Households near new pylons to get hundreds off energy bills
People living near new pylons in Great Britain will get hundreds of pounds off their bills, as part of government plans to boost energy infrastructure.Households within 500m of new or upgraded pylons will get discounts of up to £2,500 over 10 years, equivalent to £250 a year. The government said such incentives could help reduce opposition and delays to new projects, which are needed to deliver more clean energy. However, rural campaign groups said it was "impossible to put a price on the loss of a landscape".
The bill discounts are expected to be in place from 2026. The idea forms part of the government's Planning and Infrastructure Bill, which is due to be published this week. The legislation aims to speed up the building of new homes and infrastructure by cutting red tape and simplifying the planning process, and the government has put the changes at the heart of its push for economic growth.
Alongside money off bills, the government will publish new guidance on how developers should provide benefits to communities hosting transmission infrastructure, by funding projects like sports clubs, educational programmes or leisure facilities. The government said this would mean communities could get £200,000 worth of funding per km of overhead electricity cable in their area, and £530,000 per substation.The government is also looking at how communities near onshore wind farms and other energy infrastructure can receive benefits.
The plans were welcomed by RenewableUK, which represents the sector. The group's head of policy, James Robottom, said bill discounts would "help to enable the roll-out of much-needed new grid infrastructure at a faster pace, so that we can make the most of the vast amounts of clean power we're producing".However, Jackie Copley, campaign lead at CPRE, the countryside charity, said: "Investing in local green spaces or improving community infrastructure would be a better way to spend this money. "Paying individuals comes with many problems, including questions of fairness, likely legal challenges, and the fact that it's impossible to put a price on the loss of a landscape."Deputy Prime Minister and Housing Secretary Angela Rayner said: "It is no longer a question of whether we build the new infrastructure we need but a question of how and this must be done in lockstep with local communities."This government's Planning and Infrastructure Bill will slash energy bills for local people living near new projects, so they benefit as we drive forward in our mission to achieve a more prosperous and energy secure future for the next generation."Energy Secretary Ed Miliband said the plans would also "benefit the whole country by ensuring we build the clean power system we need".
The idea of giving people living near new pylons money off their energy bills was also proposed under the previous Conservative government. A government survey in 2024 suggested 78% of people would find an energy infrastructure project more acceptable if they were offered discounts on their bills.Some energy companies already offer bill discounts to customers who live near infrastructure like wind turbines, while grants are also available for local communities affected.
Sign up for our Politics Essential newsletter to read top political analysis, gain insight from across the UK and stay up to speed with the big moments. It'll be delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South Wales Guardian
an hour ago
- South Wales Guardian
MP calls for ‘chronic under-supply' of Gypsy and Traveller sites to be addressed
Mary Kelly Foy said planning decisions on these sites 'have frequently been underpinned by prejudice', with just 30 created over the past 30 years. The MP for City of Durham tabled an amendment to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill which proposes that Gypsy and Traveller sites are included in spatial development strategies. Speaking in the Commons, she said: 'Today I rise to speak to amendment 134, in my name, that works towards addressing a long-standing and deeply entrenched failure in our planning system, the chronic under-supply of Gypsy and Traveller sites across England. 'And my amendment seeks to increase fairness into the system to enable, rather than hinder, the provision of adequate, culturally appropriate accommodation for Gypsy and Traveller communities. 'For too long, the accommodation needs of Gypsies and Travellers have been overlooked by the planning system.' She added: 'The Government has committed to delivering 1.5 million new homes by 2029, if that ambition is to be truly inclusive, it must include everyone, and that means by making space, literally and politically, for communities who have been moved on, fenced off and forgotten.' Ms Foy said just 30 sites have been created over the past 30 years, adding: 'Decisions on Gypsy and Traveller sites have frequently been underpinned by prejudice, whether overt or institutional. 'Too often, proposed developments are blocked or delayed by local opposition that's not met with political will or leadership. 'Site delivery also suffers from a lack of inclusion at the strategic planning level, where Gypsy and Traveller site provision can be absent from local plans and excluded from land allocations. And this absence isn't an accident, it's a result of years of structural marginalisation that this Bill must now correct.' Ms Foy said the UK is 'seeing a troubling trend' with the number of socially rented pitches declining. She argued that leaving out Gypsy and Traveller sites from future strategies would be 'repeating mistakes of the past'.
South Wales Guardian
an hour ago
- South Wales Guardian
MP urges Government to protect live music venues from new neighbours' complaints
Dame Caroline Dinenage has proposed letting decision-makers take into account existing properties, when they grant or refuse permission for new projects. The Commons Culture, Media and Sport Committee chairwoman warned that 'live music's in crisis, the Government needs to be listening' as she proposed a new clause to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill. Dame Caroline, the Conservative MP for Gosport, told the Commons: 'It isn't about venues versus developers. 'It's about making sure we have a balance right between building enough good homes and making sure the places we're building keep the things that make life worth living. 'In Westminster and our constituencies, everyone agrees that our high streets have been in decline, so it's vitally important that we protect the places that are special to us, our constituents and our communities, the places that provide a platform for our creators and our world-beating creative industries where we can make memories, celebrate and have fun.' Dame Caroline called on the Government to let town halls and ministers rule on plans 'subject to such conditions that would promote the integration of the proposed development of land with any existing use of land, including such conditions as may be necessary to mitigate the impact of noise on the proposed development'. A similar principle already exists in national planning rules, known as the National Planning Policy Framework, to ease pressure on existing businesses which 'should not have unreasonable restrictions placed on them as a result' of newer builds. But the Music Venue Trust's annual report last year warned that, in 2023, 22.4% of venues closed as a result of 'operational issues', compared with 42.1% of its members reporting 'financial issues'. The Trust identified noise abatement orders or other neighbour disputes as being among the issues which have resulted in permanent closures. 'Consistent application of the 'agent of change' principles will de-risk and speed up planning and development,' Dame Caroline told MPs, and added that her proposal was 'good for venues' and 'good for developers and new neighbours'. She said the law change could help authorities stop 'expensive and often pointless bun fights' when neighbours complain about noise. She continued: 'It'll make sure the needs of an existing cultural venue are considered from the start and it will save developers from late-stage objections and lengthy expensive legal disputes down the line.' Dame Caroline said music venues 'are the foundation of our world-beating creative industries and also very important for our local communities', and that they had been placed 'under threat, including from our disruptive planning system and our onerous licensing regime'. The Commons select committee recommended last year that the 'agent of change' principle should be put on a statutory footing, to protect grassroots music venues.
Wales Online
an hour ago
- Wales Online
Smacking ban would be ‘heavy-handed', warns Tory critic at Westminster
Smacking ban would be 'heavy-handed', warns Tory critic at Westminster Speaking in Parliament, former MP Lord Jackson of Peterborough argued "reasonable chastisement" was harmless Introducing a smacking ban in England would be "disproportionate and heavy-handed", a Conservative peer has warned. Speaking in Parliament, former MP Lord Jackson of Peterborough argued "reasonable chastisement" was harmless and calls to abolish it as a defence for punishing a child risked "criminalising good and caring parents, as well as overloading children's services departments". He made his comments as the House of Lords continued its detailed line-by-line scrutiny of the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill. One of the changes proposed to the legislation was a move to outlaw the smacking of a child by scrapping the common law defence of reasonable punishment. Former president of the British Medical Association (BMA) and independent crossbencher Baroness Finlay of Llandaff said children had been left vulnerable by the legal "loophole" and urged for it to be closed, as it had been already in Scotland and Wales. She told peers: "There is clear evidence that physical punishment has no positive outcomes for children." Article continues below She added: "Hitting children hurts on the outside and on the inside. It damages emotional development. "Eight in 10 child runaways cite family violence as a cause." Highlighting support for the proposal by a number of leading organisations, including the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, the NSPCC, Barnardo's and the Children's Commissioner for England, Lady Finlay said: "It is time to protect children from assault and battery." But opposing the amendment, Lord Jackson said: "I believe it is an egregious interference in family life by the state and an intrusion. "It is an attack on family rights and it will encourage a childish disrespect for authority. "It is disproportionate and heavy-handed and it risks criminalising good and caring parents, as well as overloading children's services departments." He added: "The law as it stands is sensible. It outlaws violence, abuse and unreasonable chastisement. "Crown Prosecution Service guidelines are clear that, if the actions of a parent cause anything that is more than transient or trifling, it is unlawful. "The reasonable-chastisement defence simply permits parents to use very mild physical discipline, like a tap on the hand or a smack on the bottom, without being charged with assault... 'Reasonable chastisement' is common and harmless." Lord Jackson went on: "Everyone wants the state to intervene to protect children who are in danger of abuse, but, if that is to be done effectively, the limited resources available need to be focused on identifying and helping those at risk, not investigating innocent, loving parents because the law of assault has become politicised by activists who do not agree with reasonable chastisement. "Making trivial smacks a criminal offence will cause misery for parents and children." But the peer faced criticism for his remarks from Liberal Democrat Baroness Walmsley, who said: "He used 'smacking' quite a lot. I will never use that word myself, because it trivialises what we mean. "We are talking about a hit – about a physical assault on a child. "The reasonable chastisement defence is only ever likely to be used in a court of law, and it has been." She cited the murder of 10-year-old Sara Sharif in 2023, whose father Urfan Sharif claimed in a call to police after fleeing England that he "did legally punish" his daughter but he "beat her up too much". Pressing for the removal of the "reasonable chastisement" defence, Lady Walmsley said: "The presence of those words in the law sends a message that it can be lawful to beat a little child." Former Playschool presenter and Barnardo's vice-president Baroness Benjamin, who sits as a Liberal Democrat peer, said: "Almost 70 countries have banned smacking, leaving no ambiguity in the law. "It is never OK to 'reasonably punish' a child. It is time to join those countries and end physical punishment against children." Responding, education minister Baroness Smith of Malvern pointed out the most serious cases of child abuse would not be covered by the reasonable punishment defence. She said: "We are looking closely at changes in Scotland and Wales and continue to build our evidence base, but we do not want to take this important decision yet." The minister added: "Most parents want what is best for their children and they should be supported. Article continues below "It is right that we protect all children who are at risk of harm, but it is also right that we do not intervene in family life when children are safe, loved and well supported."
