Author: admin

  • Miatta Fahnbulleh – 2026 Speech on the Future of our Energy System

    Miatta Fahnbulleh – 2026 Speech on the Future of our Energy System

    The speech made by Miatta Fahnbulleh, the Energy Minister, in London on 14 October 2026.

    Good afternoon.

    It is a pleasure to be here and I would like to say a huge thank you to Energy UK for bringing us all together.

    You have heard today about the choices facing our energy system.

    And I want to spend our time together talking about what it will take to build its future and the partnership between government and industry that will make this possible.

    That starts with recognising what the people in this room do. You keep the country powered. You invest in our infrastructure, develop our people and build the projects on which our future depends.

    You know what it takes to turn ambition into investment and investment into something people can see around them.

    And you continued to do that through years of economic and political uncertainty.

    So I just wanted to start by saying thank you to each and every one of you for everything you have done to get us to this point – and for the work I hope we will do together in the months and years ahead.

    And that work begins with our ambition as a government to deliver a 10-year plan for national renewal.

    One that unlocks growth in every single postcode.

    Reindustrialises parts of the country that have been held back.

    And ensures that people have the basics to live well.

    In a Britain that is confident, that is forward-looking and that is hopeful.

    And energy has an absolutely vital role to play in that.

    An everyday essential that we all rely on.

    But one that is increasingly unaffordable for too many families and too many businesses.

    In a system that is simply not working for them as consumers.

    Now look I know that this is not a reality that any of us can be happy with – and it is one we are absolutely determined to turn around as a government.

    And we have taken the next steps for the drive for homegrown clean power.

    We all know that one of the reasons we are seeing rising prices is because we are uniquely exposed to volatile global fossil fuel markets.

    Which means that conflicts miles away in Ukraine and now the Middle East reverberate deeply in people’s pockets.

    That’s why our ambition to deliver homegrown clean power is so important and is why we set it out when we came into government.

    Now I know there are a few raised eyebrows, but look the point wasn’t just about the target itself, but the confidence and momentum it would create in the system.

    And what we have delivered in partnership in just 2 years in pursuit of this mission has been incredibly impressive.

    £100 billion of private investment in clean power unlocked.

    Enough clean power consented to power over 20 million homes.

    189 terawatt hours of clean power delivered last year.

    And over the course of 2025, almost two-thirds of Britain’s electricity generation came from clean power.

    Huge progress – and we will continue to play our part to sustain this momentum.

    But we know the public doesn’t measure the success of our energy system in gigawatts.

    They measure it in bills and whether they can live comfortably.

    And by these measures, the framework within which you are being asked to deliver is not working.

    That is not a criticism of the businesses that have invested, built and innovated within it.

    It is a recognition that even the best companies cannot compensate for a system that lacks sufficient coordination and long-term direction.

    That is failing in its purpose of providing this essential good to the British people at a reasonable cost.

    So let’s be clear with how we got here.

    And look I often say, if you have a blank piece of paper, and you can design the energy system, would you design the system we have now? Probably not.

    So I think it is important we are honest about where Britain went wrong.

    The privatisation of the energy system changed more than the ownership of individual assets.

    Generation, transmission, distribution and retail were separated into different parts of the system.

    And those reforms changed the state’s relationship with the energy system.

    Government moved away from direct ownership and coordination.

    Responsibility was carved up, and farmed out across companies, regulators, network operators and public bodies.

    And when responsibility fragments, accountability weakens.

    Successive governments recognised that markets alone could not make every decision the country required.

    So, they introduced targets, created new regulation, new frameworks.

    And the cumulative effect of all these interventions was that central government and regulators ended up micromanaging the system, often with imperfect information.

    The result was neither free market, nor public direction. It was a system in which industry was often asked to deliver without the infrastructure, certainty or joined-up decision-making it needed.

    And crucially, the state never really left the energy system.

    Because it can’t.

    The idea that the state could be absent from providing a service as critical as energy was fundamentally flawed from the outset.

    The state cannot – it cannot – relinquish responsibility for keeping the lights on.

    For protecting consumers.

    For maintaining national security.

    Or for preparing the system for the future.

    So government returned through regulation, subsidy, contracts, targets and interventions.

    But it never resolved the fundamental question of how to make our energy system work for the families and businesses it is there to serve.

    And we are now living with the consequences of that.

    We have inherited an energy system that is too exposed to volatile global markets.

    We have projects ready to invest and businesses ready to expand, but can’t secure timely connections.

    We have renewable power available in a system that still pays generators to turn down their output because the network cannot always use or move that power efficiently.

    And we have families who want lower bills, but who are locked out from accessing cheaper electricity because they cannot upgrade their homes.

    When energy suppliers failed during the last energy crisis, 4 million households were affected and customers were left carrying £2.7 billion in costs.

    And look, these are not isolated problems.

    They show what happens when the system as a whole lacks sufficient coherence and accountability.

    A system can have ambitious targets.

    It can have willing investors.

    It can have viable projects.

    But if the networks cannot connect them, those ambitions remain on paper.

    If people do not see and feel the benefits of them, the system loses the confidence of the public.

    So the answer cannot simply be another layer of targets.

    That is why piecemeal reform is no longer enough.

    Stronger consumer protection matters. Of course it does.

    A more powerful and effective Ofgem matters. Of course it does. And we’re driving forwards with those reforms.

    But our ambition must be greater than making another adjustment to the model that we have.

    Our task is to make the whole system work coherently in the interest of the consumers that we serve.

    Now that requires us to be clear about the choices that are in front of us.

    There are some choices that will make sense for the state to step in.

    There are some choices where competition, private investment and innovation have a vital role to play.

    And there are those that should sit closer to communities, giving people the freedom and opportunity to shape the energy future of their places.

    But the choice is not a binary between state or market.

    That is a false choice.

    Many countries around the world, with far lower electricity prices than ours, combine public ownership with vibrant markets.

    So the real question is: who is best placed to do what?

    Where should government set the strategic direction and establish firm rules?

    Where should businesses have the operational freedom to compete, to innovate and deliver?

    And where should communities have the power to lead, participate and benefit?

    The purpose of reform should be to accelerate delivery, not to pause it.

    To give investors greater certainty, not less.

    And to replace accumulated uncertainty with clear responsibilities, freedom and accountability for the system to deliver.

    And this is precisely the purpose of Great British Energy.

    Giving the state the ability to do more than regulate industry and its decisions again.

    Instead, creating the capability to invest directly.

    Develop projects, build partnerships and take a longer view.

    Entering parts of the market where the strategic value is high, even when the immediate commercial incentives aren’t obvious.

    Ensuring that more of the value created by Britain’s natural resources is retained for the benefit of the British people.

    Ensuring the public have a direct stake in the energy assets that will shape our economic future.

    And we can already see what practical public investment means.

    Take the Sizewell C nuclear power station for example. My department is the primary public shareholder, alongside private consortium partners.

    Taxpayers will see up to £18 billion in net consumer benefits and we’ll reduce overall electricity system costs by roughly £2 billion per year compared to other routes to net zero.

    Lower costs.

    Good jobs, buoyant supply chains, greater security.

    Great British Energy working alongside private investors.

    Building capability in technologies and supply chains where Britain has a strategic interest.

    And helping shape markets rather than merely responding to them.

    The same principle underpins Great British Grid that the Prime Minister announced at conference.

    We cannot, we cannot deliver cheaper power if viable projects remain stuck in a queue.

    We cannot electrify industry if businesses cannot get the connections they need.

    And we cannot build a more secure energy system if generation, networks and demand are planned as separate challenges.

    Great British Grid is about acknowledging what industry has been telling us – projects cannot be delivered at the required scale unless network planning, connections and investment are treated as a strategic national priority.

    Great British Grid will provide additional public investment and dedicated leadership, working alongside existing network operators and private investors.

    It will enable the vital grid upgrades needed after decades of underinvestment, helping to reduce constraint costs and meet rising electricity demand.

    This is the shift that we want to see from fragmentation to coordination.

    But of course, of course, the number one test for reforming our energy system must be whether it benefits people. And that is the ultimate test we will apply in everything we do as a department.

    Whether families and businesses can afford the energy they use.

    Now there are short-term reliefs that we must provide to give people some breathing room. And we know that and we understand that particularly in the current context.

    That’s why one of the first thing’s the Prime Minister did when he came into office was to cut VAT on energy bills, building on the £150 off the costs of energy bills that we did in the Budget last year. 

    And the expansion of the £150 Warm Home Discount to over 6 million families.

    So we know we need to do our part to give people breathing room.

    But this cannot be a substitute for the big changes we need to deliver in the energy system to drive down energy costs for good. And we are very clear as a government this is our responsibility and this is the moment we must grip this.

    Now I have given you a top-down view as you will expect.

    But I am really clear these reforms cannot simply be mandated from Whitehall.

    They will be delivered hand in hand with the people, places and communities that must see the benefits.

    When communities host the infrastructure that powers Britain’s future, they should share fairly in the rewards.

    Places shouldn’t host the transition. They should have a stake in it.

    So we will back local energy, support greater community participation and put a fairer relationship between clean-energy infrastructure and the communities hosting it.

    Through Great British Energy, which will support over 1,000 community and local energy projects by 2030.

    We will pave the way for communities to own more of the renewable energy projects built in their area and share more directly in the benefits of the clean power transition.

    And vitally we will put our communities at the centre of delivering the Warm Homes Plan.

    Devolving funding so regional and local government can play a critical role in co-ordinating and accelerating the pace of home and building upgrades that we absolutely need to see over the course of the next decade.

    So that we can insulate, solar, clean heat and smart technology street by street, state by state, community by community.

    So that people can directly benefit from the drive towards electrification.

    There’s a lot of work that I know we need to do together.

    There will be those who say you should slow down.

    That the answer is to build less.

    To reform less.

    To relinquish control.

    To blindly place our faith in the established way of doing things.

    But I believe that we must seize the opportunity of this moment as we must make this transition.

    And to do that, we’ve got to be ambitious.

    And we can only do that with clear strategic direction from government.

    With certainty, opportunity and autonomy for industry in the right parts of the system.

    And a stronger voice for communities.

    The need for the energy transition is real and urgent. And for those that question that, I simply say look at the summer we’ve just had. Record heatwaves, droughts, wildfires. They are an indication that climate change is there and we have got to do our part to respond to it.

    And in this transition which is accelerating every day in the UK and all around the world.

    The UK’s net zero economy now generates around £105 billion in Gross Value Added and supports 1.1 million full-time equivalent jobs, spanning energy, manufacturing, construction, engineering and professional services.

    Oil and gas will of course remain part of our energy mix for decades to come.

    And we will bring these vital communities with us as we move towards mass electrification and renewable power.

    Because the UK must be a leader for making the transition work for all people.

    And all of you here today are world leaders.

    You are the backbone of the energy system that we must build and of the future economy that we must build.

    So what we do and what that looks like, we must do in partnership. And that brings some questions, what do we want the end goal to look like?

    More control over the sources of our power, the level of our bills, the infrastructure that forms the bones of our economy?

    Or less?

    Do we want more certainty for businesses to invest? Or do we want less?

    Or remaining overexposed every time a crisis overseas shakes fossil fuel markets, is that the reality that we want? Or less?

    These are the big questions that we’ll be asking all of you and of ourselves.

    But for me we are really clear there’s an absolute imperative for government to grip this.

    There is an absolute imperative for the state to provide direction.

    To build public capability.

    To invest where the national interest demands it.

    And to create the conditions in which we collectively make to ensure businesses can invest, can build the infrastructure that we need, and can get us to an energy system that does the very simple job of ensuring this essential good – not a luxury – a basic that everyone needs, is provided to people at a cost that is affordable.

    And look, the commitment that you have from me is, from my department and from all of government is to do everything that we can to work in partnership to get there. We will play our part because the stakes are far too high.

    But I hope you are all willing to go on this journey with us.

    And to work in partnership to deliver the energy future that I believe we can.

    Thank you.

  • NEWS STORY : Government consults on tackling bogus self employment and extending workers’ rights

    NEWS STORY : Government consults on tackling bogus self employment and extending workers’ rights

    STORY

    The Government has launched a consultation on proposals to tackle bogus self employment, which ministers say could help around 900,000 people access employment rights. Announced on 14 October, the plans target businesses that classify staff as self employed despite working arrangements that could entitle them to protections such as the National Minimum Wage and holiday pay.

    The proposals aim to clarify employment status for businesses and workers, with parcel couriers, delivery drivers, hairdressers and gig economy workers among those potentially affected. Separate measures would introduce protections for genuinely self employed people, including a right to a written statement about individual contracts and wider safeguards against blacklisting.

    Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said the proposals would protect basic rights and prevent compliant businesses being undercut. The consultation closes on 8 January 2027, with employers, workers, trade unions and representative organisations invited to respond. It concerns employment rights and does not propose changes to tax status or tax frameworks.

  • Martin McCluskey – 2026 Speech on Carbon capture and the renewal of British industry

    Martin McCluskey – 2026 Speech on Carbon capture and the renewal of British industry

    The speech made by Martin McCluskey, the Minister for Local Energy and Jobs, in London on 13 October 2026.

    Thank you, Olivia [Powis], for that introduction.

    I’m really pleased to join you this afternoon as the new minister responsible for carbon capture, utilisation and storage.

    In July, the Prime Minister asked me to continue in the department in a new role, as Olivia said, as Minister for Local Energy and Jobs. The idea behind this brief is simple.

    Energy has always been a critical sector for our country – employing tens of thousands of people, driving and contributing to the country’s economy.

    And with the country now firmly in the midst of the energy transition, my focus is on making sure that every single community feels the benefit and that people across the country can grab the opportunities of the transition with both hands.

    What I say about this job is that it isn’t a job that deals in the abstract. This is about people and places. And that’s why it’s at the heart of the Prime Minister’s agenda for reindustrialisation.

    This sector underpins so many communities in the UK and for decades, industrial decline has dismantled the people and places at the heart of it.

    As we transition our economy from fossil fuels to clean homegrown power, we have to be clear what this is about…

    …maintaining our independence, reducing our reliance on dictators and petrostates, rebuilding our industrial strength…

    …creating good jobs and restoring opportunity in every part of the country.

    And ultimately, building a world-leading British economy that is fit for the challenges of the future.

    And I see CCUS playing a key role in that.

    Your sector enables some of our most strategically important sectors, including cement, chemicals, refining and low-carbon power generation…

    …to remain competitive in an increasingly carbon-constrained global economy.

    It helps decarbonise existing industries, safeguard foundational sectors, and create the conditions for new low-carbon products and services to emerge.

    The engineering expertise, project-delivery capability, offshore infrastructure and technical skills developed over decades in the North Sea are directly transferable to carbon capture, transport and storage.

    From decarbonised cement to future low-carbon industrial products, CCUS is opening up opportunities across our industrial heartlands and ensuring they have a stake in the industries of the future.

    At the same time, it creates new markets and supply chains, attracting private investment into our industrial heartlands.

    CCUS is not just an industry in its own right. It is an enabler of wider industrial growth.

    That is the central argument I want to make today.

    Carbon capture is not an end in itself.

    The pipelines, capture plants and storage sites – they matter.

    But ultimately, they matter because of what they allow us to do, and the industries they enable.

    To protect existing industries looking to decarbonise.

    To make products in Britain that the world needs.

    And, most importantly, to create good jobs and restore opportunity in communities right across the country.

    That, in my mind, is the real prize before us.

    When we talk about reindustrialisation, it can sometimes sound like quite an abstract idea.

    A word that might be more comfortable and belong in an economic strategy or a government report.

    But it describes and reflects the reality, the lived experience of millions of people in this country.

    That too many places have been left behind for too long, with opportunities cut off and people moving away from their homes, or abroad, to find decent jobs.

    Young people grow up in communities that they love.

    Their families and friends are there.

    Their roots are there.

    But when it comes to the point of building a career, too often they feel they have little choice but to leave.

    Not because they necessarily want to go, but because the secure jobs, training opportunities and well-paid careers are no longer available close to home.

    And when that happens, a community does not simply lose one worker.

    It loses skills. It loses spending power. It loses people who might have started businesses, raised families or contributed to local life.

    Over time, that changes how a place sees itself.

    Because meaningful work is about more than just a wage packet.

    It gives people purpose, it gives people independence.

    It allows them to plan for the future.

    It gives families security, it gives young people something to aim for.

    When generations of people see industries close, investment disappears and opportunities move elsewhere.

    And the damage is not just economic.

    It damages confidence. It weakens the sense that the future belongs to them.

    It frays at the social fabric of a place.

    We have seen this in the past in former mining communities.

    We have seen it in our great manufacturing towns.

    We have seen it in communities built around steel, around chemicals, oil and gas, and engineering.

    I have the privilege of representing in parliament a shipbuilding community.

    But I’m from the first generation in my family that didn’t work in the yards or the trades associated with them.

    Why? Because the jobs just aren’t there anymore.

    At the end of the 1950s, around 10,000 people in my community worked in shipyards.

    Now that number is about to fall below 200.

    And when the decline set in through the 1970s and through the 1980s, the new jobs that were promised materialised in the form of call centres and semiconductor manufacturers, but then most of them disappeared in the ‘90s and the noughties.

    What the government is now focussed on is how we undo that damage.

    These places powered this country.

    They created Britain’s wealth.

    They created the skills, the expertise and the industrial capacity on which our national success was built.

    But too many were left without a serious plan when the industries around them declined.

    Government stood back. Investment moved elsewhere. And people were told that this was simply the way that the economy worked.

    This government does not accept that.

    We have a responsibility to shape the economy.

    To work with industry.

    To invest strategically in the long-term and build the infrastructure businesses need.

    And to ensure that economic change happens with communities, rather than happening to them.

    That the places we are proud to call home can be given new life, designed by the people who know them best.

    That is why, to my mind, reindustrialisation matters.

    It is not about recreating the economy of the past.

    It is about building the industries of the future in the places that have the skills, experience and ambition to lead them.

    That thinking is at the heart of my job as Minister for Local Energy and Jobs.

    The 2 parts of that title belong together.

    Local energy.

    And local jobs.

    Because the clean energy transition will only succeed if people can see how it improves their lives.

    If they see good jobs being created. If they see investment arriving in their communities. If local businesses win contracts.

    If young people get apprenticeships. And if communities have a real stake in the economic change taking place around them.

    My job is not simply to support projects. It is to ensure those projects support people and places.

    That means strengthening local supply chains, enabling engineering firms to win new contracts, invest in new capabilities and grow for the long term.

    It means making sure experienced workers know that the skills they have gained over decades will be needed in the industries we are building today.

    And it means giving businesses confidence that Britain is serious about the infrastructure, skills and long-term certainty that industrial investment requires.

    It also builds on strengths we already have.

    That’s why CCUS is not only critical to achieving net zero.

    It is central to this government’s reindustrialisation agenda.

    And the clusters are proving that we can deliver it.

    The most important thing about CCUS is not simply the carbon it captures. It is about what that infrastructure makes possible.

    When we talk about pipelines and storage networks, we should also talk about the industries that can connect to them.

    Cement works. Refineries. Chemical plants. Low-carbon power generation. Energy-from-waste facilities.

    Take just one industry, cement.

    The project at Padeswood is not simply carbon capture attached to a cement works. It will be the UK’s first carbon capture-enabled cement plant, securing the future of a vital foundation industry.

    It is about protecting an important industrial site, the workers who depend on it and the supply chains built around it.

    But it’s also about creating a new generation of low-carbon construction materials and positioning British businesses to serve future markets.

    Or take refining and chemicals.

    Carbon capture offers a route to reduce their emissions while keeping production and skilled employment in Britain.

    The alternative cannot be to close British industry, import the same products from elsewhere and pretend the emissions have disappeared.

    That would not be decarbonisation. It would be deindustrialisation by another name.

    That is why I see CCUS not simply as environmental infrastructure, but as economic infrastructure.

    And we are making great strides in building that infrastructure.

    Working with industry, government has secured 5 Final Investment Decisions.

    In the East Coast Cluster, the Northern Endurance Partnership and Net Zero Teesside Power are helping to build a new low-carbon industrial heartland, supporting around 3,000 jobs during construction while delivering secure, flexible low-carbon power.

    In the North West and in North Wales, as part of HyNet, Liverpool Bay CCS is now supporting over 1,400 jobs.

    In the same cluster, as I mentioned a moment ago, Padeswood is securing the future of a vital foundation industry.

    And Protos will be the UK’s first carbon capture-enabled energy-from-waste facility, demonstrating British innovation in action.

    These competitions will help maximise the use of infrastructure already under construction, attract further private investment, develop supply chains, and strengthen Teesside’s position as a leading hub for clean industrial growth.

    Projects in the East Coast Cluster have announced over £2 billion of supply-chain contracts awarded to more than 260 UK suppliers to date.

    They have also announced investment of over £1 million in local skills development, with 175 local young people in training.

    That is what reindustrialisation looks like in practice.

    Combined, Padeswood and Protos will support over 600 jobs.

    The real value of a cluster is the ecosystem that can grow around it, and we are building the foundations of new industrial economies.

    And this opportunity reaches beyond the first 2 clusters.

    Two Teesside-based competitions are running this year to support expansion.

    We will be setting out the next steps soon, so that industry has the clarity you need, taking into account the readiness of additional store capacity along the East Coast.

    We are funding the development of CCUS infrastructure in the Humber region as part of the Viking cluster.

    We are supporting the development of Acorn CCS, which is important to Scotland’s carbon capture infrastructure.

    It will help strengthen industrial competitiveness, attract private capital, and ensure Scotland can play a leading role in the UK’s growing carbon-management industry.

    Together, this industry and these projects are already supporting around 5,500 jobs in the UK.

    And I want to hear from you. I want to hear from all of you.

    To hear what is working, hear where the challenges are, and to support the work you are doing.

    It begins with government and industry working together to maintain investor confidence, attract new investment and drive down costs as we deliver this first wave of projects.

    At the same time, you have a part to play in this as well.

    Showing how these projects create real economic growth, and support domestic supply chains, and, ultimately, provide value for money.

    This is how the clean energy mission delivers not only decarbonisation, but reindustrialisation and economic growth.

    And sets us up to be an economy that can resist the effects of wars and crises overseas that we do not control.

    But it is no secret that we are operating in a challenging fiscal environment, and this government remains committed to meeting its fiscal rules.

    So I owe you today to level with you, the next phase of the CCUS programme will be in the context of broader difficult decisions on funding.

    We must ensure that public investment is targeted where it can deliver the greatest value, while continuing to build confidence in the long-term future of the sector.

    That may mean making decisions about priorities, sequencing and pace, and recognising that progress will not always happen everywhere at once.

    But this will also mean opportunity. As we move beyond first-of-a-kind projects, we are developing policies that offer industry and private investment greater leadership and flexibility: simplifying access to networks, enabling non-pipeline connections, and allowing international transfers of CO2.

    And the Prime Minister has been clear that UK projects must deliver for UK plc and UK workers.

    So as the CCUS sector grows, the requirement for government subsidy will need to reduce if it is to be sustainable for the long term.

    But let me be totally clear, my overriding message to you today is that the government wants a strong CCUS sector in this country.

    That it is an important sector for the UK’s future, and we will continue to engage closely with industry as we continue to deliver the programme.

    That is why one of the first things I did after the reshuffle and taking this job was get a meeting in the diary with the CCSA.

    And I will be out visiting the clusters soon.

    And one thing I can do for you is make this transition more visible.

    Showing off what this sector has already achieved, that the energy transition can deliver real opportunity for our communities and our country.

    The government is in delivery mode, 2.5 years after the election.

    And I want to see how this industry is boosting local economies, and I want people to know about those successes.

    So please don’t be shy in coming forward and telling me about those successes.

    The government wants a strong carbon capture industry in Britain.

    To restore a sense of worth to our communities, to rebuild our industrial base, to lay the foundations for the future.

    And behind every strategy document, investment decision, every statistic, is a person who is proud of their community and wants to build a decent life.

    And we are serving them too.

    So, my message today is a simple one.

    Success will not be measured only by how much carbon we capture.

    It will be measured by what we build, and the message we send as we do.

    That the transition to clean energy is not a threat to British industry.

    It can be the beginning of its renewal.

    That is why this government is backing carbon capture and storage.

    So, in closing, I want to thank you all for your work so far, and I’m looking forward to we all we can achieve together in the months and years ahead.

    Thank you.

  • Ed Miliband – 2026 Speech on the Global Financial System

    Ed Miliband – 2026 Speech on the Global Financial System

    The speech made by Ed Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, in Bangkok on 14 October 2026.

    So, look, I come to this event very conscious that I’m sharing a panel with people who know much more about these issues than I do. What am I trying to do in my remarks before you get onto the real experts on the panel?

    I want to try and offer political leadership on the part of the UK on these issues, and to explain why I believe political leadership on the part of the UK is right, is necessary, and I believe can make a difference, particularly over the coming year as we approach our G20 presidency. And this is my argument today.

    First, I come to these issues, to these challenges, believing that the UK’s foreign policy must confront issues of debt development and climate, for reasons of both values and interests, and I want to explain what I mean by that.

    Second, I want to take inspiration from past UK leadership, but I want to recognise that today’s agenda in 2026 is very different from the challenges we confronted 20 years ago.

    And third, I want to set out some thoughts about how the UK wants to take these issues forward. But first, the case for action.

    In my first week as foreign secretary, I confirmed I would serve as Governor to the World Bank, and I believe I’m the first ever British Foreign Secretary to attend the annual meetings in this role.

    Why did I decide to do this? Because the issues of climate, development, and debt matter profoundly to me. I know from my experience working on climate for nearly two decades that the countries that have done least to cause the climate crisis face its most extreme effects. And if 20 years ago we talked about the climate crisis as a theoretical future threat, we now know it is a present-day reality for many countries, including our own.

    But it is small island states and many other developing countries for whom this crisis is existential. And I also know that for many, this vulnerability on climate breakdown is now piled on top of high levels of debt servicing and the urgent need for poverty reduction.

    Now, this is a values case for action, but I believe it is also matched by our national interest as the UK, because in the interconnected world we live in, the opportunities and challenges we confront are collective. We can all benefit from prosperity and growth across the world. Emerging markets can help our economic gains for themselves but also help spur global growth.

    And it is true of the challenges we face as well. Climate is a national security issue, and this is one of the things I’m emphasising in my role as Foreign Secretary, but these are national security issues that cross borders.

    This is a collective action problem because issues of global food security, energy security, migration will affect Britain if we do not tackle them.
    And the same is true on debt, development, and fragility. A foreign policy, in my view, that ignores the root causes of conflict in the world is one that is wholly inadequate to genuinely defending our security.

     So that’s the first part of my remarks. Why I am here, and I’m determined the UK plays a leading role. Second, I take inspiration from the past and what UK leadership, working with others has achieved.

     I was an advisor in the Treasury in the 2000s working with Gordon [Brown] and Shriti [Vadera] on Development and Debt in the run up to Gleneagles in 2005, the biggest debt relief intervention for a generation. I even remember being phoned and shouted out by Bob Geldof, although at the end of the conversation he made clear that he thought I was Ed Balls, my colleague.

    But now that action from two decades ago, as well as what was done in the HIPC [Heavily Indebted Poor Countries] Initiative in the 1990s, continues to make a difference.

    But the world is different, and I cite these examples not to say we rerun the past, but also to say how are things different and how we must rise to the level of ambition of the previous era. So, how has our thinking changed?

    I think I think first of all, we know that this must be a partnership of equals as we think about tackling these questions, not a rich world dispensing help to poorer countries. And we also know, and this is something that Shriti has very much emphasized in her work, of the opportunities for growth in emerging economies.

    This is an opportunity story, not just a deficit and challenges story, and I think this is a very, very important part of the picture that we are painting.

    We also, though, have to acknowledge the profound moment of challenge that we face as a world, even more than 20 years ago. When foreign secretaries come to events like this, they get a [diplomatic] telegram, as we call it, a Diptel. In my case, from Vel Gnanendran, our representative on the World Bank board, and as Vel pointed out in his Diptel, we have a world where there is more conflict than at any time since the Second World War.

    We see rising food and fuel prices as a result of the Iran War, which comes on top of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which came on top of COVID, and we see climate damage hitting developing countries as we brace ourselves for the worst El Nino on record.

    That is quite a portfolio of challenges, a perfect storm of challenges, and at the same time, we see greater fiscal strain in richer countries. ODA spending continues to play a critical and valuable role in the UK’s work, but in common with others, it is reduced. I say all this about the world having changed and about the challenges, so we get the solutions for today and the future right.

    And I want to emphasise this point: the same issues as 20 years ago persist about the fundamental failings. This is the title, in a way, of today’s event: the failings of the global financial system and indeed of the global order to properly serve developing countries, and that includes the imbalances of power we see between Global North and Global South.

    The manifestations of this imbalance, the nature of the challenges may have changed, but the injustice hasn’t, and that’s why we’re determined to bring the same level of ambition as we did back then.

    Third, then this is the third part of my remarks. This takes me to what do we do about it, and this is incredibly important. It’s easy to commentate on the world, but the point of political leadership is not to commentate; it is to act.

    One of my predecessors from some time ago, Lord Carrington, used to say – I’m told, I wasn’t around at the time – at the end of meetings at the Foreign Office, ‘and so’. In other words, ‘and so, what are we going to do’? And we’re not short of insightful proposals from successive G20 presidencies, from coalitions such as the Bridgetown Initiative (I was with [Prime Minister of Barbados] Mia Mottley earlier on today), President Macron’s ‘four Ps’, and the important Accra Reset.

    But how do we translate it into action?

    I said earlier that next year the UK takes the chair of the G20, and I wanted to use this moment to lay out some ideas today around areas we can take action: around debt, around investment, around resilience, and around fragility. And I’ll say something briefly about each of them.

    First, on debt, the debt problem may have changed, but its impact, if anything, is worse than 20 years ago.

    Debt servicing costs are at a 25-year high in sub-Saharan Africa. Over three and a half times more is spent on debt servicing than on education. And this is in part because the Global South is paying the price for rising interest rates in wealthier countries, and the Rockefeller report shows this very well.

    Many of these countries’ debt may be sustainable over the longer term, but the short-term repayments are crippling. And while many are not defaulting on their payments, they are being forced, if you like, to default on the lives of future prospects of future generations. So we need a new deal on debt, a deal that supports countries to repay over longer time horizons and, crucially, refinancing with better rates to give developing countries precious fiscal space.

    And we’re right to talk about the private sector. And I was at an event this morning, obviously, it’s a theme of the Annual Meetings, but we can’t ignore the issue of fiscal space.

    I do want to acknowledge the work the World Bank has already done on these issues, but we need all of the [multilateral development banks] MDBs to go further, as well as debtor countries delivering their end of the bargain through economic reform.

    Now, there is a small number of countries, and again, this was pointed out in the Rockefeller report, that need deeper relief.  And this deal must also deliver faster debt restructuring through the G20 Common Framework, and we’ve got to improve the debt architecture in the longer term, so we don’t find ourselves in this position again, including ensuring that debt restructuring can’t be blocked by a single private lender.

    But I think it is also the case, and I know there is debate about this, that we can make progress on this agenda through the full implementation of the review of Capital Adequacy Frameworks.

    We know that some MDBs are not even making full use of the headroom they already have to provide greater funding. So using their balance sheets, and this could release 10s of billions or even more fiscal space.

    There was a Standard and Poor’s report recently, which suggested hundreds of billions of fiscal space could be opened up by leveraging the balance sheets of the of the MDBs.

    I also want to just say, in this context tackling the issue of dirty money is also crucial. Africa alone loses an estimated $90 billion each year in illicit capital flows, outstripping both aid and foreign direct investment. As a global financial centre, the UK has a responsibility to play our part, and we’re going to convene an international summit in 2027 on illicit finance.

    And we will also continue to back partner countries’ own efforts to raise higher domestic revenues and to secure the international tax revenues they are owed.

    So that’s the first point that I want to make on debt. Second, we know we can’t only focus on debt and public investment. We know it’s part of the story, but not the only story.

    And this is the point about private capital. And I do think this is an inspiring agenda. And I do want to acknowledge what Ajay has done at the World Bank, as Shriti pointed out this morning at a panel discussion, trebling the amount that has been released in terms of private capital leverage through the World Bank. We know global savings are worth hundreds of trillions of dollars. We know that capital stays overwhelmingly in rich countries. Even a fraction of it would make a huge difference to lower-income countries.

    Now, the UK government has brought together pension funds, insurance companies, commercial banks, and others through our EMDE [Emerging Markets and Developing Economies] Investor Task Force, and this has highlighted the possibilities: how the multilateral development banks and bilateral development finance institutions need to overhaul the way they work to vastly improve their ability to crowd in the private sector by sharing risk and building the pipeline of opportunities.

    And there’s a really interesting aspect to this, which is that the private sector seems to overestimate the risk of investments in developing countries, because last week the MDBs published data on their investments, and that shows the returns, not just the risks, that investors can expect in emerging markets.

    Individually, the MDBs are doing good work, but collectively they can go much further, including by creating asset classes that attract far greater volumes of capital, and by deepening domestic capital markets. So that’s something about the private capital and the difference it can make.

    Third, I want to make a point about resilience, because we can make headway on fiscal space, and we can make headway on investment, and yet still see gains wiped out by repeated climate shocks and natural disasters.

    And this is something that we cannot ignore. Maybe it could have been ignored 20 years ago, but it can’t be ignored in the world we live in in 2026.

    Extreme heat, floods, droughts, hurricanes, and wildfires. You all know it in the audience, destroying livelihoods, displacing populations.

    I’m doing an event tomorrow with the Nepalese finance minister, precisely about this question, and we know what happened in Nepal only very recently.

    Now, of course we need to carry on our work to reduce emissions. But, and it’s really important to say this: adaptation and resilience on its own can’t address this problem if we don’t address mitigation and emissions. But we also know that many climate change effects are already locked in, so we need a fundamental shift from financing disaster response after the fact to investing in preparedness and resilience before the crisis hits.

    And we have to make resilience central to creating a financial system that works for all.

    That means better data, better early warning, and better infrastructure that can withstand or recover quickly from shocks.  But – and this is the key point I want to make – we also need finance teed up in advance of crises, so that governments get rapid support. Currently, only 2% of crisis finance is prearranged, despite, and you might think, well, how can it be pre-arranged, despite 35% of shocks being predictable.

    Time is of the essence to save lives, limit costs, and limit damage. And we know that pre-arranged finance, including insurance, works. It enabled rapid payouts of over $600 million to help Jamaica get back on its feet after Hurricane Melissa. It paid out drought insurance in Ethiopia, Kenya, and Somalia. We need to make these approaches the norm.

    And we need much stronger private sector take-up of so-called pause clauses to countries hit by major shocks to defer debt payments.

    The last point I want to make is on fragile states. This is gloomy, I’m afraid.

    This decade could be the first in more than a generation without meaningful progress in reducing extreme poverty, which blights the life chances of over 800 million people.

    Previously, ending extreme poverty was not simply a phrase; it was within reach. But that progress has not only stalled; it is being reversed. And this picture is inextricably linked to conflict and fragility, countries where power politics work directly against development and where the consequences of instability transcend borders and cross continents. Places like Sudan and Afghanistan, where we must confront the drivers of conflict and target our efforts accordingly, including working with women and girls who so often pay the heaviest price.

    Now, the reason I make this point is we can’t simply say that because a government is failing its people, we will do so as well. So, I welcome the World Bank’s new strategy for improving its work in these difficult contexts and urge it to be fully implemented. But the entire international system needs to change in relation to fragility. The MDBs, IMF, and UN should work together from the outset in ways that build on local leadership. And the MDBs must take action to end the wasteful duplication of their processes.

    Every unnecessary delay means jobs not created, schools not rebuilt, and communities left vulnerable.

    So this is just a summary of some of the ideas we have for our G20 presidency. We want to see action on debt, private sector mobilisation, resilience, and on fragile states. And this is work I will take forward with my colleague and friend, the Chancellor John Healey.

    I think it’s important also, though, to acknowledge that we can only shape our ideas with you in this room, with partners across the Global south, and with others, including civil society and others, mobilising for change. I’m not one of those politicians who believes that politics should be left to politicians. Politics is about everybody. It’s about popular movements. It’s about campaigners. It’s about policy advocates. It’s about the whole range of civil society.

    Let me then end finally, though, with this thought.

    So I said earlier that there was a perfect storm of challenges facing the world, the biggest set of challenges since 1945. But in case we are daunted by the challenges, I think we should think of the spirit of that generation that rebuilt the world anew after 1945.

    My parents were part of that generation. They were refugees from the Nazis. They saw the world rebuilt after World War II, the UN, the Bretton Woods institutions, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. All of those had their flaws, but I make this point because I think I think it’s so important for us to remember as we face these challenges in our generation. That generation faced absolutely enormous challenges, but they didn’t lower their sights; they raised them.

    They raised their sights, and they built the world anew, as I said. And I think what’s so important in the era that we live in, and I think our prime minister is a fantastic exemplar of this, is this same spirit of boldness should call us today, in this generation, to build the world anew and to defend our values of solidarity, justice, and equality.

    And together, Global South and Global North. We should all take that spirit forward in the work we do in the months and years ahead. And on behalf of the UK Government, I pledge that we will play our part, working with others in that spirit. Thank you so much, everybody.

  • NEWS STORY : Musk says US controls Starshield restrictions as Ukraine reports disruption to drone missions

    NEWS STORY : Musk says US controls Starshield restrictions as Ukraine reports disruption to drone missions

    STORY

    Elon Musk has said the US Government controls restrictions on SpaceX’s military satellite service after Ukrainian officials reported disruption to drone operations. Writing on X, Musk said limits on the speed or use of Starshield were determined by the US military and ultimately President Donald Trump. He distinguished the system from commercial Starlink, which he said was restricted to civilian or defensive activities.

    Ukrainian presidential adviser Serhiy Beskrestnov said military terminals had unexpectedly lost connectivity when travelling above approximately 100mph, disrupting several missions without prior warning. Ukraine’s 7th Rapid Reaction Corps said some connections had dropped for between ten and twenty seconds at lower speeds, making drones harder to control and forcing the cancellation of operations. The restrictions concerned the movement of terminals, rather than the speed of internet downloads.

    Ukrainian officials reported that connectivity had subsequently improved, but called for the remaining limits to be removed. The disruption has raised questions about responsibility for restrictions on a service used for battlefield communications and drone operations. Musk’s statement attributed control of Starshield to Washington, but did not establish who authorised the reported changes or why they were introduced.

  • NEWS STORY : Laura Johnson leaves Barnet housing role after backlash over Grenfell inquiry findings

    NEWS STORY : Laura Johnson leaves Barnet housing role after backlash over Grenfell inquiry findings

    STORY

    Laura Johnson, the former Kensington and Chelsea housing director criticised by the Grenfell Tower Inquiry, has left her senior role at the Barnet Group following objections from bereaved families and survivors. The organisation confirmed she was no longer employed but declined to explain the circumstances, citing confidentiality. Johnson had been appointed permanently as director of development and property earlier this year.

    Johnson was director of housing at Kensington and Chelsea Council when the Grenfell Tower fire killed 72 people in June 2017. The inquiry found she had pressed for the refurbishment contract to be retendered because of its cost. The contractor subsequently selected replaced metal cladding with combustible panels. The inquiry also criticised her decision to slow the installation of fire door closing mechanisms for financial and practical reasons, despite fire brigade warnings.

    Barnet Council had previously defended her appointment, saying a competitive recruitment process identified her as the strongest candidate. It also credited her contribution to improvements recognised by the social housing regulator. Grenfell survivors and bereaved relatives challenged the decision, arguing that the inquiry’s findings made a senior housing appointment inappropriate. The precise reason for Johnson’s departure has not been disclosed.

  • PRESS RELEASE : Migrants exploiting human rights laws targeted in fresh reforms [October 2026]

    PRESS RELEASE : Migrants exploiting human rights laws targeted in fresh reforms [October 2026]

    The press release issued by the Home Office on 12 October 2026.

    Government tables 2 amendments to the Immigration and Asylum Bill as part of a wider package of reforms.

    Migrants who misrepresent their family circumstances or make last-minute asylum claims will face tougher rules under new measures to prevent abuse of the system.  

    The government has tabled amendments to the Immigration and Asylum Bill to close Article 8 loopholes and crack down on individuals who lodge last-minute asylum claims.  

    The Home Secretary is determined to stop foreign criminals and other migrants abusing human rights laws to dodge deportation from the UK.   

    New reforms will mean that courts will have to consider how long and how often a parent has been in contact with their child when considering if family life exists. 

    This follows the bill defining ‘family life’ as typically restricted to core, co-habiting family relationships. This week’s amendments aim to strengthen the rules further, preventing migrants from bolstering their Article 8 claims by moving back into the family home shortly before making a claim. 

    New rules will also be introduced to enable immigration claims made at the last-minute without good reason to damage a person’s credibility, with decision-makers required to factor in the timing of evidence when considering claims. 

    This will build on measures in the Immigration and Asylum Bill to introduce an expedited decision-making process for late claims, helping to address the issue of individuals withholding information or raising a last minute claim which severely delays their legitimate removal from the UK. 

    Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood said: 

    The British public must trust that their immigration system is secure, controlled and not open to abuse. 

    These reforms will protect its integrity, prevent exploitation and ensure that those with no right to be here are swiftly removed. 

    This builds on our work to ramp up removals and slash asylum costs, while providing sanctuary to those who need it.

    The bill passed its second reading in the House of Commons with a majority of 174 in July. 

    It will establish a mechanism to require asylum seekers receiving taxpayer-funded accommodation and other support to contribute to those costs when they are financially able to do so. 

    The payment will take the form of a flat-rate charge, with eligible adults making regular payments above a threshold set by the Home Secretary.  

    An Independent Immigration Appeals Authority (IIAA) will also be set up to deliver a swift and fair appeals system that restores public confidence. It can scale to meet changing demand and ensure cases flow through quickly to removal where appeals are unsuccessful. 

    As part of this, a single appeal route process will be established to ensure there is no advantage to bringing forward new claims to frustrate the system.   

    A single definition of a protection claim will also be introduced, combining refugee status and humanitarian protection, thereby simplifying the decision-making and the appeals process. 

    The bill will enter the line-by-line scrutiny stage of its progression through Parliament next week.

  • NEWS STORY : Andy Burnham says Russia interfered in Brexit referendum

    NEWS STORY : Andy Burnham says Russia interfered in Brexit referendum

    STORY

    Prime Minister Andy Burnham has said he received confirmation of Russian interference in the 2016 Brexit referendum after entering Downing Street. Speaking on The Rest Is Politics podcast, he said he had asked about Moscow’s involvement and received a clear affirmative answer. He argued that publicly acknowledging foreign interference was important because other European democracies faced similar threats.

    Burnham did not disclose the evidence behind the assessment or explain how Russia had interfered. His remarks did not establish whether Russian activity changed the referendum result. Russia has consistently denied interfering in foreign elections and referendums, while its embassy had not immediately responded to the latest comments, according to Reuters.

    The comments follow longstanding criticism of the British Government’s handling of the issue. Parliament’s Intelligence and Security Committee concluded in 2020 that ministers had failed to assess fully the potential impact of Russian state media and online accounts on the referendum. Burnham also warned about Russian disinformation in Germany and said he had discussed possible links between Moscow and the Alternative for Germany party with Chancellor Friedrich Merz.

  • NEWS STORY : Four receive custodial sentences totalling 36 years for raping teenage girl in Bristol

    NEWS STORY : Four receive custodial sentences totalling 36 years for raping teenage girl in Bristol

    STORY

    Three men and a teenage boy have received custodial sentences totalling 36 years after being convicted of raping a teenage girl in Bristol. At Bristol Crown Court on 6 October, Mehrab Safi, 21, received 15 years in prison, while Salman Habibkheil, 19, and Awal Ahmadzai, 19, each received nine years’ detention. A 17-year-old boy, who cannot be identified because of his age, received three years’ detention.

    Safi and Habibkheil arranged for the girl to travel to Bristol before the four defendants gave her alcohol and attacked her. Officers found her at Safi’s home after her mother reported her missing. The boy was arrested there, while the three men fled to France before being returned to the UK. All four denied the offences but were convicted following a trial. Safi and Habibkheil were also convicted of arranging travel for exploitation, and Ahmadzai of sexual assault.

    In a statement read to the court, the victim described anxiety and withdrawal from everyday life. Judge Cullum said the defendants had deliberately increased her vulnerability with alcohol. Police praised her courage and confirmed that specialist support would remain available.

  • NEWS STORY : Government launches flood advice website and sets protection target for 200,000 properties

    NEWS STORY : Government launches flood advice website and sets protection target for 200,000 properties

    STORY

    The Government has launched a new flood advice website to help households in England check their flood risk and prepare for severe weather. Announced on 12 October to mark the start of Flood Action Week, Flood Action Online brings together guidance on flood warnings, Met Office weather alerts and practical measures to improve the resilience of homes.

    The launch accompanies a target to improve flood protection for 200,000 properties through £4.2 billion of investment between April 2026 and March 2029. Funding will support repairs and replacement of existing defences alongside new construction. The Government estimates that the programme will deliver £27.9 billion in economic benefits through avoided damage, and has set a target for 93.5% of flood defence assets to meet their required condition by March 2029.

    Floods Minister Emma Hardy urged people to check their risk, prepare a flood plan and follow warnings. The announcement comes as the new Flood and Drought Resilience Taskforce prepares for its first meeting this week. The Environment Agency said its emergency response resources include 260 mobile pumps, 25 kilometres of temporary barriers and 600 people on call at any one time.