Commons Sense

House of Commons · Bill Debate

The Homes (Energy Efficiency) Bill - Clause 1

24 March 2023 · 3 other contributors

Opened by Sarah Olney Lib Dem Richmond Park

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

At a glance

Sarah Olney raised concerns about the homes (energy efficiency) bill - clause 1 in the House of Commons. Other MPs contributed to the debate.

Key points

  • Moves the amendment to set out a legislative roadmap to upgrade homes to energy performance certificate band C by 2033
  • Critics current government policy as failing, citing statistics on greenhouse gas emissions and inefficient housing stock
  • Emphasises health impacts, cost savings for tenants, and economic benefits of improved efficiency

How the debate unfolded

MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said.

Opened the debate

Sarah Olney Lib Dem Richmond Park

Moves the amendment to set out a legislative roadmap to upgrade homes to energy performance certificate band C by 2033. Criticises current government policy as failing and cites statistics on greenhouse gas emissions and inefficient housing stock. Emphasises health impacts, cost savings for tenants, economic benefits of improved efficiency, and urgent need for action due to volatile global energy markets.

Other contributors (3)
  • Peter Gibson Lab Darlington

    Welcomes government funding for decarbonisation in social housing but questions where the cost of decarbonisation in private-owned non-mortgaged properties will fall. Supports the bill's aim despite acknowledging challenges.

  • Robin Millar Con Aberconwy

    Raises concerns about planning rules preventing modification and adaptation of listed buildings for efficiency improvements, questioning if easing of conservation rules is needed to reduce costs. Acknowledges the need for energy efficiency but emphasises the importance of preserving historical structures.

  • Louie French Con Old Bexley and Sidcup

    Acknowledges that parts of the market are improving organically without state intervention. Raises concerns about trust in government programmes, citing examples where state funding has not delivered expected outcomes.

▸ Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy