UK politics: Miliband tells MPs UK needs to ‘speed up, not slow down’ in net zero drive – as it happened | Politics

• Ed Miliband, the energy secretary, has told MPs that Britain should “speed up, not slow down” in the drive to net zero. (See 5.24pm.) Giving evidence to the Commons environmental audit committee, he also said that, even if the government does approve a third runway at Heathrow (the announcement, all but confirmed already, is officially due on Wednesday), that did not automatically mean the runway would be built. This is from Helena Horton.

Ed Miliband tells Environment Audit Committee the Heathrow Airport expansion may not happen: “Any aviation expansion must be justified within carbon budgets and if it cannot be justified it will not take place.”

As Helena reports, Miliband also claimed that the UK and Trump administration could work together on climate policy.

On Trump and climate, Ed Miliband tells the Environment Audit Committee: “We will seek to reach common ground with the new US administration – renewables investment actually went up in the first Trump term.”

• Keir Starmer did not discuss US plans to impose tariffs on British imports in his first call with President Trump since the inauguration, it has emerged. (See 1.40pm.) Pippa Crerar and Kiran Stacey discus the call on the Guardian’s Politics Weekly podcast.

As energy secretary, Ed Miliband is the person in government most responsible for ensuring that the UK meets its net zero targets, and over recent days that has been a trick brief to hold. Last week he was forced to deny that he was considering resigning over the government’s decision to back a third runway at Heathrow. And Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, appeared to downgrade the importance of the net zero targets by saying growth was more important.

This afternoon Miliband is giving evidence to the Commons environmental audit committee, and he used an opening statement to hit back strongly at the suggestion his agenda was being marginalised. Here are the main points.

• Miliband insisted that there was “no contradication between net zero and economic growth”. Downing Street was using the same line this morning (see 1.31pm), but Miliband made the case in more detail. He said:

The clean power mission has two limbs. It has clean power by 2030, and accelerating to net zero or meeting our carbon budgets.

And this is one of the prime minister’s five missions because we believe it’s the route not just to tackling the climate crisis – obviously very important – but also the route to energy security, to lower bills and good jobs and economic growth.

Energy security – because we start from the cost of living crisis that so many businesses and families have been through, which showed the dangers from our exposure to fossil fuels.

Jobs and economic growth – because we see the clean energy transition as the economic opportunity of our time. Indeed, this government sees no contradiction between net zero and economic growth. We believe they go absolutely hand in hand, because net zero is a major contributor to growth, can be, and the climate crisis is the biggest long-term economic threat our country faces.

I would also argue … that all of the evidence about our national interest says we should speed up, not slow down. Geopolitical instability continues to put pressure on energy prices; we need to go all out for clean power. The economic opportunities are going to go to those who lead, not those who hang back. And on climate, most recently in Los Angeles, we’ve seen the climate crisis is real.

The climate consensus at home and abroad is under greater strain than it has been for some time … In fact, there are siren voices in the UK who are saying we should step back from this agenda, that now is the time to give up on climate action because it is not in our national interest.

And I think this is a massive fight about the future of our country.

I want to be incredibly clear with you about this. This government is not going to do that. We’re not going to step back. We’re not going to heed those siren voices. We’re going to step up, in fact, and we’re going to lead, not follow.

And why? Because whatever the disinformation, the misinformation, the truth is that climate action is essential for our national self interest and is supported by the British people.

Miliband did not directly mention Kemi Badenoch at this point, but he was clearly referring to her. Badenoch calls herself a “net zero sceptic”. Miliband stressed that in the past Conservatives did agree with Labour on this. The Tories supported Labour’s Climate Change Act, he said. As prime ministers, David Cameron and Theresa May both supported action on net zero. And the Tory Cop president Alok Sharma also supported these goals, he said.

Richard Hermer, the attorney general, has rebuked critics of his approach towards international law in an interview with the House magazine.

The interview was conducted before the Conservatives demanded an investigation into whether Hermer had any conflicts of interest arising from his work as a human rights barrister.

But Hermer was asked about Tory claims that he and Keir Starmer are taking an overly legalistic approach to government at the expense of the UK’s national interest. In a speech he gave in October, Hermer said that “international law is the rule of law writ large” and that it was “not simply some kind of optional add-on, with which states can pick or choose whether to comply. It is central to ensuring our prosperity and security.”

“Bring it on, if that’s the fight people want to have,” Hermer told the magazine in response to criticisms of his approach.

I’m not really sure what they’re driving at. If they are criticising the government because it wants to comply with international law, if they want to pick a fight with the government because it says international law is important and that we want to uphold international law, then that’s a fight I’d quite look forward to.

Conservative criticisms are centred around the government’s decision to cede control over the Chagos Islands to Mauritius after a ruling by the International Court of Justice found the UK did not have sovereignty over them.

In the Commons Luke Pollard, a defence minister, has been responding to an urgent question about the report saying the government is likely to delay raising defence spending to 2.5% of GDP until after the general election. Like Downing Street earlier, he refused to confirm or deny the story, but said the government could give a timetable for reaching 2.5% when the defence review reports. (See 1.48pm.)

But, as he asked his urgent question, James Cartlidge, the shadow defence secretary, also asked Pollard to justify the revelation that US military families won’t have to pay VAT on school fees for children in public schools in Britain, while British military families will not get an equivalent exemption.

In a report on this last week, the Telegraph said:

HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) this week confirmed the 20pc VAT levy on fees, introduced on January 1, does not apply to the children of US service personnel. This is due to an historic relief between the two countries.

In a briefing note, seen by The Telegraph, HMRC said private school fees are considered a service and would therefore allow American military families to avoid paying the tax as it fell under the “VAT-free purchase scheme”.

Cartlidge said:

I don’t begrudge (the exemption), the US forces are based in our country to defend us, but we want the same treatment for our people.

In response, Pollard said that the government had raised the continuity of education allowance (CEA) – a grant available to service families if they want to put their children into private education because they are moving regularly. It covers up to 90% of average boarding school fees.

Bridget Phillipson, the education secretary, has dismissed a Conservative proposal to ban smartphone use in schools as a “headline-grabbing gimmick”.

During education questions in the Commons, Laura Trott, the shadow education secretary asked Phillipson if the government would be backing a Tory amendment to the children’s wellbeing and schools bill to implement this in England.

She said smartphones in the classroom were bad for educational attainment in schools. The last Conservative goverment introduced guidance to stop this, she said. But she claimed that this was not working and that a ban was now needed.

Phillipson said that she agreed that pupils should not have smartphones in class, but that she did not think further legislation was needed. She told MPs”

I agree that phones have no place in the classroom. It is entirely right that schools take firm action to stop their use, and I know that that is what the vast majority of schools already do.

Last July (the Conservative government) said that it did not need to legislate in this area. Nothing has changed in this time. I back the approach that they took in July in this area. Yet again, another headline grabbing gimmick, no plans to drive up standards in our schools.

Under the Tory amendment, schools in England would have to put in place policies banning smartphone use by pupils during the school day. But there would be some flexibility for sixth forms, and for residential and boarding schools.

Many parts of NHS in Scotland in ‘crisis’, say first minister John Swinney

Severin Carrell

John Swinney, Scotland’s first minister, has admitted significant parts of the NHS are in crisis thanks to continuing impacts of the Covid pandemic, delays in waiting and discharge times and escalating costs.

Scottish National party first ministers have been careful until now to avoid the word “crisis”, despite repeated and escalating warnings from the British Medical Association and the Royal College of Nursing the NHS in Scotland is in perma-crisis.

Neil Gray, the health secretary, explicitly denied that was true in an interview with Holyrood magazine last year. But addressing health professionals and doctors’ leaders at Heriot Watt university on Monday morning, Swinney used it, and admitted the NHS faced “great challenges”.

He first pointed at “periods of real crisis” such as the flu epidemic this winter which saw the highest peak in cases since 2010, and then acknowledged systemic crises in day to day services.

“So let’s talk first about those immediate problems, the crisis facing too many parts of our National Health Service,” he said, pointing to unacceptably long waiting times and delayed discharges putting patients, families and the NHS. “It is the very definition of a vicious circle, and it has to come to an end,” he said.

Announcing a greater emphasis on primary and community care, and better use of data, he said a new app due to be piloted later this year would improve access, and pledged his new strategy would deliver 150,000 extra appointments and elective operations this year.

There are challenges, some services are struggling (but) there is nothing wrong with the National Health Service that can’t be fixed by what is right with the National Health Service.

Swinney appears to have scrapped a series of other targets set by his predecessors and failed to set out specific targets on staffing levels.

Matt McLaughlin, Unison Scotland’s health spokesman, was scathing. He said:

After almost 20 years John Swinney has delivered the same old promises.

The first minister’s renewal framework, launched today, doesn’t begin to tackle the social care crisis, and staff will be angry after he said they ‘need to do more laps of the track’.

Downing Street has refused to back President Trump’s call for Palestinians to be refused to allow to return to Gaza.

Asked about Trump’s comment, the PM’s spokesperson told journalists at the lobby briefing:

Palestinian civilians should be able to return to and rebuild their homes and their lives.

As the foreign secretary said, for the people of Gaza, so many of whom have lost their lives, homes or loved ones, the last 14 months of conflict have been a living nightmare. That’s why the UK is continually pressed for a resolution to the conflict in Gaza.

This morning the Times splashed on a story saying Keir Starmer is likely to delay raising defence spending to 2.5% of GDP until after the next election. In their report, Steven Swinford and George Grylls say:

Sir Keir Starmer is expected to resist pressure from President Trump and the British military to increase defence spending to 2.5 per cent of GDP by 2030 because of concerns about the state of public finances, The Times has been told …

Starmer has pledged to increase defence spending from 2.3 per cent to 2.5 per cent and has commissioned a strategic defence review that is due to conclude in spring. After that, the government will set a deadline for the 2.5 per cent target.

A senior government source said: “If we try to hit the target by 2030 it will mean deeper cuts to public services in the run-up to the election. It feels like a non-starter.” The next general election would be due by mid-2029.

At the Downing Street lobby briefing the PM’s spokesperson did not deny the story, but would not confirm it either. He just said the government was “working at pace” on its strategic defence review, and that the pathway to reaching 2.5% would be set out when the SDR reports in the spring.

At 3.30pm a defence minister will respond to an urgent question tabled by James Cartlidge, the shadow defence secretary, on this story.