Westminster’s Treasury Committee is asking for evidence as it examines whether rules are needed to govern the acceptance of physical cash in the UK, ahead of public sessions which could begin in December.
Though the use of cash has declined over recent years, it remains a vital resource to many, with around 3.1 million people in the UK relying almost entirely on cash as a form of payment. Research indicates that the use of cash can provide a vital lifeline to groups such as those with long term poor health or people at risk of economic abuse.
The Bank of England has noted that the decline in cash usage is increasing the infrastructure costs of retaining physical cash as a viable payment method, which could lead to disruption for businesses and consumers.
Others have highlighted the dangers of an overreliance on digital payments, suggesting cash acceptance should be viewed as a form of civil preparedness. There are currently no regulations which require businesses to accept cash.
Evidence submitted to the Committee should seek to answer one or more of the following questions:
What is the current state of, and recent trends in, physical cash acceptance in the UK? Any forecasts on physical cash acceptance would be welcome.
Are there groups in society which disproportionately rely on businesses and public services accepting physical cash?
What challenges do they face?
Should the Government require parts of the economy to always accept physical cash?
Are there individual sectors of the economy where physical cash acceptance is particularly important, and should be protected?
What are the practical challenges that businesses might face from having to always accept physical cash?
How do these challenges differ between large and small businesses?
What would the costs to private firms and the public sector be from any imposed requirements to always accept physical cash?
How might any requirement for certain firms and public services to always accept physical cash affect financial services firms, especially those related to the provision of physical cash?
Are there any other areas or particular sectors where a decline in cash acceptance would cause problems?
Running alongside the select committee elections, Bob Blackman MP was the sole nomination received for the Chair of the Backbench Business Committee and has been declared Chair.
The new chairs will take up their positions when the remaining members of the committee have been appointed by the House.
Labour MP for Edinburgh South West, Dr Scott Arthur, has a golden opportunity to introduce a crucial new law to tackle the climate and ecological emergency – the Climate and Nature Bill – following his success in the Private Members’ Bill ballot at Westminster.
Local residentNaomi Schoglerwelcomed Dr Scott Arthur MP’s success in the 2024 Private Members’ Bill ballot:“We’re delighted that Dr Scott Arthur, our local Labour MP – someone who’s spent their life working on climate and nature solutions – can now make his Climate and Nature Bill a reality.
“Given that Dr Arthur has spent his working life focussing on the use of nature-based solutions to mitigate climate-induced flooding—now that he’s won the ‘MP’s lottery’—we’re absolutely delighted that Scott will become the hero we need. The person who will ensure that the UK Government has a serious, science-led plan—to get to the root causes of the climate-nature crisis—via the CAN Bill.
“Scott’s leadership of the CAN Bill campaign fills me, and many, many other local voters, with hope. At last, we will have a law that means we end fossil fuel production and all the damage that comes with it. That we end the pollution of our waterways, rivers and seas. That we restore our damaged countryside and protect our wildlife. That we bring about a truly just transition to a fairer, greener, future.
“It’s not often that a backbench MP like Scott gets to change the law of the country. Now, Dr Scott Arthur can do just that: he can change history. Thank goodness Scott topped the Private Members’ Bill ballot.”
Thursday’s ballot, which 458 MPs entered, saw 20 MPs’ names drawn, enabling them to introduce their own bills in the House of Commons.
Private members’ bills are public bills brought forward by MPs who are not Government Ministers. A ballot takes place at the start of every parliamentary session to determine who will be able to do so.
20 MPs’ names were chosen at random from the ballot, with Edinburgh South West’s Labour MP—Dr Scott Arthur—drawn in the sixth position.
This means the bill Dr Arthur introduces has one of the strongest chances of making progress in Parliament. Thirteen Fridays in each parliamentary session allocated to debating these bills, and Scott Arthur’s bill—as his name was drawn in the top seven of the ballot—is guaranteed a full day’s debate.
The Climate and Nature Bill, if passed, would require the Government to deliver a joined-up strategy to tackle the intertwined climate and ecological emergency.
This means integrating existing, siloed climate and biodiversity plans—and aligning the Government’s targets with the UK’s international commitments to (1) limit global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, and (2) halt and reverse nature loss by 2030. Neither of these essential targets are currently locked in UK law.
Foreign Secretary David Lammy yesterday gave a statement to the House of Commons on UK policy on arms export licenses to Israel:
With permission, Mr Speaker, I will make a statement on the Middle East.
On taking office, in July, I told this House that this government’s priority in the region would be to advance the cause of peace.
This continues to be our mission, on every front.
In Israel, in the West Bank, in Lebanon, in the Red Sea, and of course in Gaza, where we need an immediate ceasefire, the protection of civilians, the immediate release of all hostages, and more aid getting into Gaza.
Over the summer, we were faced with the prospect of full-scale war breaking out between Lebanese Hizballah and Israel.
On each of the three visits I have made to the region, including alongside my Right Honourable Friend the Defence Secretary and my most recent joint visit with the French Foreign Minister, I have urged Lebanese Hizballah, the Lebanese government, and Israel to engage with the US-led discussions to resolve their disagreements diplomatically and to reach a peaceful solution through the implementation of UN Security Council resolution 1701.
As we continue to work with our allies and partners to push for a diplomatic solution we nonetheless stand ready for the worst-case scenario including the potential evacuation of British nationals. And our message to those still in Lebanon remains clear: leave now.
Mr Speaker, our common goal of peace in the Middle East will never be lasting until there is safety, security, and sovereignty for both Israel and a Palestinian state.
We must all keep at the forefront of our minds the pain, anguish, and horror this conflict has caused for so many ordinary civilians.
The victims of the October the seventh atrocity. the hostages and all those still enduring unimaginable suffering, whether they are hoping to see their loved ones again…or mourning their loss, as the tragic events of this weekend illustrate, as the bodies of six murdered hostages were recovered.
The Israeli people still living under rocket fire not only from Hamas but from other hostile actors explicitly dedicated to Israel’s annihilation, fighting an enemy in Hamas whose appalling tactics endanger countless civilian lives.
And the innocent Palestinians, tens of thousands killed in the fighting – their numbers growing by the day, including distressing numbers of women and children, many mothers so malnourished they cannot produce milk for their babies,families struggling to keep their children alive, disease and famine looming ever larger.
Heroic humanitarians putting their lives on the line to help others, like the brave aid workers I met from United Nations agencies,and from the Palestine Red Crescent Society warehouse I visited alongside France’s Foreign Minister last month.
Indeed, last Thursday, the UK led a session at the UN Security Council, encouraging a continued global focus on the protection of civilians in Gaza, including the need for action on polio.
And now, deeply worrying escalation in the West Bank as well as in Gaza with many communities facing rising settler violence amid an ongoing occupation.
And so many on either side of this terrible conflict convinced that the world does not grasp the reality of Israel’s predicament or the depth of Palestinian suffering.
Throughout my life, I have been a friend of Israel – a liberal, progressive Zionist, who believes in Israel as a democratic state and homeland for the Jewish people which has both the right to exist and defend itself but I believe also that Israel will only exist in safety and security if there is a two-state solution that guarantees the rights of all Israel’s Israeli citizens and of their Palestinian neighbours who have their own inalienable right to self-determination and security.
Mr Speaker, as concern at the horrifying scenes in Gaza has risen. many in this House as well as esteemed lawyers and international organisations have raised British arms export licensing to Israel.
After raising my own concerns from opposition, on taking office, I immediately sought an up-to-date the review. And on my first appearance as Foreign Secretary in this House …I committed to sharing the review’s conclusions.
We have rigorously followed every stage of the process which the previous Conservative government established. Let me first be clear on this Review’s scope.
This Government is not an international court. We have not – and could not – arbitrate on whether or not Israel has breached international humanitarian law.
This is a forward-looking evaluation, not a determination of innocence or guilt. And it does not prejudge any future determinations by the competent courts. But facing a conflict such as this, it is this Government’s legal duty to review export licences.
Criterion 2C of the Strategic Export Licensing Criteria states that the Government will “not issue export licences if there is a clear risk that the items might be used to commit or facilitate serious violations of international humanitarian law”.
It is with regret that I inform the House today, the assessment I have received leaves me unable to conclude anything other than that for certain UK arms exports to Israel there does exist a clear risk that they might be used to commit or facilitate a serious violation of international humanitarian law.
I have informed my Right Honourable Friend, the Business and Trade Secretary. And he is therefore today announcing the suspension of around 30, from a total of approximately 350 to Israel, as required under the Export Controls Act.
These include equipment that we assess is for use in the current conflict in Gaza, such as important components which go into military aircraft, including fighter aircraft, helicopters and drones, as well as items which facilitate ground targeting.
And For transparency, this government is publishing a summary of our assessment.
Today, I want to underline four points about these decisions.
First, Israel’s actions in Gaza continue to lead to immense loss of civilian life, widespread destruction to civilian infrastructure, and immense suffering.
In many cases, it has not been possible to reach a determinative conclusion on allegations regarding Israel’s conduct of hostilities, in part, because there is insufficient information either from Israel, …or other reliable sources to verify such claims.
Nevertheless, it is the assessment of His Majesty’s Government, that Israel could reasonably do much more to ensure lifesaving food and medical supplies reach civilians in Gaza – in light of the appalling humanitarian situation.
And this government is also deeply concerned by credible claims of mistreatment of detainees which the International Committee of the Red Cross cannot investigate after being denied access to places of detention.
Both my predecessor and all our major allies have repeatedly and forcefully raised these concerns with the Israeli government. Regrettably, they have not been addressed satisfactorily.
Second, there can be no doubt that Hamas pays not the slightest heed to international humanitarian law and endangers civilians by embedding itself in the tightly concentrated civilian population and in civilian infrastructure.
There is no equivalence between Hamas terrorists and Israel’s democratic government – or indeed, Iran and their partners and proxies.
But to licence arms exports to Israel, we must assess their compliance with international humanitarian law notwithstanding the abhorrence of their opponents’ tactics and ideology.
Third, this is not a blanket ban. This is not an arms embargo. It targets around 30 approximately of 350 licenses to Israel in total for items which could be used in the current conflict in Gaza.
The rest will continue.
Neither will the action we are taking have a material impact on Israel’s security.
This suspension only covers items which might be used in the current conflict. There are a number of export licences which we have assessed are not for military use in the current conflict and therefore do not require suspension.
These include items that are not being used by the Israel Defence Forces in the current conflict, such as trainee aircraft or other naval equipment.
These also include export licences for civilian use – covering a range of products such as food-testing chemicals, telecoms, and data equipment.
Nor will it prejudge the international collaboration, global F-35 programme that supplies aircraft for more than twenty countries – and that is crucial to wider peace and security.
Indeed, the effects of suspending all licences for the F-35 programme would undermine the global F35 supply chain that is vital for the security of the UK, our allies, and NATO.
Therefore, the Business and Trade Secretary has exempted these licences from his decision.
Fourth, the Government will keep our position under review.
Commitment to comply with international humanitarian law is not the only criterion in making export licensing decisions.
We will continue to work with our allies to improve the situation. And foreign policy of course involves tough choices.
But I will always seek to take such decisions in line with our principles – and I will keep this the House updated, in line with my previous commitment.
Mr Speaker, we do not take this decision lightly, but we note that on previous occasions Ministers from all sides of this House – Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrat – chose not to licence exports to Israel.
In 1982, Margaret Thatcher imposed an arms embargo and oil embargo on Israel as they fought in Lebanon. onflicts in Gaza prompted Gordon Brown to suspend five licences in 2009 and Vince Cable chose not to issue new licences while conducting a review in 2014.
Like them, this government takes seriously its role in applying export licensing law reflecting the published criteria and the specific circumstances.
But let me leave this House in no doubt. The UK continues to support Israel’s right to self-defence in accordance with international law.
In April, British fighter jets intercepted Iranian missiles aimed at Israel, preventing significant loss of civilian life.
We supported robust action against the Iranian backed Houthis in Yemen, who have attacked Israel directly as well as Israeli-linked shipping.
And Iran should be in no doubt of our commitment to challenge their reckless and destabilizing activity, in the region and across the world.
We will continue to work hand-in-glove with our international partners, to stand up to Iranian aggression and malign activity – wherever it is find and whenever we see it.
We continue to hold Iran to account – including though extensive use of sanctions. And today, we are doing so again.
We are announcing new sanctions on four IRGC-Quds Force targets who have a role in supporting Iranian proxy actions in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon.
Through the UK’s dedicated Iran sanctions regime we have sanctioned over 400 Iranian individuals and entities.
And through our work with partners, we are exposing and containing Iran’s destabilizing weapons development, where soon, we will be introducing further regulations to bolster existing bans on the export of goods and technology significant to Iran’s production of drones and missiles.
So let me be clear – we will continue to work with Israel and our partners to tackle the threat from Iran across the region.
This government will continue to stand for Israel’s security. And we will always do so in a manner consistent with our obligations to domestic and international law.
Mr Speaker, I commend this statement to the House.
The Board of Deputies of British Jews commented last night:
Current policies to reduce fuel poverty have not continued a downward trajectory in fuel poor households.
In addition, the Low Income, Low Energy Efficiency (LILEE) metric should be reviewed as it no longer captures the full range of households facing unaffordable bills.
In 2023, there were an estimated 13.0% of households (3.17 million) in fuel poverty in England under the Low Income Low Energy Efficiency metric, effectively unchanged from 13.1% in 2022 (3.18 million).
Committee Chair, Rt Hon Caroline Flint said: “Governments from 2010 onwards saw levels of fuel poverty in England falling steadily for almost a decade – a reduction of 40%, only to be followed by 5 years from 2019 to 2024 where fuel poverty did not fall to any meaningful extent.
“There has been a stalling of progress – fuel poverty has flatlined. I don’t think any government anticipated this. Perhaps the stable energy prices for most of the 2010s created an optimism that fuel poverty would continue to fall for years to come. That optimism was misplaced.
“Last year, the Committee hoped that with the pandemic behind us, energy efficiency programmes would step up and progress would continue – even if the government’s milestones were at risk of being missed. Now, it seems the pandemic – when so much stopped – obscured the lack of progress being made.
“This report is not defeatist. The Committee believes fuel poverty can be beaten. But for too many low-income households, the unaffordability of bills, especially in the coldest months, is all too real. We foresee that targeted financial support, possibly including the use of social tariffs, for vulnerable and low-income households may be needed for some years to come.”
Measuring fuel poverty
The report states that ‘the increase in the amount added to the standing charge element of energy bills, a flat-rate charge incurred by even households with the lowest usage, is regressive in nature.’ Based on current energy price levels, targeted support to the fuel poor will remain important, and necessary, for the foreseeable future.
Nor can fuel poverty be separated from the experience of many households who are struggling to afford their bills or are at risk of getting into energy debt. The report urges a future fuel poverty strategy to include ‘a guarantee of affordable energy for all’ and consideration should be given to low-income households who may not be in receipt of state benefits.
This includes reviewing the Low Income Low Energy Efficiency metric, the current metric used to measure fuel poverty in England, which is based on a combination of household income, energy requirements and energy prices.
Fabric first
The Committee also states that ’effectively targeted energy efficiency programmes are central to reducing fuel poverty’ and notes that the shift away from a ‘fabric first’ approach to improving household energy efficiency since 2022 has proved less effective at making homes substantially warmer.
The report argues that ‘tackling fuel poverty among fuel poor households requires a fabric first insulation approach, completing these programmes for all fuel poor and vulnerable households, before resources are directed at the incorporation of low-carbon heating systems into those properties.’
Groups most at risk
The government has committed in their manifesto to ensure homes in the private rented sector meet minimum energy efficiency standards by 2030.
The Committee warns that failing ‘to make rapid progress in the private rented sector on energy efficiency will fundamentally undermine any government strategy to end fuel poverty.’
Those living in the Private Rented Sector (PRS), ethnic minority households, and households using prepayment meters (PPMs) are all identified as most at risk of not being able to afford energy and living in a cold home.
Moreover, over 900,000 households with one or more children are in fuel poverty. Any strategy to tackle fuel poverty must be aligned to wider policies with similar end goals, such as those to eliminate child poverty.
The need for better evidence, data sharing and targeting
The Committee also advocates further research into the impact on low-income households, as well as the prevalence of fuel poverty amongst ethnic minority households. The Committee also sees better targeting and, in particular, data sharing, as key to being able to tackle fuel poverty in future.
Chair, Rt Hon Caroline Flint, said: “Our report exposes hidden aspects of fuel poverty: like very high concentrations of ethnic minority households in fuel poverty in some of our large towns and cities; like the lack of progress in the low-cost private rented sector, where too many people are still living in cold homes.
“This report argues that the Fuel Poverty Strategy requires a reset, a refresh and a new focus, to continue to bear down on a problem which too many low-income households endure year on year. The Committee hopes to see a renewed drive to improve the fabric of our coldest homes – a fabric first approach.
“Energy prices remain about £700 above pre-pandemic levels – and are rising this winter – this poses a serious challenge. But the cheapest energy of all is the energy never used because a house retains its heat and stays warm in winter.”
The Speaker of the House, Sir Lindsay Hoyle MP, has set out the timetable for the election of chairs of select committees following the General Election on 4 July 2024.
Since 2010, most committee chairs have been elected by the whole House by secret ballot using the alternative vote system, under which MPs rank candidates in order of preference.
The period of nominations will run until 4pm on Monday 9 September, with the ballot scheduled for Wednesday 11 September.
How do Chair elections work?
The Speaker’s announcement follows the allocation of particular committee chairs to political parties, agreed by the House on 30 July. The number of chairs allotted to each party relates to their strength in the House of Commons. The chairs of the Committee of Public Accounts and the Committee on Standards are required to be from the Official Opposition.
The rules for the election of chairs of select committees are set out in Standing Order No. 122B. The Chair of the Backbench Business Committee will also be elected at this time although this takes place under a different Standing Order, No. 122D. The chair of the Backbench Business Committee must be elected from a party which is not represented in the Government.
Which committees are electing a Chair?
Select committees appointed under Standing Order No. 152 (Select committees related to government departments) and their allocation:
Business and Trade (Labour)
Culture, Media and Sport (Conservative)
Defence (Labour)
Education (Labour)
Energy Security and Net Zero (Labour)
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Liberal Democrat)
Foreign Affairs (Labour)
Health and Social Care (Liberal Democrat)
Home Affairs (Conservative)
Housing, Communities and Local Government (Labour)
International Development (Labour)
Justice (Labour)
Northern Ireland Affairs (Labour)
Science, Innovation and Technology (Labour)
Scottish Affairs (Labour)
Transport (Labour)
Treasury (Labour)
Welsh Affairs (Labour)
Women and Equalities (Labour)
Work and Pensions (Labour)
Other specified select committees:
Environmental Audit (Labour)
Petitions (Liberal Democrat)
Procedure (Labour)
Public Accounts (Conservative)
Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs (Conservative)
Starmer prepares for The King’s Speech at the State Opening of Parliament on Wednesday 17 July
New laws will prioritise growth, the Government’s overarching mission for the year ahead
Legislative programme will support delivery of the Government’s first steps and missions to rebuild Britain
Focus on improving the prosperity of the country and living standards of working people
The Government will use its mandate for change to put economic growth at the heart of its legislative agenda as it prepares for The King’s Speech at the State Opening of Parliament on Wednesday (17 July).
Departments are working on more than 35 bills to deliver an ambitious parliamentary session that will be built on a bedrock of economic security, to enable growth that will improve the prosperity of our country and the living standards of working people.
Legislation will include a bill to enforce tough new spending rules, designed to ensure economic growth, while avoiding the chaos which left families with spiralling bills and wreaked misery on people’s lives.
To ensure nobody can play fast and loose with the public finances ever again, this new bill will strengthen the role of the Office of Budget Responsibility, meaning significant fiscal announcements must be properly scrutinised and that taxpayers’ money is respected.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer said: “Our work is urgent. There is no time to waste. We are hitting the ground running by bringing forward the laws we will need to rebuild our country for the long-term – and our ambitious, fully costed agenda is the downpayment on that change.
“From energy, to planning, to unbreakable fiscal rules, my government is serious about delivering the stability that is going to turbo charge growth that will create wealth in every corner of the UK.
“The task of national renewal will not be easy, and this is just the down payment on our plans for the next five years, but the legislation set out at the King’s Speech will build on the momentum of our first days in office and make a difference to the lives of working people.”
‘His Majesty’s Most Gracious Speech’ will build on the momentum of the Government’s first week in office which saw the Prime Minister and his ministerial team roll up their sleeves and get to work.
Legislation to enact announcements made this week, including the launch of a National Wealth Fund to drive investment into the UK, to a new Mission Control tasked with turbocharging UK to clean power by 2030, to opening the recruitment of a new border security command, show that the Government is getting on with the job.
The package of bills will focus on growing the economy through ‘turbocharging’ building of houses and infrastructure, better transport, more jobs and securing clean energy – helping to make every part of the country better off.
As part of the Government’s plans to empower regions to deliver change for their communities, new legislation will also help to create wealth in every community and hand the power back to local leaders who know what is best for their areas.
The report finds that, despite the Home Office committing significant sums of money to the Rwanda partnership and its large accommodation sites, there is little to show for the money spent so far.
Questions also remain as to what will happen to the more than 50,000 people left in limbo by the system – people who are living in the UK, with no ability to claim asylum, who are officially “pending relocation”.
On asylum accommodation, the report welcomes Government’s progress in closing asylum hotels in communities.
However, the report finds the Home Office’s assessment of the requirements for setting up alternative accommodation in large sites fell woefully short of reality and risked wasting taxpayers’ money, while the new sites will not house anywhere near as many people as initially expected, exacerbating existing accommodation issues.
A new levy on arena and stadium tickets and a cut in VAT are urgently needed to support grassroots music venues across the country as they struggle to cope with a crisis of closures and soaring costs, says a Westminster committee.
The recommendations are in a report from the cross-party Culture, Media and Sport Committee, which highlights how small local venues integral to the pipeline of professional creative and technical music talent are stopping performances or closing entirely at a rate of two per week.
The Committee also heard about how artists are facing a “cost of touring crisis”, while promoters are struggling to get shows off their spreadsheets and into venues.
On top of immediate financial help through a levy-funded support fund and a targeted temporary VAT cut to help stem the tide of closures, the report says a comprehensive fan-led review of live and electronic music should be set up this summer to examine the long-term challenges to the wider live music ecosystem.
The Committee inquiry, launched at the Music Venue Trust’s Venues Day in October 2023, heard from across the sector1 of the scale of the crisis facing venues and the impact this is having on artists and all those that rely on them for business.
The MVT described 2023 as the most challenging year for the sector since the trust was founded in 2014, while Creative UK said the grassroots music sector took a ‘battering’.
In total the number of GMVs declined from 960 to 835 last year, a net decrease of 13%, representing a loss of as many as 30,000 shows and 4,000 jobs.
The report says that given the urgency of the crisis, a voluntary levy on arena and stadium concert tickets would be the most feasible way to have an immediate impact, creating a support fund for venues, artists and promoters administered by a trust led by a sector umbrella body.
The Committee also calls for the industry to ensure the levy cost is not passed on to music fans. If there is no agreement by September or if it fails to collect enough income to support the sector, the Government should step in an introduce a statutory levy, the report adds.
On VAT relief, the Committee calls for a temporary cut based on venue capacity, with the Government undertaking analysis to assess the impact to inform future decisions.
Dame Caroline Dinenage MP, Chair of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee, said: “We are grateful to the many dedicated local venues who gave up their time to take part in our inquiry. They delivered the message loud and clear that grassroots music venues are in crisis.
“The ongoing wave of closures is not just a disaster for music, performers and supporters in local communities up and down the country, but also puts at risk the entire live music ecosystem. If the grassroots, where musicians, technicians, tour managers and promoters hone their craft, are allowed to wither and die, the UK’s position as a music powerhouse faces a bleak future.
“To stem the overwhelming ongoing tide of closures, we urgently need a levy on arena and stadium concert tickets to fund financial support for the sector, alongside a VAT cut to help get more shows into venues.
“While the current focus is on the many grassroots music venues falling silent, those working in the live music sector across the board are also under extraordinary strain. It is time that the Government brought together everyone with a stake in the industry’s success, including music fans, to address the long-term challenges and ensure live music can thrive into the future.”
Among the report’s other recommendations are for the Government and Arts Council to make it easier for the live music sector to apply for public funding and for stakeholders across the industry to continue to support the Featured Artists’ Coalition’s campaign to end punitive fees on artists’ merchandise.
How should the UK Government tackle the security threats posed by climate change?
Today the Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) has launched a new inquiry, ‘Climate change and security’. The inquiry will explore the UK Government’s approach to anticipating, preventing and responding to the threats climate change poses to national security.
The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warned in 2021 that the global threat level posed by climate change was “a code red for humanity”. Climate change is a major source of global instability, causing and heightening tensions, prolonging conflicts, and polarising nations.
Extreme weather caused by climate change can generate insecurity in food, water and housing, potentially leading to mass displacement within and across borders. It can also threaten physical infrastructure, from naval bases to transport hubs.
EAC is keen to explore the scale of the challenge that climate change poses to UK security. It is likely to consider how climate change will affect the UK’s national security, including access to natural resources and how the UK should respond to extreme weather events, as well as how the risks to the UK compare to those facing other countries.
The Committee will also consider possible solutions. Members will consider whether the Government’s current plans do enough to mitigate the dangers of insecurity caused by climate change.
They will also consider how the UK Government can cultivate cooperation on climate security issues, how funding can be targeted towards adaptation, and the role of technology in addressing potential security issues caused by climate change.
Environmental Audit Committee Chair, Rt Hon Philip Dunne MP, said: “February was the ninth consecutive month that global temperature records were broken; record breaking temperatures are now a regular part of our lives. At the same time, the world is also growing ever more unstable. Regional conflicts are having knock-on effects across the rest of the world.
“Many might not realise that these two trends are deeply linked. Climate change can prolong instability, and in turn, instability can stifle efforts to address climate change.
“In its next inquiry, the Environmental Audit Committee is examining the true extent of the challenge climate change poses to our national security, and how the UK should best respond. I encourage anyone with views or expertise to give evidence.”
The Committee invites written submissions addressing any or all of the issues raised in the following terms of reference, by 17:00 on Monday 29th April 2024:
Understanding the challenge
What challenges to UK national and human security are posed by climate change in the next five, ten, and twenty years? In particular:
What is the relationship between climate change and population growth, and what are the effects of this relationship on displacement and population flows, both within the UK and across borders?
How might climate change and its effects affect the UK’s access to natural resources such as water, food, and energy?
How does climate change affect UK infrastructure and land use, including military assets, in ways that create and exacerbate insecurities?
How well prepared is the UK to respond to extreme weather events, such as wildfires and flooding?
How do the risks to the UK compare to those facing other countries?
Potential solutions
What is the UK Government’s current approach to anticipating, preventing and responding to the threats in part 1? How could that approach be strengthened? In particular:
Which solutions would have the largest impact across the widest range of areas for the UK?
What updates to Government policy and strategy documents, such as the National Adaptation Programme, the Integrated Review of Security, Defence, Development and Foreign Policy, and the Defence Command Paper, would improve the UK’s ability to address the security implications of climate change?
How can the UK Government fully embed mitigation of security risks in its plans to achieve its targets for climate and the environment?
What technological innovations could strengthen the UK Government’s approach to addressing the security implications of climate change?
How best can funding be targeted towards climate adaptation and emergency response solutions?
What more can the UK Government do to encourage global co-operation on climate security issues?
