PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
New Homes (Solar Generation) Bill - 17 January 2025 (Commons/Commons Chamber)

I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.

I move the Bill with sunshine in my heart. I am an environmentalist, I have fought for years to improve the housing market in my town of Cheltenham, and I strongly believe that we all deserve a fairer deal on the cost of living. I was elected in July after campaigning on those three issues, and I move Second Reading of the Bill with those issues in mind. I thank hon. Members who have taken the time to attend today’s debate, and I urge them to retain a sunny disposition for the next few hours. I am happy to take interventions from Members from across the House, but I hope hon. Members will not use them to throw too much shade. I promise a warm response regardless, and I hope the Minister will provide the same.

Today, we can all make a commitment to a brighter future by backing the sunshine Bill. It will be a future in which people have lower household bills; we are less reliant on dirty and expensive fossil fuels, often imported from abroad; and the country’s energy supplies are more secure. This future is a vision supported by voters across political divides, as well as by industry.

Before I get to the core of my speech, I ask hon. Members to think back a few short years, to the start of the energy bills crisis. Householders endured a 54% rise in the energy price cap in April 2022, and bills remain 43% higher than they were before the crisis. That caused widespread fuel poverty. We witnessed another shocking increase in food bank use, businesses went bust, jobs were lost and family holiday plans were cancelled. The crisis also laid bare how short-sighted past ideological decisions were to slow down the roll-out of renewable technologies.

Imagine an alternative. Imagine that more homes included solar power generation during that crisis, and in the ongoing crisis. Bills could and should have been hundreds of pounds lower for everyone; householders would have been insulated against higher bills; and our nation would have been safer and stronger. Food banks would have been less busy, and the Government would not have been forced to give such large subsidies to ensure that people could get by.

At the heart of the discussion is a pressing need to tackle twin crises: the cost of living and climate change. As hon. Members will know, the climate change discussion often leads us to debate difficult trade-offs—the Government are grappling with those and they have my good wishes in doing so—but solar energy generation on new build homes is very much not in that category. The Bill helps us to tackle the cost of living and climate change—a clear win-win.

MCS Foundation research has shown that the payback period for a solar array on a three-bedroom semi-detached house is just four years, when that array is combined with other technologies that will be widely available in the next few years. Over a 25-year mortgage, the savings stand at a whopping £38,000. Solar technology also offers homeowners the chance to profit directly. The Energy Saving Trust estimates that a typical household could make between £270 and £400 a year.

On the environmental side, research by Solar Energy UK shows that buildings accounted for 20% of all UK emissions in 2023. The Government have placed building new homes at the heart of their agenda, which I support.

I genuinely welcome today’s Second Reading of the Bill. Having brought two private Members’ Bills through Parliament from the Back Benches, I wish the hon. Gentleman every success; it can be a long journey. Will he say more about the impact of solar panels on the environment and the green belt? In the shift towards using more solar panels, I fear many of the panels will be installed on prime agricultural land. I am disappointed that in Walsall, the planning inspector has just given permission for a battery storage facility on the edge of my constituency, right by a conservation area. I feel strongly that we need to look at alternative places for solar panels in order to protect communities and our green belt.

The right hon. Lady is entirely right. She and Members across the House will have noted that the Campaign to Protect Rural England has taken a strong interest in this issue and in the Bill, for precisely the reasons she describes, with which I have a lot of sympathy. Efficient use of land and space in this country is extremely important.

If we are to achieve the new home building targets that the Government have set out, we must ensure that new build homes are equipped for the challenges of the future, which include climate change and looking after our environment. If we do not change the standards for new housing stock, we not only miss an economic opportunity but put the environment at risk. The Government’s own advisory body, the Climate Change Committee, has advised that the UK will not meet its emissions targets without the “near complete decarbonisation” of housing stock. That is why it is so important that the new Government, specifically the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, have moved the conversation along, not least as shown by the answer to a question that I asked the right hon. Gentleman before Christmas, in which he said he was “very sympathetic” to the case for mandatory solar panels on new build homes. He is right.

The case for updating the regulations is irrefutable. The regulations that govern building work are set out in the Building Act 1984, which is the year I was born, and the Building Regulations 2010, which is so long ago that Members will be disturbed to learn that I still had a large Brylcreem bill in those days. The previous Government consulted on the future homes standard, but we were not able to respond before the general election. It is heartening that the current Government have promised a response and to pick up that work. There will of course be strong pushback from some developers, who will default to thinking about profit only. I understand that profit motive, but I urge developers to think about the planet and what their customers are demanding.

I am pleased to see the Bill in the House today, but am not quite so entranced by the hon. Member’s puns, or by his making me feel completely and utterly ancient. Setting aside that niggle, on a serious point, does he agree that it is important for us to have a secure supply chain for solar panels, and that we eliminate the use of solar panels built by Uyghur people subject to forced labour in China?

The hon. Member makes a very reasonable point. We need to be clear that our supply chains in this country are free from slave labour. That is a matter for Government procurement rules, and I understand that measures on that will come to the House in due course.

As I was saying, I understand the developers’ motives and why some will push back, but developers know what we all know, which is that the technology already exists and that implementing the measures in the sunshine Bill will be relatively straightforward for them. Solar panel technology has been available for many years and the construction industry is accustomed to working with it. Mandating installation at the construction stage is logical; it removes the burden from homeowners, and places the responsibility with the developer.

I thank my hon. Friend for bringing the Bill to the House. It is so important that it almost feels like a no-brainer. Many of my residents share with me their frustration about trying to navigate the process of installing solar panels. There are questions about which provider to go with, how it works, and all the technical details. Does he agree that not only does the Bill have an environmental benefit, but it will—as he has started to explain—take that burden from residents and empower them? They will benefit from lower bills without all the faff.

My hon. Friend is entirely right. As she knows, the Bill includes a recommendation to set an industry standard, so that consumers can have confidence in what they are buying. Not only is the burden removed from homeowners and responsibility placed with developer, but the Bill creates an efficiency saving in human resources and materials. It is an entirely logical step to take. Installing solar panels on roofs while the houses are being built is at least 10% cheaper than retrofitting.

There will be issues around cost, which Members might raise in interventions or in speeches, but Government estimates put the cost of mandatory solar panels on all new homes at around £5,200 per home. That sounds like a lot of money in isolation, but the average cost of a new build in the final quarter of 2024 was far in excess of £400,000, so we are talking about little more than 1% of the price of a new build home. That is next to nothing in the context of a monthly mortgage repayment, if we take the figure in raw form, and it would be offset by lower bills.

This Bill would mandate that all new homes are built with solar generation technology covering the roof space—a minimum of 40% of the equivalent of the building’s ground-floor area.

I too am interested in solar panels being mandated on public buildings. In my area, Rednock school has had solar panels retrofitted. Solar panels in educational facilities have two effects: they not only save money for the school, but teach young people about the issue. Also in my area, the NHS is looking to put solar panels on all south-facing roofs of hospitals. I wonder if we could extend the Bill to public buildings in general.

I take the hon. Member’s point on board entirely, and agree with him. This Bill is limited to residential new builds; I was very conscious that in the public sector, the cost of initial installation would be borne by the taxpayer. He was right to reference schools. In my constituency, Bournside school is installing a huge ground source heat pump. That is a national, leading case study. He is right that it is important that young people understand what is going on. With regard to industry standards, we need to make sure that there is an industry-wide regulator and a certification scheme. The industry needs proper regulation to give consumers confidence in the product.

Supply chains were mentioned. To give supply chains, the construction industry and developers time to adjust, the Bill proposes that the regulations apply from 1 October 2026. Ministers may have comments on whether that is a realistic timescale—they might want to make it longer. I am sure that there will be a discussion.

Reasonable exemptions need to apply, including for very tall buildings; for buildings on which it would not be economical to install solar panels, due to roof size or other factors; and for buildings that had other forms of renewable energy generation installed that were more appropriate for that setting. Where buildings cannot physically accommodate solar panels that cover at least 40% of the building’s ground-floor area, the Bill requires that solar panels are installed to the maximum extent possible.

It is important to take part in some myth busting. To dispel one big myth about solar panels, they do not always need a clear, sunny day to work; they will continue to work in overcast, cloudy conditions. I think we can all agree that that is good news for this country. To dispel another myth, solar panels can be installed to good effect on north-facing roofs, although efficiency will be a little lower.

The overwhelming strength of the case for the measure means that the sunshine Bill has gathered support from industry. Over Christmas, several businesses and industry organisations signed an open letter to the Government in which they declared their support for the Bill. I am grateful for the support of the MCS Foundation, Solar Energy UK, Eco2Solar, E.ON Next and Ecotricity. I am particularly grateful to the MCS Foundation for its assistance and advice on technical matters in these last few months.

I thank the hon. Member for letting me interrupt his excellent speech, which is loaded with fantastic puns that I would be very proud of. What discussions has he had with industry on making sure that we have the correct skills pipeline, so that we have enough installers and other people required to ensure that solar panels are installed efficiently and effectively, and to maximise the economic benefit to this country?

The hon. Member is absolutely right. He will recall that if we go back more than a decade, there was a thriving solar energy industry in this country. Sadly, we have taken steps back over the last few years when it comes to the skills pipeline. I know that issue is on this Government’s agenda, and I welcome that. On the date on which we might look at this, we hope that further education colleges will put on courses to train people up, and that there would be more industry work, too.

Will the hon. Member explain why his Bill excludes the use of solar thermal panels?

The Bill focuses on solar photovoltaics. Solar thermal panels are a different type of technology and are not covered by the Bill.

I would also like to thank CPRE. The right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton) spoke earlier about the preservation of land and fields in green areas, and the CPRE is specifically interested from that perspective.

This is becoming increasingly worrying, because we are now starting to see policy on grey belt. I fear that if we do not thoroughly grasp the issue of where solar panels, battery storage and all the other renewables infrastructure should go, we risk green belt being all of a sudden redefined as grey belt, in a few years’ time, and being built on.

The right hon. Lady speaks powerfully for her constituency, which I know has a specific issue.

We mentioned housing developers, and one housing developer has put its head above the parapet to support the Bill. I am grateful for the support of Thakeham, and it is to be applauded for supporting the measure. Developers should support the Bill for sound business reasons. There is a clear market preference for homes with solar panels, and a relatively small proportion of the price will be rewarded with a decent payback, and customers want them.

Politically, there is demonstrable cross-party support. In the last Parliament, 79% of Members were found to be supportive, and I suspect the percentage is higher in this new Parliament. The climate barometer tracks support for mandatory solar panels on new builds and found a clear majority of support among all parties’ voters, so doing this would place us at the centre of political gravity. Some 80% of Conservative voters, 89% of Labour voters, 92% of Liberal Democrat voters and 63% of Reform supporters responded to the survey in favour of mandatory solar panels for new build homes. Those same constituents rightly look to us to make the right and logical decisions on these matters. They back the measure because all the evidence points to clear benefits at every level, including the Government’s positive agenda on energy and climate.

MCS Foundation research has found that mandatory solar panels on 1.5 million homes would be the equivalent of two additional Sizewell C nuclear power stations, which should give us all pause for thought. For a country that struggles to build infrastructure, we must not look past these easier, small-scale wins.

I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on introducing the Bill. He talks about the nuclear power that may not be needed if we have solar panels on houses. Does he have a view on how much pressure we could take off demand on green land for solar farms, because many people have concerns about that use of green land, if we had solar panels on new builds?

My strong suspicion is that the market will help to decide the answer to that question, but it is inevitable that if we produce more energy from some sources, it will lower demand in other areas. The hon. Gentleman makes a good point.

I visited Hinkley Point on a school trip as an 11-year-old and was told, very excitedly, that a new Hinkley C was on the way. I regret to tell the House that I am now 40 and, on current projections, Hinkley C is not expected to generate any power until I am at least 44. On the point of time, the new homes built today will outlast us all. If we can make them work better for the planet, they will be a lasting testament to this House’s efforts to tackle climate change, and they will offer protections against the energy shocks we have all endured too. That is what we have the chance to do today, if Ministers are willing to support the principles of the sunshine Bill. We cannot and should not let this opportunity pass us by, and it is our duty to build a political consensus here to match the consensus among members of the public.

So to paraphrase the great Morecambe and Wise in the song that shares the informal name we have given to this Bill, let our arms be as warm as the sun up above, and let us think about how much joy we can give to each brand new bright tomorrow—if only we can lower people’s energy bills and help to tackle climate change too.

I thank the hon. Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson) for introducing the Bill. I will try not to cloud the Chamber too much with puns; I will leave it to other hon. Members to shower the room with them. [Laughter.] It’s so painful.

I am glad that the Bill has been brought forward. There are so many good things in it, and I want to ensure that the country as a whole can embrace the future of solar power generation where people live, right in the heart of communities and on their homes. I have moved in the past year or so to ground level, as many people in my constituency know and frequently comment about on Facebook. I have lived most of my adult life in tower blocks, and one of the great things about 1960s council tower blocks is that there are fantastic views over everybody’s roofs. In all the decades I lived in those tower blocks, it was apparent that we are missing out in this country. So much acreage on rooftops is empty and devoid of power generation, while other countries have leapt ahead and taken advantage.

At the same time, I have seen where this has not quite worked. I watched a new council housing block being built right next to the previous place I lived in. Over its rooftops, I saw the solar panels go in and then saw what the problems were, where the management company and the local council were not quite able to make it work and to generate power for people there. The solar panels were for a long time unused and not functioning. That is the sign of a technology that was not quite mature, and it is only in the past five years that that has happened.

When, like me, Members go around their constituencies, they will see lots of solar panels on houses and have lots of conversations with people in pubs who have installed them on their houses. Some people will have had a great experience and will talk at length about how it has reduced their bills, and unfortunately others tell of the problems and challenges of getting connected to the grid and making it work. That is not a reason not to do it, but it is a reason to have a clear eye as we go forward on this change. Hopefully, the Minister will talk about how we can ensure that this policy is successful in future.

There are loads of opportunities, but we should not lose sight of other opportunities as well. One of the most impressive things I have seen in my constituency from an industrial side is the cluster of factories around Kemsley paper mill from DS Smith. A third of the cardboard produced in the UK is recycled in that one location. It is part of a set of factories that use their waste products and heat to generate power themselves in a circular carbon economy. A key part is more traditional forms of power production. For instance, all the cardboard that is not used in those factories and that cannot be recycled is turned into electricity, and carbon capture is used. The carbon capture process is then used to support work in other factories, such as the production of plasterboard, and the waste heat is used.

The factories are already doing great work, and they want to expand further with solar power, particularly on an old landfill site, which is perfectly placed. That is a great opportunity, but there are also the factory roofs. Not all the buildings are suitable, but as we build on that cluster and can generate power locally, and as we build more homes around them and in that area to provide power, solar power has an important part to play. I very much want to see that we are able to change our building regulations and to ensure they meet the needs and opportunities from factories, but, at the same time, we must not close our eyes to the fact that there are many other ways of ensuring that we reach a zero-carbon future.

Fixing the housing crisis is absolutely not mutually exclusive with fixing the climate crisis. The hon. Member rightly identified the cost of living crisis and the climate crisis. I would add in the housing crisis as a third part of that, and I can see he does not disagree.

This point has been made a few times, but it is almost as if there is a tension between protecting our natural environment and making progress on renewable energy sources. It is not a choice between the two; one is central to the other. As a former councillor, I know that it is vital that community voices are heard in this. If there is one thing that upsets local communities, it is when they are not involved in conversations on matters that directly impact them and the areas they live in. Does my hon. Friend agree?

I wholeheartedly agree. I gave the example of a power generator on a roof not working, and that came down to the fact that the local community was not involved. The residents on the block saw no benefit from it, but it was causing them problems, including leaks in the roof and all sorts of other stuff. It is vital that we have not just a circular energy economy but a circular economic and monetary economy so that people see the benefits in their pockets as well as in the lights and heating in their homes.

I am keen to hear from the Minister what the Government plan to do to change the building regulations, meet the aspirations in the Bill and ensure that we have a comprehensive strategy to progress towards a zero-carbon, net zero future, while ensuring that that does not get in the way of tackling local environmental problems—biodiversity and so on—or the housing and cost of living crises. Those things are all joined up. That is how developers will work and deliver, and how we can ensure that that happens.

We all know that implementation is the tricky part of policy. The intention is very straightforward—and this Bill is full of great intentions—but getting the implementation right will be the challenge. We have had 14 years of hot and cold climate policy. Sometimes the previous Government went hell for leather on tackling climate change; at other points, they did not seem so certain. As well as developers, businesses and households have struggled with that, because they have not been sure of the direction of travel. I am hopeful that our new Government will now focus on stability as a key plank of our growth agenda, giving developers, communities and households the certainty they need to plan together. Everyone is looking for that framework.

Some areas and towns face greater challenges on housing and housing need. In Sheerness in my constituency, for example, the housing stock is of deteriorating quality. Much of it is post-war council housing, which, unsurprisingly in a coastal area, is not lasting and has high maintenance costs. We need a comprehensive renewal that brings in not just better housing, but the opportunity to leapfrog several stages in environmental learning and energy production, and ensures that energy production is brought into the heart of towns in my constituency and those of other hon. Members.

My hon. Friend is speaking with great passion about his constituents—that is always great to hear. When it comes to new homes, we must consider their efficiency from top to bottom. The Bill will add solar panels to new homes—we all welcome that, and I am happy to support it—but we must go further by ensuring that our homes are as efficient, warm and cheap to heat as possible. In Scotland, the private Member’s Bill introduced by Alex Rowley MSP could mean that all homes in Scotland are built to the Passivhaus standard, which I think is the gold standard right now. Does my hon. Friend think that we should aspire to that?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for coming in on that point, and I very much agree. Although my constituency is generally not quite as cold and damp as parts of Scotland, it is pretty cold and damp, and when the wind comes along the Swale it can get quite cold, as people who live in north Kent will know. The quality of housing stock, including insulation, needs attention. That is what I mean by a comprehensive picture; it is about not just power generation, but ensuring that we do not waste power and that the effect is ultimately felt in people’s pockets.

I know that other Members will talk with greater expertise and in greater depth about things happening in their constituencies and the opportunities that they see, and I look forward to listening to them. As we move forward, we must learn from past mistakes and from current great practice, and ensure that these policies actually work, unlike in the false starts of the past.

I congratulate the hon. Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson) on his good fortune in securing a place in the ballot in order to introduce what is, without doubt, a very important Bill. I am, however, concerned about the scope of the Bill, and I will come to that in a moment, if I may—I do not propose to take very long. For many years, I have consistently opposed the installation of solar farms—of course, they are not farms at all—on agricultural land.

In east Kent, we are losing grade 1 agricultural land far too frequently, both to development and to be used for solar power generation. It is completely unnecessary. As I have said many times, both in this House and outside it, we have acres and acres of rooftops in public ownership, on public buildings—schools, hospitals and prisons—in addition to acres of car park space, which the French would be covering in solar panels. If we use all of that, I can see no need whatsoever to use for these purposes fine agricultural land that should be used for growing crops for feeding people. That is why I think that the scope of the Bill, good though it may be, does not go far enough. We must look, not just at new build, but at what exists and what can and should be done.

By the bye, I would go a stage further and say that we should not only be looking at solar panels, but at grey water systems. We waste gallons and gallons of water off the rooftops of this country, which of course cannot then soak into the land because we have covered it in tarmac, so it is not replenishing the aquifers. That water ought to be used for flushing lavatories and matters that do not require potable water. Again, I think there is a trick that may have been missed.

Quite clearly, what is going to happen is that the developers and the builders will scream like stuck pigs. For why? Let us take a development in Herne Bay in my constituency. I will not name the developer, because I would hate to upset Taylor Wimpey, but it has avoided installing electric vehicle charging points because there is a bit of wriggle room—the amount that it would add to the cost of the property—that allows it to get off the hook. I do not doubt that installing solar panels initially would add to the first purchase price of the property, which of course might eat into profit, and we would hate to see that. But this is essential. We have to do this, and it is long past time. I notice that the Bill gives 2026 as the start date; I can see no reason whatsoever why we should not start immediately and say that, from now on, every new build should be fitted with photovoltaic panels.

There is another issue, which is the design of the technology. We all know that retrofitted solar panels are pretty unattractive—hideous, to be blunt about it. It surprises me that, in this day and age, those developing this technology have not gone far enough and fast enough to develop attractive panels that are simply roofs like any other roof. It has got to be possible to develop a photovoltaic tile that could be used on listed buildings, but that has not happened.

I just want to advise the right hon. Member that several products of the type he is referencing are available on the market at the moment.

If the hon. Gentleman can tell me of a photovoltaic tile that is acceptable to the people who are enforcing regulations relating to listed buildings, I would be delighted to hear it. That is what I was trying to come on to before I was interrupted.

Kent, a wonderful county, has very many grade II listed buildings, and at present, it is not permitted to use solar panels—or solar tiles, as I would like to see them—on those listed buildings. It is not even permitted on other buildings, outbuildings, cottages or whatever within the curtilage of a listed building. That rules out a considerable quantity of property that can and should accommodate solar panels.

King’s College in Cambridge, one of the oldest and most prestigious heritage buildings, now has a fine array of solar panels that it managed to get through planning permission. Does the right hon. Member agree that what we need in planning terms is for material weight to be given to climate change, as well as conservation status? That is where the crux of the matter is. It would allow all those who are responsible for listed homes or who have homes in conservation areas to do energy efficiency in the right way.

Up to a point, I agree with the hon. Lady, but only up to a point. I do not want to see the fine buildings of Kent smothered in hideous installations, so we have to find a way technically of making the panels acceptable. I accept entirely that retrofitting is much harder than new build. It is possible to inset photovoltaic panels into a new roof on a new build, but it is much harder to retrofit it attractively. I would like to see us make much more effort to go down that road, so that we come up with products that are acceptable across the board—not just for new build, but for existing buildings.

It is essential that this Bill has a Second Reading, and I will be supporting it today. There are flaws in it, but that is what the Committee stage is about, and we should allow the Bill to go into Committee. If I may say to the hon. Member for Cheltenham, there is rather too much wriggle room. I can see canny developers finding ways of exploiting some of the exemptions, if we are not careful, that he has written into the Bill.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that an unintended consequences of this Bill could be that it is no longer possible to build a new thatched house? In Dorset and Hampshire, we welcome people who are developing new thatched houses. How will that work with this Bill?

The Bill does accommodate exemptions, and my hon. Friend makes a case in point. In the village I live in, we have thatched buildings, and I would like to see more of them. There may be cases where an exemption should be permitted, but looking at the Bill as it stands, it seems that these loopholes are wide open to exploitation, and they will have to be tightened up. That, however, is the purpose of the Committee. Let us give the Bill its Second Reading, get it into Committee, amend it and bring it back on Report and Third Reading, and then let us see it become law.

One of my previous employers used to run a competition for schoolchildren. They asked them to draw a picture of a better future where we tackled our climate and ecological crises. The entries were displayed on a wall close to my office, and many times a day I passed them and looked at them.

Many young people had chosen to show a contrast. On one side of the page was often a burning world—now painfully familiar from our news feeds, as our dear friends in California find their world set alight, and I am also reminded to remember our neighbours here in the UK still reeling from our recent floods. The children’s pictures were sadly a good predictor of the threat, but on the other side of the page, where they showed their hope for tomorrow, children often drew homes surrounded by trees with happy people playing outside in the sunshine. Without fail, on the rooftops of the houses in those pictures were solar panels. Our children understood that a bright and sustainable future depends on clean and sustainable energy.

Our Government’s mission to make the UK a clean energy superpower is a direct response to the climate crisis and a clear mission to make energy secure and affordable. Photovoltaics fit the bill perfectly—simple, reliable and effective, they are the purest form of renewable energy, converting photons directly into electrical power, and we can place that power directly in the hands of homeowners.

The need for us to embrace solar power as part of a suite of energy technologies for a sustainable future is clear. Alongside offshore wind and underpinned by storage using green hydrogen, solar photovoltaic is a key technology for the UK to decarbonise its electricity and all the sectors and use cases that we electrify. While the use of land for solar generation is rightly contended, we have a vast and perfectly designed, yet barely tapped, resource on our rooftops.

Residents in my constituency are aghast that a mega 840 MW solar farm is being proposed by the Blenheim estate, which, people believe, has not allowed solar panels to be placed on the houses it has developed in the area. Does the hon. Member agree that placing solar panels on the roofs of houses is a much better way to diversify solar panels and build the community consent for the renewable transition that is part of the Government’s mission?

I fully agree. Many people have told me that, intuitively, they would like solar to be put on roofs first. I think there is strong consensus that that should be our direction.

My hon. Friend the Member for Sittingbourne and Sheppey (Kevin McKenna) talked about some of the challenges of retrofitting. We need to listen to the social science, harness new initiatives such as GB Energy and activate local authorities to empower ordinary people to retrofit solar. We must develop ways for people to easily access trusted partners to help them decarbonise their homes and save money as a result.

The average price to install solar panels post build is somewhere between £5,000 and £8,000. The majority of people do not have that kind of cash stuck down the back of the sofa. Does the hon. Member agree that supporting the Bill is an investment both in our environment and in reducing energy bills for all new homeowners, not just those who have the cash to do so?

I agree. As we face a transition in a range of technologies—my professional background is in heat—it is important that we put consumers at the heart of that and ensure that it works for them, and that we find ways to make it accessible, easy, affordable and beneficial to embrace new technologies. There are new business models available that can help us do that—heat as a service, for example—and we need to embrace those. But whatever we do as we navigate the transition, it is vital that we put people at the heart of what we build.

Having worked in the energy sector for 20 years, there is one comment that I have heard, and uttered myself, very many times—more than I can possibly count: “We should be putting solar on every new home.” There are very few no-brainers in politics, but if any exist, surely that is one of them. We have the opportunity to make a crucial change, to stop growing the problem and start solving it. Putting solar power on every new home will save people money. It will boost our national renewable capacity. It will be a crucial step in our mission for clean energy. And it will mean that for our children, who hope for a better future for people and our planet, we can begin to deliver the homes that they have always dreamed of.

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson) for introducing the Bill. I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests.

Just after the general election, Ministers made the shock decision that the Sunnica solar farm in Ely and East Cambridgeshire would go ahead, despite the planning inspector’s recommendation that it should not. The farm will cover a vast area of our green space, using up prime farming land—land that could be set aside for the benefit of nature, and land that we might have used to build much-needed new homes. No sooner had that solar farm got permission than the lovely glossy leaflets for the next one came through the door about the next consultation, on an even bigger solar farm across my constituency, and others. Yet, as we have heard, we have acres and acres of roof space that we could put solar panels on. Why are we not doing that?

A couple of years ago, I was on a planning committee visit to a new housing estate that was being built, and I noticed that there was just one, or sometimes two, solar panel on each roof. I said to the developer, “Why just one or two? That’s hardly making a dent in things.” His answer was, “That was all we were required to do.”

I refer the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, because I am a councillor on Mid Sussex district council. Some four years ago, I was sitting in training on a cross-party basis with Conservatives, Greens, Independents and Liberal Democrats, and we asked our planning officers, “Why can’t we mandate that all new builds have solar panels on the roof?” We were told that we were not allowed to, because it was not in the NPPF as it stood at that time. Does my hon. Friend agree that, in order to make the case for house building and tackle the housing emergency, we need to be able to convince the public that we are building high-quality houses that are fit for a climate crisis and that are energy efficient to reduce bills?

I entirely agree. We had a similar frustration when looked at revising our local plan, because we wanted to put things in about energy efficiency.

South Oxfordshire and Vale of White Horse district councils’ brilliant new joint local plan proposes that new homes should be net zero, with solar being the obvious way of delivering that, but that ambitious plan is now sat with the Government inspector, and we are in his hands. Does my hon. Friend agree that local authorities should be empowered to deliver on their net zero ambitions?

I agree, because we were advised that we could not do what we wanted with our local plan, as it would have gone beyond the national planning policy framework. The local community want to do it, so we should be empowered to do it.

I entirely support the Bill, because it would make so much sense to everybody if we were to make sure that all new builds had adequate solar panels on them or, where appropriate, an alternative form of green energy production, so that people end up with houses that are not destroying the climate and where they can actually afford their fuel bills.

It is quite a long time ago now, but I remember when I bought my first house. I had carefully planned out all the costs to determine whether I could afford the mortgage and everything else, and then the winter came, I started getting my fuel bills and I thought, “Oops, this is a bit difficult.” I do not want that to happen to people. I want them to move into their new house and have low energy bills.

It is not in this Bill, but the Government have the power to do this: we must make retrofitting solar panels a good deal easier. It must be made easier for people to get the connection certificates they need, because that is a problem, and I am already getting casework about it. I commend Cambridgeshire county council, because it has a scheme whereby local people can register to join in with a group purchase, on which the county council does the due diligence. That means that people know that the supplier and the contractor are good, responsible, reliable people and they also get the discount of bulk buying. I commend the council on that scheme.

The Bill is a brilliant start to making sure that this country can get to net zero and that people have warm homes that they can afford to heat.

I begin by making a declaration of interest: my former employer, CPRE, the countryside charity, is a supporter of the Bill. Many of my constituents are also passionate supporters of the proposal for mandatory rooftop solar on new buildings; it is one of the issues on which I have had the most correspondence in recent months.

In North East Hertfordshire, the towns of Royston and Buntingford have seen rapid development in recent years, as have smaller villages such as Barkway, Puckeridge and Standon. In the near future, a new estate will be built on the edge of Letchworth Garden City and the town of Baldock is due to roughly double in size. At the same time, we face many challenging decisions locally to balance the need for renewable energy with the protection of our high-quality farmland, while also preserving and enhancing space for nature. It is therefore unsurprising that residents in North East Hertfordshire can see the common sense in making the best possible use of our finite land by putting the solar panels we need on rooftops.

Our approach to delivering the renewable energy we undoubtedly and desperately need has been far too laissez-faire.

My constituency has also seen significant population growth; it has grown by 35% in the past 20 years. New estates in Didcot, Great Western Park, Wantage, Kingsgrove, Highcroft in Wallingford and Wellington Gate in Grove have not all sought the opportunity to have solar panels on the new houses. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that if we do not create the homes of the future now, there is a risk that we will have to retrofit them in future, at great expense, to reach our net zero targets and help residents with their bills?

I wholeheartedly agree.

As I was saying, we could suffer from the potentially profound impacts of competing demands for space for the homes we require, our commitment to protect 30% of our land for nature by 2030, and our fragile food security. Government figures show that with an industry average of 5 acres per megawatt, the proposed ground-mounted solar schemes put forward to date would, if they all went ahead, require a total land area roughly equivalent to Birmingham, Bristol, Manchester, Liverpool, Nottingham, Newcastle and Leeds combined. Yet at the same time, academic analysis indicates that between suitable existing buildings and new construction, there is potential space for 117 GW of rooftop solar in England by 2050.

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that it was a shocking dereliction of duty when the previous Government cancelled the zero-carbon home programme, which would have allowed for the generation of around 3,000 MW if every house built since 2015 had had solar panels on it? Does he agree with my residents in Taunton and Wellington, who are aghast and want to see solar panels on the new houses being built in Comeytrowe, Staplegrove and Monkton Heathfield?

I find myself, once again, in wholehearted agreement.

Ensuring that solar panels are installed on the rooftops of new buildings specifically could deliver a generating capacity over six times greater than that of Sizewell C. Clearly, if we start applying a strategic approach beginning with the provisions in the Bill, we can host the vast majority of the solar panels we need on our rooftops. Other nations are already proving that this can be done, with similar regulatory measures currently in place in Germany, China and Japan. Better yet, enacting this legislation would not only accelerate our progress toward meeting our climate targets, reducing the industrialisation of our countryside and protecting rural communities; it also offers the most effective way to ensure that the net zero transition lowers electricity bills for consumers.

I refer to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests; my former colleagues at the MCS Foundation have provided research in support of the Bill.

I want to pick up on the hon. Gentleman’s point about timescales, because in my experience this issue is the one that is raised most commonly by residents wanting to see action. Why on earth, they say, are new homes being put up without solar panels on them? Time is of the essence, but is it not the case that we have already lost many opportunities to progress? Regulations were due to come into force in 2016 that would have required all new homes to have zero carbon standards. Those regulations were scrapped by the coalition Government.[Official Report, 21 January 2025; Vol. 760, c. 976.] (Correction) [Hon. Members: “No, they weren’t.”] The briefing I have had says that they were scrapped in 2014. [Interruption.] Either way, I am pleased to see cross-party support today to press ahead with this proposal at speed. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that speed is of the essence here to ensure that homes are not being put up without solar panels?

I agree that speed is of the essence in multiple ways, and I encourage the Government to move as quickly as possible.

Empowering households to generate the electricity that they use will help families to lower their bills far more rapidly than commercial schemes that feed into wholesale energy markets influenced by international commodity prices. This strikes me as a well-drafted Bill, and I congratulate the hon. Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson) on its clarity and flexibility. The only thing that I might suggest is a widening of the provisions to cover commercial buildings as well, given the vast opportunities provided by warehousing space. It is estimated that we currently use only about 5% of warehouse rooftops for solar generation. Claims that the regulations would hinder innovation are clearly spurious, especially in view of the provisions for exemptions where other forms of renewable energy generation are installed.

It is high time that our country had common-sense standards for rooftop solar on new builds, and I hope that the whole House will support the Bill.

I congratulate the hon. Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson) on his Bill. I do have some reservations about it, which I will go into shortly, but I am minded to support it today because this is a much better policy than the current Government line about having large-scale solar farms on all our farmland throughout the United Kingdom. I would much rather solar panels were put on new builds, and councils already have some powers enabling them to do that. Broxbourne council, which I used to lead, has engaged in extensive negotiations with developers, particularly at High Leigh, where we have managed to get solar panels on some of the houses. A large data centre is also being built, and we have managed to put some solar panels on that.

As I have said, I do have some concerns. I am all for taking on developers and ensuring that they pay for their section 106 negotiations and do their community work, and standing up for the residents we all represent. However, during many of the negotiations when I led the council, developers told me that they wanted to put solar panels on more houses but the distribution network operator had told them that there was not enough capacity. I said that no one would be able to see the top of the data centre, so why not cover the whole thing in solar panels? Why would anyone not want to do that? Why would anyone not support it? That was my negotiating position. The developers went away and had discussions with the DNO, which said that they could have only 25% because there was not enough capacity for more and the system would not be able to cope. We need to have a discussion about the capacity of the grid if we are going to do this. I know that the Bill focuses specifically on new build properties, but surely it is a good thing to be able to use the rooftops of all the large data centres and warehouses that are already available.

The hon. Gentleman is speaking passionately about his constituency, but does not cheaper battery technology mean that people do not have to sell their electricity back to the grid any more? They can keep it within their boundaries and use it themselves.

I was about to mention battery technology, so I ask the hon. Gentleman to wait just a few seconds.

The Bill does go quite far in that its ambition relates to all houses, but I think we should go further. If we are putting solar panels on houses, we should require those houses to have battery storage as well, which might solve some of the problems involving grid connection and there being sufficient capacity. Battery technology is a bit behind solar panel technology in terms of efficiency, and it is not quite there yet on cost-effectiveness, but we are definitely getting there. For example, it is more cost-effective to use the electricity in an electric car than to send it back to the grid. I urge the hon. Member for Cheltenham to consider that, because if we are taking this one step in installing solar panels, perhaps we should take one further step and require people to have battery storage as well.

I am concerned about the red tape we are going to create for new development. As I said, I am all for taking on developers—I see some councillors and former councillors in the Chamber, who have probably all had vociferous discussions like the ones I have had with developers about them doing their bit—but I am concerned about the pushback we might get in discussions on section 106 agreements. There are issues around viability, which I will not go into now, but I would not want to see developers telling their local councils and communities, “We can’t give you money for the new school or the doctor’s surgery because we’ve got to put solar panels on housing.” We need to give some thought to how that will work, because we all want the most community money possible for the roads, schools and GP surgeries that must come with new developments.

There will be some homes for which solar panels are not suitable. I am fully supportive of panels being installed on buildings that have an east-west facing roof, or on a block of flats. Where it is practical to do that, of course we should do it. As other Members have said, it is increasingly frustrating when we drive past a development to see a roof with only two solar panels on it, after the developers have gone through the whole cost of putting up the scaffolding and building the house. I suspect that is because of the issues around capacity, which we definitely need to look into, but come on. If they are already putting solar panels on half the roof, they should fill the whole roof with them, because that does not just help them; if they can sell the green electricity back to the grid, it helps everybody.

I have some reservations about where the money will come from. I would not want it to come from the resources that would have gone on schools, education and roads through section 106 agreements, so we need to look at that. We also need to look at distribution network operators and capacity, to make sure we can really harness the energy, but as this proposal is much better than having large-scale solar farms plastered all over our green belt and the countryside, I am minded to support the Bill’s Second Reading.

I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson) for bringing forward this Bill on a subject of great importance. I know from personal experience the time and effort it must have taken to get to this stage.

I am sure Members on both sides of the House will agree that solar is a key tool in the renewable energy arsenal which, if used properly, can have a significant positive impact on tackling climate change and ensuring that we live in a more sustainable society. I am proud to represent a constituency that is taking the power of solar seriously. Constituents in Amber Valley regularly write to me wanting to know what is being done at both local and national level to tackle climate change. Even those constituents who are not what any of us would call eco-warriors are invariably unopposed to solar on rooftops, and that is not, it seems, unique to Amber Valley. As I walked through Westminster underground station this morning, a billboard caught my eye. The MSC Foundation was advertising the fact that a recent YouGov survey found that three in four voters believe that solar panels should be mandatory on new homes.

When Labour took control of Amber Valley borough council in 2023, the council had no council homes whatsoever, as the previous Conservative-run council had sold all the housing stock 20 years earlier at below-market rates. To right that wrong, the council has started a new council house building programme, and while we started small, we are working towards a target of 30 new council homes, each fitted with solar panels. Indeed, the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero last year witnessed four new builds resulting from that programme on his visit to the borough alongside the Mayor of the East Midlands. It is fair to say that we are committed in Amber Valley. Incorporating rooftop solar as part of our house building programme has been an important part of delivering cleaner energy and lower bills, and ensuring sustainability for our constituents.

When I first became a borough councillor in Amber Valley, I asked whether we could have a planning condition that solar panels must be installed on roofs, and I too was told that that was just not possible. That was totally perplexing to me, so I am sure that hon. Members can imagine that I am proud to be part of a Government who are spearheading the most ambitious house building programme in a generation, with a clear commitment to environmental sustainability.

The hon. Lady speaks of the Government’s ambition, and there is one simple thing they could do. In December 2023, after lobbying from developers, the previous Conservative Government shamefully issued a written ministerial statement to prohibit a councillor in West Oxfordshire district council in my constituency from insisting on higher environmental standards for a net zero development. Does the hon. Lady agree that if the Government simply revoked that written ministerial statement, local councils across the country would have more freedom to set higher environmental standards? Will she encourage the Minister to respond to that point?

I would encourage the Minister to respond, because I do not think that it is for me to do so. However, I do think we should be doing everything we can to move towards a better, more sustainable future.

Not only are we building 1.5 million new homes over this Parliament, but we are committed to an ambitious decarbonising agenda and harnessing renewable resources across the UK. The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero of course understands the importance of solar as part of our wider clean power mission, and the contribution that the energy efficiency of homes can make to our net zero emissions target. There is no doubt in my mind that rooftop solar plays a crucial role in that.

I support the notion behind the Bill. The Government are already working on future standards, particularly on the technical detail of solar, to ensure that they are appropriate. That will ensure that new homes and buildings embrace energy efficiency and are fit for a net zero future, and I look forward to the Government introducing those standards this year. I thank the hon. Member for Cheltenham for raising this important issue in the House today.

People in my constituency are passionate about protecting our environment, and they know that if we are to do that, we need to produce more renewable energy. However, in North East Hampshire, as in many other areas of the UK, we are also protective of our arable farming land, which is so essential for our food security.

Passing the sunshine Bill, which has been brought to the House by my hon. Friend the Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson), would challenge the presumption that the principal way to increase our solar capacity is through solar farms and large-scale industrial solar power generation. Prioritising solar panelling on new homes will allow us to create the right energy mix and to produce energy in a sustainable way. Not only that, but it will help us to address some of the challenges with economic growth. Reducing energy bills, especially for those in social housing or on lower incomes, is an essential part of tackling the recent cost of living crisis, and developing the industry through innovation is of course good for jobs.

There has been a lot of conversation this morning about the benefit to homeowners of installing solar panels on new builds. If solar panels were included on new social housing, we would also be helping those who face the greatest challenge in paying energy bills, which have gone up since the energy price cap rise. That is an added benefit in the cost of living crisis.

My hon. Friend is of course correct. This should not be just about cost savings for those who can afford installation in the first place.

In North East Hampshire, we have some fantastic examples of community investment in renewables. Hart district council has installed 121 photovoltaic panels on the roof of its offices, generating as much as 57,000 kWh of electricity per year, which is enough to power around 20 average homes every year. Hart leisure centre has seen £200,000 of investment in solar panelling on its sports hall, which reduces the demand put on the energy grid as a result of heating the swimming pool.

If you will permit me a “Sliding Doors” moment, Madam Deputy Speaker, my house was built in 1961, when this technology was not around. Had solar panels of today’s quality been installed then, not only would our energy bills have been significantly lower, but we could have saved in the region of 800 tonnes of carbon—roughly equivalent to 140 London to Sydney return flights. Given the Government’s ambitious house building targets, and as retrofitting is more expensive than installing at the build stage, it makes sense to ensure that we do all we can right now to protect our environment, to reduce energy bills and to secure this industry for the future.

Each house built without renewable energy is a missed opportunity to save carbon and money, and to grow our economy. Furthermore, each house built without solar panels increases the pressure to put panels elsewhere, including in our fields. Sustainable energy development is critical, but in North East Hampshire, as elsewhere, we do not want it to come at the cost of our countryside and our agricultural land. That is why I support this Bill, which prioritises putting solar panels on the roofs of new homes.

This is an important debate; not only is it about solar, but it is about our climate and our environment. It matters to me, to my generation and to my constituents. My constituency mailbag is full of ideas about how we get clean energy and messages advocating for solar panels, so I know my constituents are interested in this debate.

There are many experts in my constituency. Just yesterday, I sat with a nuclear scientist from Wirral West, and there are many people who are passionate about the environment. In one quite brilliant architect, Colin Usher, we combine the expertise and the passion. He has brought intelligent design to bear in order to build super low energy use homes. Along with triple glazing, insulation and intelligent design, solar panels play an important part in those homes. The panels sit on the roof and heat the home, and excess energy is sold back to the national grid. So brilliant is the design that in the winter months, one of the people living in these homes pays just £10 for their energy. I hope we can expect future homes to meet that high standard.

I welcome the fact that the Government have already made a commitment to developing the next generation of homes with high energy standards and efficiency. It is better for our pocket and for the planet. Labour is clear that the crisis in our climate and in nature needs serious action. That is why, in the election, we committed to tripling solar power by 2030. Solar energy has an important role, and it is a part of GB Energy, which supports our mission to make our country a clean energy superpower. We are meeting our pledges with action: we are approving solar projects that will power the equivalent of almost 400,000 homes. I note that this Government, in just one week, has consented to more solar than the last Government installed in an entire year. That shows the marked difference this Government are already making in an area that the whole House is clearly passionate about.

I am pleased that the Minister is developing strong new standards, which will combine Labour’s ambition to build high-quality homes in the right places and the ambition to protect our environment. Our commitment to action will bring lower bills to my constituents. That is sorely needed after a difficult cost of living crisis, lasting for years, which has put pressure on household bills. In this way, we can really support our constituents. Through our meaningful action on more sustainable renewable sources of energy, we are making a difference to our climate.

It is pretty clear that the climate crisis does not respect rhetoric, weapons or borders; it does not care how many likes you get on social media or how viral your clip goes; it responds only to action, and the action the Government are taking gives me hope for the future. Across my constituency, people are taking action, and doing their bit to shift us toward cleaner energy. We must meet their ambition for a greener, sunnier and more secure future.

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson) for bringing the Bill before the House. As an environmental campaigner for the past 22 years, I very much support any Bill, including my own Climate and Nature Bill—a shameless plug—that encourages the shift away from fossil fuels. However, I do not support every measure that increases the use of renewables, which is why the sunshine Bill is so important.

There are good ways and less good ways to meet our international commitments on carbon emissions and climate change. A less good way, as has already been mentioned by many hon. Members, is to cover large tracts of our countryside in solar panels without the agreement or co-operation of local communities.

I welcome the Bill, but the choice between solar farms and rooftop solar installations is not a zero-sum game; they both have a distinct role to play. In our most ambitious plans, solar farms would account for less than 1% of land cover. Does the hon. Lady agree with Tom Bradshaw, president of the National Farmers’ Union, that solar farms represent a diversification opportunity for farmers that will also be good for the British public?

I thank the hon. Member for the good points she raises, but I would like to see more solar panel installations that are motivated not by profit, but by concern for people and planet. That is my concern about some of the very large solar installations we are seeing proposed across the country, including in my constituency of South Cotswolds. We are rightly proud of our beautiful countryside, so a proposal for a 2,000-acre solar farm has provoked outrage and objections from nearby communities. Some 88% of respondents to an early consultation are against the plans. Some might say that their sacrifice is necessary for the greater good, but when I put myself in the shoes of nearby residents, I cannot agree.

I love my morning walks, which help to keep me sane—well, relatively. We need to be encouraging people to spend more time enjoying the outdoors, with all its benefits for mental and physical health, as well as strengthening the relationship between humans and the rest of nature. When I consider how I would feel if my cherished morning walk, through green fields, was instead going to be a walk through fields of black, shiny solar panels, past humming battery storage facilities, I would not be happy. Let us keep our countryside beautiful. It adds insult to injury for the people of Hullavington, Luckington and Sherston to see massive new warehouses and new homes springing up with not a solar panel in sight.

We need to meet our environmental goals in collaboration with people, not in opposition to them. My Climate and Nature Bill, which I will introduce next week, emphasises the need for public engagement on our journey to net zero. That journey will not be easy and will only be made more difficult if people feel that net zero is something that is being imposed on them, by corporate interests or Government, without respect for the wishes of nearby residents. Where ground-mounted solar may be necessary, let us make it small scale and community led.

The Government’s housing targets mean that my area needs 9,500 new homes over the next 20 years, which thousands of my constituents are very worried about. Many of them would be far happier if they knew that the properties being built would meet the needs of local people, by being affordable to buy and cheap to run. Does my hon. Friend agree that the New Homes (Solar Generation) Bill is not only a no-brainer, but an essential part of gaining public support for house building?

I wholeheartedly agree with my hon. Friend.

We also need to increase our national food security, decreasing our reliance on vulnerable international food supply chains and depending more on home-grown food, grown to trusted standards. Most farmers want to grow food, not solar panels. The need for a national land use framework is becoming ever more pressing.

We need a sensible long-term strategy for how we use our finite resource of land space in this country. I would like to see a much greater emphasis on multipurposing our land area. We need to get away from dividing up food production, housing and electricity generation. We can make much better use of our land when we take a multilayered approach. To that end, it makes sense to prioritise rooftop solar ahead of greenfield sites. Some 60% of UK solar targets could be delivered on rooftops by 2035. Generating energy at the source reduces the strain on the national grid, improves overall energy resilience and reduces the need for long, wasteful grid connections

Generating energy at the source reduces the strain on the national grid, improves overall energy resilience and reduces the need for long, wasteful grid connections or ranks of electricity pylons marching across our countryside. Retrofitting solar panels to houses is costly and disruptive; it is so much more efficient and effective to install solar at the time of building. In Europe, they get this. The EU solar standard requires solar panels on new and existing public, commercial and residential buildings. The EU’s goal is to increase the use of renewable energy and reduce dependence on Russian fossil fuels, and it is working.

To me, the sunshine Bill is a win-win-win. It is a win for the UK, reducing our need for imported energy sources and improving our resilience and self-reliance; it is a win for householders, who can reduce their energy bills by generating their own electricity; and it is a win for the planet, supporting our transition away from fossil fuels. I will wholeheartedly support the sunshine Bill.

I thank the hon. Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson) for bringing forward this Bill, which deals with an issue that matters deeply to my constituents and to me. This winter we have seen the devastating impact that climate change can have on communities, and colleagues and I have watched in horror as wildfires have spread through California and flooding has impacted my constituency and many areas across the UK. Now, more than ever, we must find ways to weave the pursuit of clean, home-grown energy into everything we do, and solar power will make a vital contribution.

I have had the pleasure of visiting many local schools in Kettering since being elected. On every visit, children have told me that they are worried about our local environment and the future of our world, and I feel those worries too. I was proud to stand on a manifesto that promised to make Britain a clean energy superpower, and which pledged to double onshore wind, triple solar power and quadruple offshore wind by 2030. I am even prouder to see the progress that this Labour Government have already made in delivering on those pledges.

Only two weeks after the election, when most of us, including me, still did not know the way from the Chamber to Portcullis House, the Secretary of State lifted the ban on onshore wind, established the 2030 mission control centre and consented to solar projects that will generate more than 1.3 GW—enough to power almost 400,000 homes. This is clearly a Government of delivery, who are working to drive forward and increase rooftop solar, which, where appropriate, will help accommodate the Government’s 2030 clean power mission.

The potential for rooftop solar is huge, especially in constituencies such as mine, which is one of the fastest-growing areas in the UK and, of course, where the sun always shines. I have been contacted by many constituents about this issue, and they support the Government’s aim to achieve 95% clean energy by 2030. I understand their desire for solar and the need for it on new builds, warehouses and the ground, so I am glad that this Government have committed to ensuring that local communities continue to have a voice in planning matters, and that communities hosting clean energy infrastructure will benefit from it.

The speed of house building in Kettering means that we are no strangers to irresponsible and difficult developers, so our commitments to the environment must go hand in hand with planning. I know that the Government will introduce standards on house building this year to ensure that our new homes and buildings are fit for a net zero future, but we also need to ensure that developers cannot shirk their responsibilities to the environment and to local residents. Our house building needs to be sustainable so that local people can trust that their needs, and the needs of the environment, are being met.

The Government’s national planning policy framework is a lesson in how we can deliver the biggest boost to social and affordable housing in a generation while unlocking green energy and recognising the benefits of our best agricultural land, and all while making vital commitments to use planning to enhance the natural and local environment, protect valued landscapes, and recognise the character and beauty of the countryside.

I am grateful to have had this opportunity to put on the record my support for rooftop solar and for this Government’s commitment to our environment in Kettering and beyond.

The 1.5° global temperature limit was passed for the first time ever in 2024. This politically significant milestone is a stark reminder that we must leave no stone unturned as we make the systemic changes required to every part of our economy for a safe future. Rooftop solar is one of the easiest of the changes that we can make. As the hon. Member for South Cotswolds (Dr Savage) said, it is a “win-win-win” policy that helps cut people’s bills and climate emissions, and helps strengthen our energy security.

Research and development of rooftop solar is already a British success story—we are world leaders—so it is time to take the next step and maximise deployment of on-site solar generation in new builds. That is the aim of the sunshine Bill, and I am pleased to have co-sponsored this proposal to create new jobs, to drive innovation yet further, and to generate abundant amounts of energy both while the sun shines and, as the hon. Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson) pointed out, when it does not.

Making solar panels mandatory on suitable new homes is almost universally popular—other than with some major house builders. That is what I want to focus on during the short time available to me. Solar Energy UK estimates that, of the 15 GW of solar power capacity currently in place, around two thirds is on the ground and the remainder is on residential and commercial roofs. If we are to meet the Government’s targets to ramp up solar capacity—which I hope we do—we should be looking up.

Some 80% of the buildings that we will have in 2050 have already been built, so we must work hard to retrofit them with renewables, but the remaining 20% have still to be built. For goodness’ sake, let’s build them right the first time. That is where private housing developers come into the mix. The British designer and “Grand Designs” presenter Kevin McCloud wrote last year that in 15 years’ time the average profit on each new build home has rocketed from £6,000 to £63,000. I call on Ministers to stand up to the major house builders and ensure that they pay the cost of putting solar on every suitable new roof. The organisation 100% Renewable UK has calculated that mandatory solar panels and heat pumps in new homes would add around £8,000 to the cost of a new home—an amount that decreases as installations gather speed.

Clearly, housing developers can afford that cost, and neither they nor anyone else can afford the consequences of not meeting our solar or other climate targets. The Los Angeles wildfires are on track to be among the costliest in US history, as well as the most heartbreaking, with losses already expected to exceed £109.7 billion. Failing to decarbonise at speed, in line with the climate science, will dwarf the cost of future-proofing our homes. The moral case for acting is unequivocal, and so too is the economic one.

If Ministers are worried about the risk of solar costs being passed on to homebuyers, the Government could simply stop that happening. They could also offer interest-free loans for this technology, and make it easier for retail lenders to drive rooftop deployments. Property-linked finance or green mortgages can help consumers with the capital costs of installation, as could regulation to incentivise low interest rates for green mortgages. These are all political choices that the Government could make.

The sunshine Bill is not just about solar panels but about—forgive me—shining some sunlight on who has the power. Making every home a mini power station would help rebalance that power towards communities. I therefore very much hope that the Government will today choose to back both a solar rooftop revolution and mandatory solar being included in the future homes standard, rather than choosing to protect the vested interests that are behind the vast and ultimately unsustainable house builders’ profits.

I thank the hon. Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson) for introducing the Bill. I think it is laudable, and its heart is very much in the right place. We should think of the climate crisis in all matters of policy and in how we might contribute to the Government’s goal of making Britain a clean energy superpower.

The Government, guided by the excellent work of the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, are already making great strides in combating the climate crisis, putting green energy at the heart of the country’s future and supporting green industrial growth wherever we can. The Government have established Great British Energy, which means that we will need new green infrastructure sooner rather than later. When it comes specifically to solar energy, I was very pleased that, within just days of taking office, the Government approved three major, long-stalled, large solar farms in Lincolnshire and East Anglia, capable of generating 1.5 GW, or enough to power 500,000 homes. That was a clear statement of intent, and one that we can all be very proud of.

At the same time, the Secretary of State pledged a rooftop revolution, making it easier for newly built homes to come with solar panels from the off and to install solar panels on existing homes. A third of our solar generation capacity already comes from rooftop solar, it is an important part of the energy generation mix and I know that the Government fully believe in rooftop solar, as I do.

The hon. Member talks a lot about the measures that are being put forward in the move towards net zero, but we need to go further. CPRE Hertfordshire says that 60% of our targets could be achieved through rooftop solar panels alone, and supporting the Bill will help to make sure that that revolution helps towards net zero for our planet and our people.

I thank the hon. Member for her intervention, and I will cover some of those points shortly. I broadly agree with the sentiment of what she said.

The Bill’s aims, in promoting the installation of solar panels on all new homes, feed into the Government’s overall intent, and I am pleased about that. I note, however, that it is undeniable that solar farms, especially the larger ones, are much more efficient than rooftop solar for a whole spectrum of reasons. Rooftop solar panels are constrained by the size, orientation and structural limitations of individual buildings, while solar farms are optimised for maximum energy generation. The difference in output can be as high as 30%. Economies of scale mean that the cost to install, maintain and centralise the supportive infrastructure notably reduces the ratio of cost per unit of energy generated by solar farms. That is not to say that I do not support rooftop solar, because I very much do, but solar farms are a highly scalable, cost-effective means through which to achieve the green energy transition.

Is that not exactly the point—we need to do both, because that creates a subsidy for more opportunities to have rooftop solar panels?

I completely agree. It is not about one solution versus another, but a diverse, broad array of solutions, all feeding into a grand, greener future.

The hon. Gentleman talks about a balance. My view is that solar is better on rooftops, but if he is so pro-solar installations, how many thousand acres in his constituency is he actively campaigning to see turned into ground-mounted solar?

I must say that I declare my support for those projects wherever they come up. Indeed, I will touch on some of them in a moment. I was recently asked by the media whether I would be happy to have pylons outside my house, to which I responded with a photograph of a pylon taken from a window in my house.

I have long felt that despite the great benefits solar farms bring, they have often been too difficult to bring forward. The UK has around 15 GW of solar energy generation capacity. In Germany, meanwhile, solar capacity grew by 14 GW in 2023 alone. It is clear that the UK’s current planning regime and approach to building infrastructure constrains growth and sees us lag behind similar nations. If we want Britain to be a clean energy superpower, as I do, and leading the green energy revolution rather than just following it, we must tear down the barriers to growth and unlock our potential.

In my constituency, my Labour colleagues on Erewash borough council have, in their own small, local way, helped to be part of the change that we need. Since taking control of the council in 2023, they have approved several solar farms, while the previous Conservative administration always blocked them, and I am very proud of my colleagues for doing so. I was also very proud to tell the now Energy Secretary that information when he visited Erewash this time last year. The progression of these vital infrastructure projects, which are pivotal to the future of our country, must be driven by a national strategy and not held up by bureaucracy.

As I have said, the Bill’s proposals are laudable. The drive to green energy generation along with this Government’s ambition to make Britain a clean energy superpower could be, to this decade and to those to come, what the race for space was in the 1950s and 1960s—countries engaged in a great contest of scientific innovation and progress. There is nothing that I, as a former research scientist, could welcome more than the Government pursuing science, innovation and technology as a matter of not only core policy, but national pride.

This Government are committed to greatly expanding our provision of solar energy generation and have acknowledged many times the significant part that rooftop solar has to play in that expansion. I hope that supporters of this Bill are assured by the Government’s genuine commitment on this front. The climate crisis and the housing crisis are both profound issues, worthy of the descriptor “crisis” and in need of immediate action. I know that many right hon. and hon. Members share the Government’s commitment to act here, as I most certainly do.

I pay tribute to my neighbour and hon. Friend the Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson) for so boldly taking up this cause. His so-named sunshine Bill, which to my mind reflects his own disposition so brightly—as though it was his own glowing cranium—[Laughter.]

My hon. Friend has so eloquently put across the pragmatism that we can enjoy from Liberal Democrats in working across parties for the benefit of our constituents, and I thank him for that.

This undertaking by my hon. Friend the Member for Cheltenham has been brought up consistently on doorsteps across the Tewkesbury constituency in recent years. Widely considered to be a blindingly obvious antidote to rising energy bills and the phasing out of fossil fuels, people have tended to ask, with an exasperated tone, why on earth new homes are not built with solar panels by mandate. As my hon. Friend has described, the public roundly support such measures, with one poll registering 70% support. Whether or not the New Homes (Solar Generation) Bill goes to a vote today, I hope that the Government will recognise the alignment with their environmental pledges and that they will take the ball and run with it.

I thank the hon. Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson) for introducing this Bill. Rooftop solar panels are a huge area of huge potential. On such a grey day, I also thank him for bringing all the sunshine.

I am pleased that the Government are already exploring rooftop solar panels on new build houses in the “Clean Power 2030” action plan, which aims to have at least 95% of Great Britain’s electricity produced by clean energy by 2030. The Government relaunched the solar taskforce quickly after the general election, bringing together experts from the Government and industry. The taskforce’s road map is due to be published in the spring, and it will set out recommendations for how we can triple the UK’s solar capacity by 2030. I look forward to that.

The pylon issue has been brought up. I grew up and lived in a home under a pylon for nearly 50 years, and I do not think it has done me any harm. I know that the Government are due to introduce further standards later this year. They will set our new homes and buildings on a path away from reliance on volatile fossil fuels, and they will ensure that those homes and buildings are fit for a net zero future. I am sure the Minister will expand on that.

As well as new builds, it is important that people know that assistance packages are out there to help them with installing solar panels on existing homes. That includes the energy company obligation, the warm homes local grant and the warm homes social housing fund. Owners of solar panels can also be paid for the surplus electricity their solar panels generate through the smart export guarantee, and there is a zero rate of VAT on residential solar panels.

Much of what has being covered in this debate is devolved, although Members may not have known that I was Welsh. To my constituents in Gower and across Wales, I point to the Welsh Government’s Nest programme, which can provide free energy efficiency improvements, including solar panels, to those eligible.

The Bill states that it

“extends to England and Wales.”

Of course, the hon. Member for Cheltenham will be aware that building regulations are devolved. What conversations has he had with the Welsh Government or Members of the Senedd about this? I am sure that the Welsh Labour Government would be delighted to work alongside the UK Labour Government—they probably are already doing so—to ensure that homes are more energy efficient and that our constituents have the opportunity to save money on their bills.

The important thing about the path forward is that the Government should work with house builders to get the best outcomes for both our environmental targets and our housing targets. We must also build high-quality, sustainable and affordable homes. As has been mentioned by many, the scope of the Bill does not cover roofs other than those on new builds, so I highlight the need for solar panels on all roofs. As the right hon. Member for Herne Bay and Sandwich (Sir Roger Gale) said, we must take the agricultural land that we need for food to feed our country into consideration, and we must strike a fair and right balance. I know that the hon. Member for South Cotswolds (Dr Savage) has also raised that issue. I feel very passionately that we must not do down one or the other.

We must be aware that there are problems, particularly with tenant farmers and how they are being treated by companies. Where there are bad actors, I know that our Government—my Government—will seek to find them. I hope that the Government will work in collaboration with farmers, who may need to have a blend and have solar farms on their land, as well as with tenant farmers. I know that the Government are committed to find a workable way forward on this issue. I thank the hon. Member for Cheltenham for the chance to highlight it in this debate and for the sunshine he has brought.

As the Liberal Democrat spokesperson for energy security and net zero, I am delighted to support the private Member’s Bill of my hon. Friend the Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson): the sunshine Bill. Madam Deputy Speaker, I am beaming.

South Cambridgeshire is one of the fastest growing constituencies in the country in terms of house building and lab space. People constantly say to me, “Why are all of these new homes without solar panels on their roofs?” or “Why do these new homes only have one or two solar panels or only on part of the roofs?” Sadly, in 2025, developers are still required only to meet—not exceed—the Merton rule’s inadequate 10% energy improvement standard. That is why Liberal Democrat councillors in my constituency have been pushing hard to change this at the local level. In fact, in the five years since they took control of the council, South Cambridgeshire has rapidly become the district with the highest number of solar panels fitted and with the fastest increase in planning applications that include solar panels.

It is the lack of ambition and political will at the national level that has held back the revolution in solar rooftops. That is why we are still building homes that are cold and damp and that have skyrocketing energy bills. The former Conservative Government disgracefully scrapped the zero carbon homes policy, and dithered and delayed on the future homes standard.

Earlier, the hon. Member for Waveney Valley (Adrian Ramsay) lamented—in good faith—the drawdown of environmental pledges in 2016. Of course, that was not the coalition Government; what we saw and what we got is what happens when the Liberal Democrats are no longer there to hold people to account.

It will not surprise anyone to hear that I agree wholeheartedly. The record has been corrected. It is vital that the Bill helps to repair that damage, and we look forward to the Minister’s commitment to bringing about these changes.

As has been mentioned, the lack of ambition on the solar rooftop revolution has contributed to the barrier to public acceptance of larger scale solar farms. We are hearing people say, “Why not put panels on the rooftops of homes, industrial sites and commercial warehouses first?” We need a joined-up plan; we need the Government urgently to bring forward the much-promised land use framework and the National Energy System Operator’s strategic spatial energy plan, which will show how much solar farm energy is still needed and where it would be best placed. In that way, we can meet all our needs.

The Bill is our chance to get this right. It is our chance for a cleaner, greener and more secure future that addresses the triple cost of living, housing and climate crises and takes people with us. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Cheltenham.

I thank the hon. Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson) for bringing this sunshine to the Chamber today.

The horrific wildfires raging in California and the recent flooding that we saw provide yet more reminders that urgent action is needed to tackle the climate and nature emergency. I am proud that, under this Labour Government, the UK is once again showing climate leadership. We know that we cannot tackle the housing crisis without tackling the climate crisis. Nor can we achieve our core growth mission or increase living standards without acknowledging the huge impact of climate change.

The built environment is responsible for 40% of emissions, and decarbonising our housing stock is essential. As a member of the all-party parliamentary group on ClimateTech, which is chaired by my hon. Friend the Member for Exeter (Steve Race), I was pleased to attend a recent event in Parliament, where we met start-ups working on innovative solutions to decarbonise the built environment. The Government’s steadfast commitment to this agenda and to policies such as Great British Energy and the warm homes plan were warmly welcomed by the businesses I met.

Turning to my constituency, I want to share an example of how a local business can use the expansion of rooftop solar and of low-carbon heating and energy generation to help our Government achieve their mission of stimulating economic growth and raising living standards in all parts of the country. I recently visited a former Marks and Spencer on Mostyn street in Llandudno, which the owners are transforming into a massive indoor entertainment centre. That is exactly the kind of development that places such as Llandudno need. The owners have installed a huge solar array, which will save the business £32,000 a year and about 25 tonnes of carbon. For me, the most exciting part of that development is that the installation was part-funded by the local authority and done by a local business. We do not want just the cleaner, cheaper energy that rooftop solar will provide; we also want the jobs.

I absolutely agree, and that is why we need to get this right, not just on rooftop solar but on the skills for retrofitting and in low-carbon heating in general. A lot of work needs to be done to ensure that businesses have the skills so that we can expand and do what we need with this whole agenda.

We need to ensure that local businesses benefit from the jobs and supply chain opportunities that the expansion of low-carbon heating and rooftop solar would provide, because tackling climate change and increasing living standards go hand in hand. It is critical that we get this right across the piece.

I call the shadow Minister.

I commend the hon. Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson) for bringing this important issue to the House. It is good to see the Minister in his place—I know he and Ministers in his Department have had a busy week.

Solar energy has an essential role to play in decarbonising our power sector by putting otherwise unused roof space to good use. Solar panels are an effective technology for reducing carbon emissions, and the Bill proposes a forward-looking measure that would require the installation of solar PV generation equipment on new homes. Its Second Reading offers us an opportunity to debate the merits of the proposal and its potential contribution to our shared goal of reaching net zero by 2050.

While welcoming the Bill and its aims outlined this morning, I would like to add to the debate some possible unintended consequences of the Bill in its present form. I want to be a genuinely constructive voice in ensuring that the Bill gets to Committee—I hope the hon. Member sees that—but some areas could be strengthened. I appreciated his sunny disposition in bringing the legislation to the House today. I will try to be a ray of sunshine as I get through this speech. [Interruption.] I am in danger of misleading the House there. I hope to be a sunny ray of light in Committee should the Bill get through and we table amendments to it.

The previous Government supported solar energy generation where it was appropriate. Our efforts included a £50 million fund aimed at supporting rooftop solar installations to enhance on-farm energy security. The responsibility for advancing solar and renewable energy now rests with this Government, and we wish them luck in doing so while remaining sceptical about the abilities of GB Energy to see that through. Under the last Government’s leadership, we delivered 2.5 million homes since 2010, including 1 million homes during our final term in office. That provided more people with the opportunity to own their homes and expanded options for renters.

Additionally, in November 2023, as has been outlined, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government announced expanded development rights, making it easier for homeowners and businesses to install rooftop solar panels without the need for planning permission in most cases. That was a positive step, and I hope to see such support continue. As the Government pledge to deliver 1.5 million homes in this Parliament, we must ask ourselves what impact the Bill would have on house building. Building costs are already high and projected to rise further. Even the chief executive of Homes England has admitted that delivering Labour’s housing target may require two parliamentary terms, not one as the Minister outlined.

I also note that the implementation date of 1 October 2026 in clause 1 provides little time for the industry to adapt to the significant challenges the Bill introduces. Given the growing pressures on the industry, it is necessary to question whether the Government have considered and worked on the potential skills shortage, as an hon. Member raised earlier, and the feasibility of implementing the standards in this well-intentioned Bill.

We know that the UK has one of the oldest housing stocks among developed countries, with a particularly complex system of housing tenure. Buildings owned by freeholders and occupied by a mix of leaseholders and tenants present ongoing challenges for successive Governments when implementing necessary updates and retrofits. Meanwhile, in the realm of housing development, where 1.4 million new units already have planning consent, developers continue to highlight issues, such as the cost of solar panels, as a significant obstacle to advancing new housing projects. We must therefore consider whether the additional costs imposed by the Bill could hinder progress in delivering housing. Could it add restrictions to house building plans, particularly when it comes into effect in 2026? We are open to the timescale that the Bill would implement.

Does my hon. Friend not accept that, while it is not remotely surprising that some developers are resistant on the grounds that the Bill will add to the costs of building property—it indubitably will—we should recognise the flipside of that coin, which is that it will enhance the value of the property and make its management and running much more affordable?

My right hon. Friend is absolutely correct. If he will allow me, I will elaborate on that further on in my oration this morning, when I will look at the other side of the coin. While absolutely taking into account that house builders will have concerns over costs and will claim concerns over costs, as we have seen various organisations do, we also have concerns about the ongoing maintenance costs of these technologies for those who buy the properties in the first place. There is a balance to strike, which we can look at further if the Bill goes into Committee.

Maintaining solar panels, as my right hon. Friend was tempting me to say, is not without challenges. Repairs often require scaffolding, which can be expensive. We worry that an unintended consequence of the Bill could be increased costs for residents, home owners and property owners. How will we support home owners facing frequent and costly repairs?

The updates to the national planning policy framework present an opportunity to consider how such requirements can be better embedded in planning law. I recognise that administrators face a challenging task. The framework contains approximately 19 chapters of guidance, which each local authority must reflect in its local plan after public examination, ensuring full alignment with those chapters. The complexity of the process, combined with consideration of local environmental factors, such as surface water run-off, and the need for materials to align with established practices, creates a considerable challenge.

To translate the aspirations outlined by Members into real-world outcomes, we must simplify the process for local authorities to enable them to fulfil their role as community leaders. Instead of requiring lengthy and costly procedures to prove compliance with planning law, we need to ensure that the relevant standards can be implemented efficiently. The previous Government consulted on a future homes standard to ensure that all new homes would be zero carbon-ready. That included provisions for solar panels where appropriate. We must also ensure that brownfield sites are prioritised for housing development and stand-alone solar power, rather than sacrificing valuable agricultural land, as we risk seeing under the Government’s proposals. I sincerely hope that they will build on the progress we saw as a result of the previous Government’s consultation and the feedback gathered.

As we consider the Bill, it is important to recognise that not all buildings are suitable for solar panels. Factors such as structural strength, the direction and orientation of buildings and challenges with maintenance access must be taken into account. As I believe the hon. Member for Cheltenham has recognised, a one-size-fits-all mandate might lead to unintended consequences or inefficiencies. What discussions has he or the Government had and what consultations have taken place with the building industry during the drafting of this legislation? Collaboration with developers and stakeholders is critical to ensuring the successful implementation of such a policy. Consumer and local choice must also play a role in these decisions. I am concerned about the Labour Government’s apparent intent to reduce the influence of local representatives on planning committees. Local people should have a say on what is built in their area—we have heard some examples from local council leadership across the country this morning.

If this Bill receives passes its Second Reading today, we will scrutinise it thoroughly to ensure that it balances the need to build more homes with the imperative of increasing energy efficiency and production. I welcome the proposed exemptions for buildings that cannot support solar due to roof positioning or other factors. Those exemptions need further scrutiny in Committee to ensure that they are comprehensive. Sensibly, the Bill allows for other renewable energy systems to be used where solar is not feasible; that is practical. However, the list of exemptions should not allow developers to adapt their designs in order to avoid installing solar panels, so that they can avoid what they claim are increased costs. As my right hon. Friend the Member for Herne Bay and Sandwich (Sir Roger Gale) and a number of colleagues on the Labour Benches mentioned, there remains a risk that house builders or developers will identify loopholes in the legislation that they can use to say, “We can’t build solar on that, so we will do either a cheaper alternative or none at all.” However, if Members in all parts of the House work together in Committee, we can strengthen the legislation to ensure that developers put these technologies on buildings across the country.

When the zero carbon homes standard was scrapped by the Conservative Government in 2015, a Government report said that scrapping that standard was designed to reduce regulations on house builders. Many people said that the Conservative party had been put under considerable pressure by house builders who were very generous to that party. Will the shadow Minister reassure me that if this Bill reaches Committee, he will be in favour of putting pressure on the house builders to comply?

There I was, being nice about a Liberal Democrat-proposed Bill. As the hon. Lady knows, the Liberal Democrats are the bane of my life in my constituency, but I was being nice to the Liberal Democrat Member who introduced this Bill, and the hon. Lady has come back and been quite nasty to a Conservative. [Interruption.] Thank you very much.

As my speech clearly outlines, we in the Opposition will take a pragmatic approach to legislation that comes before the House, so that people will see the right measures brought in—for developers, if necessary—for new developments across the country. I am not going to be party political and talk about donations. The last Government had a very strong track record of reducing carbon emissions and making sure we delivered the homes that we need across the country. We will continue to be a constructive voice in Parliament, as I tried to outline to the hon. Member for Cheltenham. We will be very pragmatic and constructive in making sure that the aims of this Bill are realised, should it reach Committee. The hon. Member for South Devon (Caroline Voaden) has my assurance on that, as the shadow Minister responsible for this policy area.

I fully support initiatives to encourage renewable energy and solar panel usage, but it is crucial to address the practical challenges we face. As has been mentioned, the national grid’s infrastructure may not be equipped to handle a significant increase in capacity from solar generation alone. A recent article outlined that £60 billion of investment in the national grid is needed to make sure that solar energy can be put back into the grid in a sustainable way.

I will conclude—many will be pleased to hear—by reaffirming the Conservative party’s strong commitment to the UK’s target of reaching net zero by 2050. I am proud to say that we have already achieved a 50% reduction in emissions between 1990 and 2022 while growing our economy by 79%. As we continue on this journey, our policies must strike a balance between ambition and realism. I look forward to hearing more about the provisions in this Bill, and hope that this debate will bring us closer to solutions that support both its practical implementation and our environmental goals. I once again congratulate the hon. Member for Cheltenham, and look forward to seeing him—if he is lucky—in a Committee on this legislation. At the risk of being sanctioned, I promise him that I will be a ray of sunlight when we work together to ensure that this Bill is strengthened and becomes legislation.

I congratulate the hon. Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson) on initiating this high-quality debate. It has been an honour to hear the many contributions that have been made.

New homes must be built with the years 2030, 2040 and 2050 in mind, not the year 2000, and I am glad that the national planning policy framework has been drafted in the context of the wider climate crisis, so that planning decisions on new homes apply a presumption in favour of sustainable development. I look forward to the sunshine that the Minister will bring at the end of the debate, along with, I hope, more details about supplementing the NPPF.

The domestic installation of solar panels has had a rough history in the UK since 2010. The previous Labour Government adopted zero-carbon homes regulations, but they were watered down in 2010 and largely scrapped in 2015. One million new homes have been built since 2010, most of them with minimal standards for water and energy efficiency. Sooner or later those, along with all the much older homes, will have to be retrofitted.

All our constituents really care about the climate crisis. It is one of the most common topics in my mailbox; it is raised by children in schools, and by grandparents at residents’ meetings. Yesterday evening I attended a meeting of Osterley and Wyke Green residents’ association in my constituency, where we discussed solar panels. Many residents who live in conservation areas want to be able to install solar panels on their south-facing roofs where they face the road, and have asked me to see whether that is an issue of supplementary guidance or of national planning policy. I look forward to the Minister’s response.

We have a housing shortage in North Norfolk. In in particular, we need to build houses that are affordable to buy and cheap to run. Most of my constituents would be far happier with the current growth in house building if they knew that the properties were being built to meet the needs of local families, and that can be done. Some of the most energy-efficient, low-cost housing in my constituency has been built by housing associations, such as Broadland, that have constructed mixed developments containing both expensive and social housing, and it would be perfectly possible to do that at scale.

The new regulations on solar panel installation that the Bill would require the Secretary of State to create could help us to deal with some of the problems and frustrations about rooftop solar. One constituent complained to me about a lack of quality bird netting or deterrents on solar panels in his street, which has led to a large influx of pigeons that are causing a considerable nuisance to him and his neighbours. That may sound like a scene from a Hitchcock film, but it is causing daily frustration, and could be easily avoided if the provisions in the Bill were correctly applied. I cannot find any puns to add to that story.

Anyone who wants to tackle climate change knows that it makes sense to put solar panels on the roofs of new builds. Anyone who wants to move into a house with low or no energy costs knows it, and anyone who is worried about excess solar farms being installed in our fields knows it, too.

Let me start by sincerely thanking the hon. Member for Cheltenham (Max Wilkinson) for introducing the Bill, for the constructive spirit in which he has engaged with me on it, and for his laudable efforts outside the Chamber—including his efforts as a local councillor, before coming to this place—to promote the further growth of solar power. I know it is a cause that he cares about, and his passion and commitment were evident in his opening remarks. I also thank all the other Members who have spoken this morning for their thoughtful and well-informed contributions. It has been a wide-ranging debate and the quality has been high—although the same cannot be said, I am afraid, for many of the puns that have been made throughout.

The Government are extremely sympathetic to the intention behind the Bill, namely to significantly boost the deployment of rooftop solar. That aim is clearly shared widely across the House, and for good reason. Self-generation and consumption through solar PV panels not only decreases emissions and delivers bill savings for householders, but provides security from fluctuations in wholesale electricity prices. As solar technology becomes more efficient and affordable, installing panels during construction is increasingly more cost-effective than retrofitting, a point that many Members touched on. The Government are, therefore, in complete agreement with the hon. Gentleman that solar energy has an integral role to play in improving the energy efficiency and reducing the carbon emissions of new homes.

However, we cannot support the Bill today. That is because the Government already intend to amend building regulations later this year as part of the introduction of future standards that will set more ambitious energy efficiency and carbon emissions requirements for new homes. The new standards will ensure that all new homes are future-proof, with low-carbon heating and very high-quality building fabric. Not only will they help us to deliver our commitment to reach net-zero emissions by 2050, but they will reduce bills, tackle fuel poverty, grow skills, foster diverse job markets and make Britain energy secure.

Let me make this absolutely clear to the House and to those watching our proceedings: solar energy will have an extremely important role to play in these standards. The Government’s reservations about the Bill are not related to its objective; rather, they stem from recognition that the regulatory landscape being dealt with is incredibly complex and that we must take great care to get the technical detail right. My officials and I are working to develop the technical detail of the solar standards we intend to implement, with a view to ensuring that they are both ambitious and achievable. Our concern is that passing primary legislation that does not strike that balance correctly could have adverse effects, including on housing supply, the construction industry and local authorities.

Although the Bill is not inherently flawed, we are not convinced that it is the most appropriate means of proceeding, for reasons I shall set out shortly. None the less, the hon. Member for Cheltenham has done the House a great service by providing hon. Members with a valuable opportunity to debate this important issue. In the time available to me, I will try to give the House a sense of some of the practical challenges we have been wrestling with as we develop and refine our emerging proposals, and how they speak to potential weaknesses in the Bill.

As hon. Members will be aware, in December 2023 the previous Government published the future homes and buildings standards consultation, setting out proposals on what new standards should entail. The consultation closed in March last year. Over 2,000 responses were received, and some of the most detailed feedback the Department received related to the options set out in respect of solar. The hon. Gentleman has, I know, amassed a not inconsiderable amount of technical expertise when it comes to rooftop solar systems, and he has consulted with industry stakeholders, so he will be acutely aware that setting environmental standards for new homes is not something that Government can do in isolation. To succeed, we must take industry with us, and crucially, we must also ensure that the standards we set are achievable on all sites across the country.

While it is certainly not dictatorial, the expert feedback to the consultation as well as our ongoing work with the industry-led future homes hub, where we have been considering matters such as design flexibility, has been invaluable in shaping the Government’s thinking on what future standards should look like and how they should be implemented. The feedback to the consultation we received drew attention in particular to a number of practical considerations, which we believe it is essential to take into account when determining the precise role of solar in the new standards. I shall touch briefly on three, to illustrate the sort of practical issue my officials and I have been weighing up as we develop the forthcoming new standards, and in so doing give the House a sense of why we feel the Bill may not be the right way to achieve the objective we all share.

The first consideration relates to the ground floor area requirement. As hon. Members know, the future homes and buildings standards consultation set out two options for new homes; both included very high-quality building fabric and a heat pump. The first option also included several additional elements, notably solar panels equating to 40% of the ground-floor area. While respondents were very supportive of the inclusion of solar panels, widespread concerns were raised about the proposed level of solar coverage, which many argued would be virtually impossible to achieve on certain types of home—for example, those with dormer windows.

Clause 1(2) of the Bill sets out a requirement for the same level of solar coverage as was proposed in the consultation. Having thoroughly explored the evidence submitted during the consultation process, the Government have concluded that this level of ground-floor area coverage, rather than just being challenging for a small proportion of new supply, is simply not feasible for many new homes. Importantly, our concern is that setting a requirement at this level in law would result in a significant number of homes needing to apply for an exemption to the standards, which in turn could cause unmanageable workloads in local authorities, lead to significant bottlenecks in housing supply, and ultimately reduce the speed at which rooftop solar on new homes is rolled out.

Determining exemptions is by no means a trivial task. Solar panel systems must be designed carefully for each individual house, taking into account features such as roof shape and pitch, roof lights and dormers. As such, determining the number of solar panels a roof can reasonably accept is a technical design exercise for which many local planning authorities are simply not resourced to carry out in large numbers. Furthermore, any regulation would need to have an enforcement mechanism to deal with instances where unscrupulous developers simply did not comply. The Bill does not address that point, and again, we fear it could end up being another burden that will fall on overstretched local planning authorities. Alive as we are to these unintended consequences, the Government are determined to take an approach that is both ambitious and technically feasible so that widespread exemptions are not necessary.

The second issue relates to the timeframe for introducing the changes. Clause 1(1) stipulates that solar PV will be mandatory on new build homes from 1 October 2026. While that may seem some way into the future, the design and specification of new housing developments is typically set some considerable time prior to construction. As a result, the Bill’s proposed commencement date could risk a significant increase in costs and delays to housing delivery, as developers are forced to rapidly redesign, including sites already in train.

It is important to bear in mind that those in the industry cannot properly prepare for the new requirement until they have access to the final regulations and accompanying statutory guidance. Preparing the regulations and said guidance is not an insignificant task. They need to be drafted and consulted upon, with the consultation open for at least 12 weeks to align with standard protocol and to permit industry sufficient time to respond to such significant proposals.

Following the consultation, the regulations and guidance will need to be finalised and passed using the affirmative resolution process. It is therefore unlikely that the full detail will be available to the construction sector until the end of this year at the earliest, giving the sector only a few months to redesign and get supply chains prepared. These issues are particularly pertinent for small and medium-sized enterprises, which are less equipped to respond quickly. By potentially compressing this period to meet the proposed deadline, housing sites that are already under way may become unviable, leading to wasted investment, a negative impact on housing supply and disruption to numerous local communities across the country—outcomes that I am sure Members will agree we must try to avoid.

The third and final issue relates to transitional arrangements. Government typically minimise the disruption associated with the introduction of new building regulations by setting out associated transitional arrangements. These arrangements determine the limited conditions under which a building can be built to the previous standards. That gives industry time to adapt to new standards and allows work that is already under way to be completed without major disruption. When the 2021 standards were introduced, a six-month period was allowed between laying the regulations and the standards coming into force, followed by a 12-month transitional period. That meant the regulations were laid on 15 December 2021, with the transitional period ending on 15 June 2023.

This Bill does make provision for the Secretary of State to put in place transitional arrangements. However, our reading of the Bill is that those arrangements cannot contradict or override its main premise that new homes built from 1 October 2026 must be fitted with solar panels. As a result, we are concerned that there may not be sufficient time for appropriate transitional arrangements to be set. We believe it is vital that they are set, given that the construction sector typically plans ahead by at least two, if not three or even more, years. Providing merely a matter of weeks between publishing such significant legislation and its taking effect would not be realistic or fair, in our view.

I have been listening carefully to what the Minister has said. Does he agree that a vote on Second Reading is a vote on the principle of the Bill, and the objections that he has been raising are micro, technical ones? Does he not agree that the urgency of the climate crisis and the immense benefits associated with solar PV mean that he should stop raining on the parade of this Bill and give us the opportunity to vote on photons?

The hon. Lady makes a fair challenge, but the Government do not intend to proceed on the basis of primary legislation. She might find that the primary legislation route is ultimately slower than the way in which we intend to introduce the future standards later this year. Speed is absolutely an issue we are grappling with, but I gently challenge the idea that this private Member’s Bill is the fastest way to proceed, even leaving aside the points I have raised, which I do not consider to be minor or technical.

In contrast, the future homes standards consultation sets out two options for transitional arrangements, which we believe are far more robust. The first option involves a six-month period between the laying date of the regulations and the regulations coming into force. The second option involves a period of up to 12 months. That approach to transition will ensure that as many homes as possible are required to meet the new standards in a way that is structured and achievable.

It is our responsibility to ensure that the standards we set for new homes are ambitious, but also technically feasible and deliverable, as I have said. For the reasons I have set out, and others that I have not covered today, we believe that forthcoming future standards, developed as a clear and coherent response to the 2023 consultation, are a more appropriate and arguably faster means of achieving the Bill’s aims, which we fully share with the hon. Member for Cheltenham.

Reflecting on the point made by the hon. Member for Broxbourne (Lewis Cocking) about industry using excuses to push back on delivering homes, can the Minister give assurances that in their efforts the Government will push ahead with renewable energy, particularly solar, and do everything they can to ensure that industry and housing companies do not use viability as an excuse not to deliver the many new homes that we need?

My hon. Friend makes a good point. I am afraid that the time to go into it is not available to me, but I would mention the Government’s intention to revise viability guidance this year to strengthen the section 106 developer contributions system rather than implementing the infrastructure levy that the previous Government devised. In lots of different respects, this Government are absolutely ensuring that developers are held to the commitments they make, and, as she will know, we gave significant weight to the benefits of renewable and low-carbon energy proposals more generally in the NPPF.

As I was saying, maintaining consistency with the established direction of travel is vital. There is a history of environmental standards being committed to and then withdrawn by previous Governments, which has understandably left industry reluctant to invest in preparing for new standards. However, since its announcement in 2019, the future homes standard has become a world-recognised framework, giving industry time to develop the necessary supply chains, skills and construction practices, and many developers are already building to higher standards in anticipation of its roll-out. Introducing conflicting legislation at this stage could create significant confusion and risks reversing the confidence and momentum that we have worked hard to establish.

Let me reassure the House that it is our firm intention to legislate for future standards later this year, as I have made clear, and to increase rooftop solar deployment significantly as a result. I understand that hon. Members and industry will need more details about what the standards will entail before they can arrive at a judgment as to their efficacy. Although we need to take the necessary time to get that right, my intention is to set out further details as soon as I am able—in the not-too-distant future, I hope.

I understand that 1.5 million Germans live in flats that have solar panels on their balconies. Will the Minister consider that as an option, in both new and retrofitted housing, as he looks at this important work?

As I said, we will set out further details on the new standards in the not-too-distant future.

I reiterate my thanks to the hon. Member for Cheltenham for introducing this commendable Bill. Although the Government cannot support it for the reasons that I have given, we very much agree with the sentiment and ambition that have motivated it, and I recognise and appreciate all the dedicated work that I know he has put into it. For that reason, and assuming that he is willing, I would very much welcome an ongoing dialogue with him as the Government progress our work on the new standards, so that he has an opportunity to build on the important contribution that he has made in introducing this legislation, and to work closely with me and my officials prior to the introduction of our legislation so that his work and the views he has developed are properly incorporated and taken into account. On that basis, and given the widespread consensus on the objectives of the Bill, I hope that he will not seek to divide the House on its Second Reading.

I thank the Minister for his generous words. Although I accept that I will not be cracking open a beer this evening to celebrate the Bill’s passing—perhaps a bottle of Corona—this has been an important debate and it has demonstrated consensus across the House, save for the local difficulties of the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Hamble Valley (Paul Holmes), which we should not go into again.

A range of views were expressed about the energy mix. My view is that we need a mix of energy generation that includes all the things discussed today. I am pleased to hear that the matter will be up for future discussion and I look forward to working on it with the Government—particularly on the important point of applying pressure to developers in a way that gets the pragmatic outcome that we all deserve. I thank all Members for their contributions to the discussion.

Ordered, That the debate be now adjourned—(Christian Wakeford.)

Debate to be resumed on Friday 11 July.