the key points that were made by the shadow Transport Secretary, my hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough (Andy McDonald), who called for urgent action by the Government. He said rightly that the challenge is no longer abstract; it is now a very real and devastating reality. Those points were all important, and I believe that the contributions today reflected Members’ deep concerns about the climate emergency. Sincere views are held across the House about the enormous challenge that we now face.

  The coalition Government and the last two Conservative Administrations have presided over rising carbon dioxide emissions from transport, due largely to increased pollution from road vehicles. At the same time, rail fares have increased dramatically, hundreds of bus services have been cut, and walking and cycling growth is flatlining, with the Government missing their targets to increase active travel.

  The failure to tackle rising emissions at a time of climate crisis is simply unacceptable. What is needed now is a completely and utterly different approach, and it is clear from the progress being made by other countries, the Labour Mayors of our great cities and the Welsh Government that investment in public transport and in walking and cycling works and delivers real and tangible change and benefits. Investing to cut carbon dioxide emissions is not only desirable, but absolutely essential.

  Full debate: Transport

• 05 Feb 2020: Vote

  Transport - Pro-climate vote: Aye - Their vote: Aye

• 4 Feb 2020: Parliamentary Speech

  I will make three key points. First of all, on the scale of this problem. Secondly, on the need for an urgent response, as discussed by a number of hon. Members. Thirdly, on the series of policy choices facing the Government now that they have a significant working majority. Before I do that, I will comment, without intruding into private grief too deeply, on the tussle that is quite clearly going on in Government at the moment. It is deeply unfortunate that a former climate Minister has quite clearly had a difference of opinion with her colleagues, which reflects rather badly on the Government’s ability to focus on this vital issue. I urge the Minister—a thoughtful and gentle chap who is very interested in key policies relating to climate change—to please have a word and see if he can sort things out.

  We have focused on the technical points, but it is quite simply no exaggeration to point out that the climate crisis is the most urgent and serious problem facing the British Government and, indeed, the wider world. There is quite clearly a need for every Government, private individual, business and charity to take urgent and determined action. However, it is also clear from the debate that this is simply not happening, and that the Government, I am afraid, are failing in this vital area of policy.

  I am aware of the time, Ms Nokes, but I also ask the Minister, as he considers this, to please talk to his colleagues in other Departments and integrate policy with wider measures to tackle climate change.

  Full debate: Net Zero Targets and Decarbonising Transport

• 22 Jan 2020: Parliamentary Speech

  Increased investment in rail is required to tackle air pollution and the climate crisis, as the hon. Member for The Cotswolds (Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown) mentioned. According to the Government’s climate change advisory body, the Committee on Climate Change, the Government are not on track to meet their emissions targets, which themselves are insufficiently ambitious to meet the objectives we all have set ourselves.

  Full debate: North Cotswold Line

• 7 Oct 2019: Parliamentary Speech

  I would like to address two key points, which have been mentioned but perhaps need some further emphasis: first, the scale of the challenge; and, secondly, the need for an urgent response. It is vital to consider where we are with climate change, to look at the term “climate emergency” and consider what it really means, and then to look at the range of potential responses available to Governments around the world.

  Regarding the science of climate change, it is fair to say—without being an expert, but as a relatively well-informed observer—that we are approaching a serious tipping point. I do not say that lightly. It is really clear from the evidence from the UN reports, and other independent science from a range of universities and other scientific bodies around the world, that the climate faces a tipping point.

  That is not a small tweak or a little change, but a fundamental change. It means that we are on a path to the destruction of humanity on this planet, because of the rising proportion of carbon dioxide and other gases in the atmosphere which cause or facilitate climate change. As humans, we are ultimately responsible for that process. The data is clear on the number of warm years recently, and the amount of carbon dioxide and other gases in the atmosphere, which has been measured since the 1950s. The link with climate change is clear.

  In that context, I think it is perfectly reasonable for protestors outside, and for us in this House, to use the term “climate emergency”. We should not shy away from it. I am sure the Minister will address that with the level of gravity that this serious situation demands. That is my first point. I am grateful to colleagues who made points clearly in support of that and highlighted the particular issues in Brazil, where the Amazon is greatly important. It is a huge carbon sink, but it is under threat from the dreadfully irresponsible fires, which the Government of Brazil have so wrongly allowed to take place.

  Full debate: Amazon Deforestation

• 23 Jul 2019: Parliamentary Speech

  A lack of affordable public transport and, indeed, transport as a whole has a huge impact on many people. It makes travelling to work difficult, and potentially limits access to vital services such as doctors or local shops. For young people, a lack of affordable transport can limit access to apprenticeships, college or university. Investment in transport is an important driver of economic growth; we have heard about the effect that regional imbalances in investment can have on growth. Most of all, in our interconnected world, cutting carbon dioxide emissions from transport is central to tackling the threat of climate change, something that is only too evident today.

  Labour would take a much more strategic approach than the current Government, based on the public interest and the needs of the economy as a whole, and would take urgent action to avert a climate crisis. That is in contrast with the current state of much of our transport system, part of which the hon. Member for Mansfield has described, as have colleagues on the Labour Benches.

  It is important to consider the scale of the crisis. First and foremost, Britain depends far too much on its roads as a mode of transport. The pollution, choked high streets, terrible congestion and carbon dioxide emissions caused by cars and lorries are unsustainable. I am afraid that at the moment the current Government’s policies are making that problem worse with more traffic, a lack of action on congestion and pollution and, on local roads, a huge backlog of potholes. The Government’s priority should be to invest in public transport and deal with that range of issues, taking traffic off our roads and reducing congestion for those who have to drive.

  A Labour Government would also tackle the serious issue of local transport, which my colleagues referred to when they mentioned the problems with buses. Our bus services have been cut by 45% since 2010, leaving older and disabled people isolated, younger people unable to get to work or education, and commuters let down and ripped off by increasing fares. There has been a chronic lack of investment in walking and cycling, with just 1.5% of the Department for Transport’s budget spent on those two modes of transport, despite their importance. If Britain had the same levels of cycling as the Netherlands, our carbon dioxide emissions from cars would be cut by a third, because of the large number of journeys of around a mile in length currently made by car. It is also worth noting the importance of the link to public health, which I am sure the Minister is aware of. If we all walked a mile a day, we would be significantly healthier. There would also be a knock-on effect of freeing up valuable road space for those who have to drive, such as the emergency services and some businesses.

  Full debate: Transport Links: Nottinghamshire

• 18 Jul 2019: Parliamentary Speech

  My hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough (Andy McDonald), the shadow Transport Secretary, has made clear the scale of the challenge we face with climate change and the urgent need to cut emissions from transport. Increasing cycling and walking is particularly important if we are to avoid a climate crisis. If cycling levels in the UK were the same as those in the Netherlands, carbon dioxide emissions from cars would fall by one third. Given the scale of the threat from climate change, why are the Government not doing more to avert this crisis?

  Full debate: Cycling and Walking Investment Strategy

  The Government have once again shown their lack of commitment to tackling the real problems facing this country. The Secretary of State has failed to meet his own targets for encouraging cycling, and the Department for Transport is spending just 1.5% of its budget on walking and cycling. The Minister’s attempts to dress up what is clearly a failing policy are, quite frankly, deeply disappointing and show that the Government are simply not capable of providing the leadership needed to tackle climate change, which is the greatest threat to our country and, indeed, to humanity. When will the Secretary of State and his colleagues get a grip and show some leadership?

  Full debate: Cycling and Walking Investment Strategy

• 9 Jul 2019: Parliamentary Speech

  The Government have admitted, albeit under pressure from the Opposition, that the UK and the world as a whole face a climate emergency. We have just 11 years to dramatically reduce carbon dioxide emissions and we need to take practical steps now to protect the planet for future generations. Changes in the way we travel have a vital part to play in responding to this emergency and, as has been discussed this morning, walking and cycling can play an important role in that.

  Were the UK to achieve the same cycling culture and levels of infrastructure as the Netherlands, we could reduce carbon gas emissions from cars by as much as a third, and that is not to mention the many social and economic benefits, such as tackling the air pollution crisis and reaping health benefits by reducing sedentary lifestyles, which in turn could save the NHS up to £9 billion per year. I will return to the central point about climate change later and outline some of the other many advantages of encouraging walking and cycling.

  We know that cycling and walking are hugely important. They can play a vital part in helping us tackle climate change. There are health benefits and real benefits in terms of reducing air pollution. Yet, the Government are failing to meet the targets. Mr Bailey, I believe that we need a programme of concerted action with a step change in investment, which is why Labour would improve investment in cycling and walking, to encourage the sort of transformation we have seen and heard about on the continent.

  I am conscious of time, so I will conclude. Walking and cycling are hugely important if we are to tackle climate change and lead healthier lives. It is clear that determined action can make an enormous difference, whether in northern Europe or closer to home in the UK. We need action now, not delay, and I urge the Minister to change the Government’s approach.

  Full debate: Active Travel

• 25 Jun 2019: Vote

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

• 28 Mar 2019: Parliamentary Speech

  It is a pleasure to follow my hon. Friend the Member for Swansea West (Geraint Davies). For me, the context of this debate is quite simply the deeply worrying issue of climate change. We face a stark choice if we are to avoid extreme and potentially unstoppable change to the climate: do we continue to develop and exploit fossil fuels, or do we leave them in the ground? It will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to stop dangerous climate change if we do not leave fossil fuels, including gas, in the ground. We can and must take a more responsible and sustainable approach, and that is why we need to stop the exploitation of shale gas.

  I am conscious of the time, but I just want to add my support for a range of other points that have been made today. In particular, I would like to support and endorse the concerns that have been expressed about the relative weakness of the planning system and about the Government’s policy on energy—particularly renewable energy—and their deeply mistaken policy of cutting the feed-in tariff and not investing in wind power, solar energy and other renewables such as the tidal power project in Swansea bay. These mistaken energy policies stand in stark contrast to the policies of many other Governments, including the last Labour Government.

  We have just 12 years left to reduce carbon emissions dramatically. Local communities around the country have serious and substantial concerns about fracking. Given the climate crisis and the need for radical change in energy provision, and given the indisputable local concerns, shale gas exploitation has to stop, and it has to stop now.

  Full debate: Permitted Development and Shale Gas Exploration

• 16 Jan 2019: Parliamentary Speech

  As we have heard, the bioethanol industry contributes £600 million to the UK economy every year. Over the past 10 years there has been an investment of over £1 billion in bioethanol production facilities. When it comes to greenhouse gas emissions, transport is clearly the biggest offender, contributing 28% of the UK total, as well as contributing to air pollution, as we have heard. I am sure that we all agree that is a serious public health issue. Under the Government’s current plans we are not on course to meet our existing climate change targets under the Climate Change Act 2008. Indeed, last January the Committee on Climate Change warned the Government that their clean growth strategy does not go far enough and that urgent action is needed to meet our legally binding carbon reduction goals in the 2020s and by 2030. In June last year the CCC again warned the Government that we will not meet our targets unless they bring forward new policies such as the introduction of E10.

  We know that bioethanol fuel is good for the environment, and that introducing E10 would be equivalent to taking 700,000 cars off the road. E10 petrol is already available in many western countries, such as France, Germany and Finland, and colleagues have also mentioned New Zealand, Australia and the United States. According to the Renewable Energy Association, the introduction of E10 in the UK would be equivalent to replacing 2 million petrol cars with fully electric vehicles. Does the Minister agree that the failure to mandate E10 will make achieving Government targets to source more of the UK’s energy needs from renewable sources more challenging?

  One factor leading to the closure of that plant was the Government dithering and delaying their decisions. Does the Minister have a plan for replacing those lost jobs? Does she think that the collapse of the bioethanol industry last year will deter investors from investing in the renewable energy sector? The industry has been calling on the Government to make E10 mandatory at UK pumps. The Government have said that they would like a market-led solution, but petrol companies have pointed out that without a mandate from the Government such a solution cannot be introduced.

  Full debate: British Bioethanol Industry