Miliband refuses to publish details of green energy deal with China
In Freedom of Information disclosures, the Government revealed that while Mr Miliband had been in China from March 13 to 17, Ofgem officials stayed until March 21.
The officials, including Mr Brearley, used four temporary 'burner' phones while in the country, a standard security precaution government visitors are advised to take while in China.
An Ofgem spokesman said: 'We always seek to keep expenditure as low as possible to deliver the best value for money and we regularly review our business travel and expenses policy in order to minimise the number of flights Ofgem staff take.'
The group's food, local transport, and accommodation costs were paid for by the Foreign Office, the British embassy in China and the UK Integrated Security Fund, they added.
The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero insisted it was 'misleading' to suggest memorandums signed with other countries are made 'publicly available'.
A spokesman said: 'The MoU is not about encouraging Chinese investment or involvement in the UK critical national infrastructure.
'Instead, it renews a partnership that has been in place for over ten years, and which facilitates the sharing of research and ideas to support the global clean energy transition.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
27 minutes ago
- BBC News
Police pay rise of 4.2% derided as 'barely treading water'
A government-backed pay rise of 4.2% for police officers in England and Wales "barely treads water", the association representing front-line officers Police Federation said the pay rise was "worth the price of a Big Mac per shift" and would not stop "record levels of resignations, record mental health absences or the record number of assaults on officers".The organisation, which represents more than 145,000 officers, said it would now ask its members whether they accept or reject the home secretary said the increase, which is marginally above the current rate of inflation of 4.1% and is recommended by an independent review body, was "a clear signal of our gratitude". The amount is also above the 2.8% proposed by ministers in December, for which police forces will mean the starting salary for a police constable will go up by £1,256 to £31,164. The typical salary for a constable who has been in post for six years will be £50,256 and the average salary for a chief superintendent will be £98, addition, on-call, away from home and hardship allowances will be increased by £10 and London weighting will also rise by 4.2%.Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said: "Our brave police officers work day and night, often making enormous sacrifices to keep us safe."She added: "We are committed to investing in the front line and supporting officers who work every day to tackle crime, keep our streets safe and protect our communities."The pay award will be supported by £120 million from the Home Office to "help protect police force budgets", the government Police Federation said while it welcomed the government's decision to reject police chief constables' calls for a pay rise of 3.8%, the award was not national chair Brian Booth said: "After more than a decade of real terms pay cuts, this award does little to reverse the long-term decline in officers' living standards or address the crisis policing faces."British Transport Police Federation chair Stuart Cowan said 4.2% "is simply nowhere near enough".He said: "Officers who are battered and bruised and stretched to their physical and psychological limits are worth so much more than repeated paltry pay increases."But the National Police Chiefs' Council (NPCC) said the 4.2% increase was above inflation and "it is essential that we attract and retain the best people into policing through competitive pay".NPCC lead for pay and conditions, Asst Ch Officer Philip Wells, said the pay award "is what we believe our officers deserve and reflects the nature of the work they are required to undertake to keep our streets safe".He added it was "vitally important that additional costs for pay are fully funded if we are to maintain services and be able to continue to invest in areas such as neighbourhood policing and technology".
Telegraph
27 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Capitulate to unions, and you undermine democracy
I have one abiding memory from my early school days in the mid-1980s. It isn't of a favourite teacher, playground companion, or a treasured lesson. No, what stands out most vividly in my mind is Strike Day. It might not have been every week, but it was regular enough to take on the rhythm of a national ritual. As a five-year-old, I adored it. The anticipation was electric. Strike Day meant I had a whole, uninterrupted day with my mother. Just the two of us. It was bliss: no school! But of course, for my parents, it was a different story. It was a burden. My mother would have to call in absent from work, adjust her commitments, rearrange the day. Eventually, my parents, like many working-class families trying to climb, had enough. They opted to send me to an independent school. At least there, the calendar didn't tremble with every union whim. Thanks to Margaret Thatcher, these disturbances came to an end. The grip of the unions was broken. Britain felt governable again. We thought the era of union rule had passed into history. But Strike Day has returned. Since July 2024, several hundred thousand working days have been lost to strike action. In the first quarter of 2025 alone, 160,000 working days disappeared into the black hole of industrial action. Since the peak in late 2022, over 1.6 million working days have been lost. Unsurprisingly, public sector productivity has plunged – now 4.2 per cent below pre-Covid levels. The BMA – a union which now more closely resembles a political party than a medical association – recently called a five-day strike because its demand for a pay rise of over 20 per cent wasn't met. That strike saw around 50,000 resident doctors walk out, resulting in thousands of cancelled procedures. These are not Dickensian workers demanding hot meals and clean conditions. These are qualified professionals, whose average salary is between £47-55,000 per year. But the point isn't just about pay. It's about power. And they know they have it. And it's not just the doctors. Nurses are threatening a winter strike. Civil servants have walked out in the last year. Train drivers, sixth-form teachers, university staff – all have joined the chorus of disruption. Britain is being quietly but systematically brought to its knees by the same forces we thought had been vanquished a generation ago. And what has the Government done? Capitulated. Time and again. Ministers shuffle to the negotiating table like supplicants, pen in hand, ready to sign the next cheque. Each time, they hope the gesture will end the militancy. It never does. Appeasement, as history teaches us, only whets the appetite. Wes Streeting, the Health Secretary, has learnt the hard way: this isn't a rational negotiation – it's a hostage situation. And the Government is tied to the chair. The truth is that Labour is not merely negotiating with the unions – they are the unions. Or rather, the unions are them. Almost every Cabinet Minister owes their ascent to union patronage. The party machine is powered by union money, union operatives, union ideology. The very people meant to hold the line against disruptive action are, in fact, the authors of it. And the consequences are now being laid bare. Consider the Employment Rights Bill – Labour's legislative love letter to the unions. It promises to repeal the Tory anti-strike laws of 2016 and 2023, lower the thresholds for industrial action, and tilt the field further toward collective bargaining. This is an open invitation for more disruption. Once again, we find ourselves ruled not by Parliament, but by the backroom deal. Beer and sandwiches are back. But this time, they're accompanied by collapsing productivity, eroded business confidence, and the creeping sclerosis of the state. Strike Day has become a national curse. And unless we find the courage once more to challenge the vested interests that now run Britain by proxy, it will become a permanent fixture of our national life – another symbol of decline in a country too frightened to govern itself.
The Guardian
27 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Manchester United's ‘Wembley of the North' stadium plan hits the buffers
Manchester United's plans to build a 100,000-seat stadium next to Old Trafford are facing delays due to a standoff over the price of land needed to begin work on the construction of the proposed ground Sir Jim Ratcliffe has called 'the Wembley of the North'. The club want land used as a rail freight terminal to complete the Old Trafford Regeneration Project, which they claim will bring £7.3bn a year to the UK economy. United have held talks with Freightliner, the haulage company that owns and operates the terminal, about buying the land, but negotiations are deadlocked due to a disagreement over the price. While Freightliner is understood to have expressed a willingness to relocate from Trafford Park to nearby St Helens, the company is seeking around £400m for the land, with United valuing it at between £40m and £50m. Ratcliffe has made it clear United are unwilling to accept the asking price set by Freightliner's parent company, Brookfield, and initial discussions are believed to have reached an impasse. A source said Freightliner 'have United over a barrel'. The company is willing to relocate to a proposed new site that would offer increased capacity for trains, but it is in no rush to move. The club's view is that Freightliner will only receive what would be a significant windfall if they are willing to drop the asking price. Sign up to Football Daily Kick off your evenings with the Guardian's take on the world of football after newsletter promotion When unveiling designs for the Old Trafford master plan, produced by Foster + Partners, in March, Ratcliffe set an ambitious target of completing what he described as a five-year build by 2030. United had been hoping to begin preparatory building work by the end of this year, but failing to secure the Freightliner site will delay the start date. United's options at this stage would be to increase their offer, wait for Freightliner to lower its demands, or scale back the project so that the freight terminal land is not required. It is also possible the new Old Trafford Mayoral Development Corporation, chaired by Sebastian Coe, could issue a compulsory purchase order, although that would be subject to legal challenges and would lead to further delays. Completion by 2030 was always seen as an ambitious target outside the senior leadership team at Old Trafford, given United have yet to obtain planning permission, secure ownership of all the land required or formally appoint architects. While Foster + Partners produced the artist impressions and videos of the proposed new stadium, the club plan to run a formal tender process to appoint architects. At a Fans Forum event on 30 June, United conceded that securing the land required could prove an obstacle to beginning work this year. United were asked by supporters whether building would commence in 2025 or 2026 and responded: 'Planning work is continuing, including the consultations with fans discussed during today's meeting. 'Discussions are also ongoing with local authorities, land owners and potential funding partners with a view to securing the land and the finance we need to proceed with the project. It remains our ambition to proceed with the project as quickly as possible, but we can only do this once the necessary land and funding is in place.' United have estimated the cost of the project at £4.2bn, but claim it will bring huge social and economic benefits to the local community and wider region, including 92,000 jobs, more than 17,000 new homes as well as attracting an extra 1.8 million visitors annually. The cost for the stadium has been projected by United to be around £2bn, although given the tented roof alone is likely to cost £300m, industry sources say £3bn is a more realistic budget. Freightliner's demands for £400m could result in the redevelopment being significantly over budget from the start. United are not seeking any public money to build the stadium itself. The club declined to comment on a private commercial negotiation.
