Miliband says Farage trying to ‘airbrush history' over UK's fossil fuel reliance
Speaking to MPs on the Energy Security and Net Zero Committee on Monday, Mr Miliband said: 'Nigel Farage wants to airbrush history – he wants people to forget the fact it was our exposure to fossil fuels that led to the worst cost-of-living crisis in generations.'
Richard Tice was accused by Ed Miliband of threatening investment in Britain (Joe Giddens/PA)
'Family finances wrecked, business finances wrecked, public finances wrecked – and we're still paying the price.
'There is only one answer to that, which is homegrown energy that we control – and the security that you get from that homegrown clean energy is now essential for our energy security and national security.
'Any decision to say let's remain on fossil fuels, subject to a global market controlled by petro states and dictators, frankly surrenders our energy security and national security.'
Mr Miliband was responding to comments made by Mr Farage during a BBC interview on Sunday, in which the Clacton MP argued: 'It is absolutely mindless for a country that produces less than 1% of global CO2 to beggar itself.'
Pressed on whether he believed in man-made climate change, Mr Farage told Laura Kuenssberg: 'Do I believe there's climate change? Yes.
'Does man have an influence? Impossible to think we haven't got some influence – as to what proportion it is, I've no idea.'
Mr Miliband said such arguments 'fly in the face of people's experience of what has happened to them and what they are still facing'.
He also hit out at Reform deputy leader Richard Tice, accusing him of threatening investment in Britain's growing green economy.
Mr Tice recently sent a formal letter to clean energy firms warning that Reform would seek to cancel net zero-related contracts if it wins power.
'The renewables agenda no longer enjoys cross-party support,' he wrote.
'As a result, your potential participation in AR7 – and any future auctions based on the Clean Power 2030 framework – carries significant political, financial and regulatory risk for your shareholders.'
AR7 refers to the UK Government's upcoming seventh allocation round for Contracts for Difference (CfDs), the primary mechanism for supporting low-carbon electricity generation projects such as offshore wind farms.
Winning bidders are guaranteed a set price for their energy, providing investment certainty for developers and helping drive down costs.
Mr Tice argued that offshore wind farms, new pylons and energy storage infrastructure are driving up costs and threatening grid stability, adding: 'If you enter bids in AR7, you do so at your own risk. We will seek to strike down all contracts signed under AR7.'
In response, Mr Miliband said: 'There are people that want to use their opposition to clean energy and climate action to say it is the fault of that – they are just wrong.
'The really irresponsible thing that Richard Tice is doing with that letter is he is almost deliberately putting at risk tens of thousands of jobs across our country.'
He added: 'The net zero economy grew three times faster than the economy as a whole last year – he's sending a message to companies: don't come and invest in Britain.
'We're sending the message: come and invest in Britain.'
Later in the session, Labour MP Mike Reader asked Mr Miliband: 'Do you think that your response has been tough enough?'
The question prompted a wry smile from the Energy Secretary – a nod to his infamous 'tough enough' line during the 2015 general election campaign.
'I'm happy to be tougher,' he replied.
'It's deeply irresponsible what Richard Tice is doing. I think frankly it is playing politics with people's jobs and people's bills.
'It's deeply, deeply irresponsible – and when it has come into contact with reality, you've even got Reform mayors now saying, well, we're distancing ourselves from this.
'It's not where the British people are. I don't think the British people want a culture war on this.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Statesman
6 hours ago
- New Statesman
Britons increasingly fear future political violence
Photo byA large majority of the British public are concerned about the potential for political violence according to new polling conducted by Looking for Growth and Merlin Strategy. A survey of 2000 adults between 25 and 27 July found that 7 in 10 (70 per cent) are concerned about the potential for political violence. A further 1 in 5 (21 per cent) say that political violence in the UK is acceptable in some conditions. A similar number (18 per cent) say they would consider participating in violent protests as the state of Britain declines. Broken down by party affilation, the survey found that 1 in 3 (32 per cent) of Reform UK voters say political violence is acceptable in some conditions. The Green Party had the second highest number saying violence was acceptable in some conditions (24 per cent). The findings come a year after the murder of Alice da Silva Aguiar, nine, Elsie Dot Stancombe, seven, and Bebe King, six, at a Taylor Swift dance class in Southport sparked days of violent rioting across England and Northern Ireland. Riots in Aldershot, Tamworth and Rotherham targeted so-called 'asylum hotels'. The hotels have become a flashpoint once again this summer. Protests around so-called asylum hotels have taken place in Epping, Diss and Canary Wharf in recent weeks. On Saturday clashes took place between anti-racism demonstrators and anti-asylum hotel protestors outside the Thistle Hotel in central London. The Home Office says fewer than 210 hotels are now being used to house asylum seekers, down from more than 400 in the summer of 2023. Meanwhile the number of asylum seekers crossing the Channel has surpassed 25,000 this year, the earliest the figure has been reached. Britons are split on whether it is acceptable to protest outside an asylum hotel, with 47 per cent saying it is acceptable, and 44 per cent saying it is unacceptable. Only 14 per cent say it is acceptable to riot outside an asylum hotel, and only 1 in 5 (19 per cent) of Reform UK voters say it is acceptable to riot outside an asylum hotel. [See also: One year on, tensions still circle Britain's asylum-seeker hotels] Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Related
Telegraph
6 hours ago
- Telegraph
Labour wrong to give 16-year-olds the vote, says former supreme court judge
Labour should not give 16-year-olds the vote while it blocks them from accessing adult content online, one of Britain's most senior former judges has warned. Lord Sumption, a former justice of the Supreme Court, criticised Sir Keir Starmer's decision to extend the franchise to 1.5 million 16 and 17-year-olds at the next general election and said the limit should have remained at 21. He accused the Government of a 'crude' attempt to increase the number of Labour voters, although said much of the new electorate will vote for Nigel Farage's Reform UK. Lord Sumption is a retired judge and was considered one of Britain's most important barristers. He is now a notable historian of the mediaeval period. 'I think that it is a mistake to lower the voting age to 16,' he told the Policy Unstuck newsletter. 'I would actually not have reduced the voting age below the age of 21. I think it's a fairly crude attempt to change the electorate so as to introduce a large number of people whom Mr Starmer thinks will vote Labour. 'He may be wrong about that. The polls suggest that quite a lot of them will vote Reform. 'And quite a lot of those who might, last year have voted Labour will vote for Jeremy Corbyn's party. So, he may end up stabbing himself in the back.' He added that there was a tension between the Government's policy and the newly-enforced Online Safety Act, which bans under-18s from accessing adult content online. Tech firms, which have been threatened with huge fines for breaching the rules, have begun to enforce them by stopping underage people from listening to explicit music online or reading some innocuous social media posts. 'The reality is that there are many things that we do not allow 16-year-olds to do,' Lord Sumption said. 'For example, under the Online Safety Act, they can't access significant parts of the internet. I don't have an objection to that in itself. 'But that's some indication of where we think that the boundary lies between responsible adulthood and childhood.' New polling by the research firm More in Common finds that a majority of parents of 16 and 17-year-olds say they should not be able to vote. Fourteen per cent of the parents polled said their child would vote for Labour, while the same proportion said they would vote for Reform. One percentage point less – 13 per cent – think their child would vote for the Green Party. Sir Keir pledged to lower the voting age to 16 when he ran to be Labour leader in 2020, allowing children to cast a ballot in general elections for the first time ever. Sixteen and 17-year-olds are already allowed to vote in elections for the devolved administrations in Scotland and Wales. Among the population more generally, 70 per cent of people think that teenagers are too immature to vote. That view is especially popular among people who voted for Reform last year and the over-75s.
Spectator
7 hours ago
- Spectator
Reform's motherland, Meloni's Italian renaissance & the adults learning to swim
First: Nigel Farage is winning over women Does – or did – Nigel Farage have a woman problem? 'Around me there's always been a perception of a laddish culture,' he tells political editor Tim Shipman. In last year's election, 58 per cent of Reform voters were men. But, Shipman argues, 'that has begun to change'. According to More in Common, Reform has gained 14% among women, while Labour has lost 12%. 'Women are 'more likely than men… to worry that the country is broken.' Many of Reform's most recent victories have been by women: Andrea Jenkyns in the mayoral elections, Sarah Pochin to Parliament; plus, there most recent high profile defections include a former Tory Welsh Assembly member and a former Labour London councillor. What makes Reform's success with women all the more remarkable is that it appears organic; 'we haven't forced this' says Farage. So why are women turning to Reform UK? Tim Shipman and Sarah Pochin MP join the podcast to discuss. Next: is Italy experiencing a renaissance? From Italy, Owen Matthews argues that Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has revived her nation. While he says that Italy has been 'suffering from the same economic malaise' as the rest of Europe, the macroeconomics covers up the true affordability of the country. Espressos cost €1.20, pizzas are no more than €10, and rents in even the swankiest areas are 'laughably' cheap compared to Britain. Plus, Owen sees none of the 'media catastrophisation' over issues like immigration, social cohesion and militant Islam that appears to grip the UK. So how has Meloni done it? To discuss, Owen joined the podcast alongside Antonello Guerrera, UK & Westminster correspondent for the Italian newspaper Repubblica. And finally: one in three British adults cannot swim This week, Iram Ramzan provides her 'notes on' learning to swim saying, 'it's humiliating to admit that at 37' she can't. She's not alone though – one third of British adults cannot swim, and the proportion appears to be rising. Iram highlights the disparities between different communities; 76 percent of South Asian women for example cannot swim 25 metres. Iram joined the podcast to discuss further, alongside fitness professional and entrepreneur Elle Linton who also learnt to swim in her thirties. Plus: what small error led Rachel Johnson to get a telling off from Noel Gallagher? And Max Jeffery reports from court, where the Spectator and Douglas Murray have won a defamation claim brought against them by Mohammed Hijab. Hosted by William Moore and Lara Prendergast. Produced by Patrick Gibbons.
