From green energy to rivers, environment at heart of nine plans in king’s speech

Planning changes, investment in infrastructure, a new national green energy company, a crackdown on water companies and more public transport – although Keir Starmer did not dwell on the green aspects of his legislative programme the environment was front and centre in nine bills that will have far-reaching effects.

In the words read by the king (though written by ministers), the new Labour government “recognises the urgency of the global climate challenge and the new job opportunities that can come from leading the development of the technologies of the future”. But importantly, these measures were presented as ways to reduce the cost of living, a key focus of Labour’s environmental commitments in the run-up to the general election.

At the heart of Labour’s plans is Great British Energy, a publicly owned company that will invest in renewable energy, particularly offshore wind. Siting the headquarters in Scotland is also a nod towards the need for a “just transition” away from oil and gas to green jobs.

Great British Energy will be capitalised with £8.3bn over the course of the parliament, one of the few big green spending commitments remaining after Labour slashed its intended £28bn a year green prosperity plan earlier this year.

Plans to widen the powers of the crown estate to raise money to invest, via the crown estate bill, will also help the green energy push, as will the national wealth fund that is expected to invest in low-carbon projects. The crown estate, which funds the royal family, owns the seabed around the UK where offshore wind is sited and holds regular auctions for sites, which are a key source of its income. Allowing more borrowing and investing is calculated to boost the offshore wind sector.

Water companies will face the most serious – arguably the first serious – challenge to their practices since privatisation in 1989. Labour promised many times, in the course of a campaign where sewage-filled rivers were a constant presence, that it would hold the water bosses to account and put the companies in special measures. Many would have liked to see full renationalisation, as is happening with the railways, but that was ruled out as too expensive.

With Thames Water already fighting to stave off collapse and warning of “critical failure”, and managers until recently continuing to award large dividends and pay deals even while increasing bills, the sector is unlikely to survive the crackdown without major structural changes.

Planning is likely to be the most controversial of the nine bills – the planning and infrastructure bill; the better buses bill; the three rail bills, which are the passenger railway services (public ownership) bill, rail reform bill and high speed rail (Crewe to Manchester) bill; the Great British Energy bill and crown estate bill; the sustainable aviation fuels bill; and the water (special measures bill) – that have a clear green tinge.

Labour will face stiff local, if not parliamentary, opposition over its attempts to rationalise the UK’s planning laws. Ministers say the reforms are needed to build the 1.5m new homes promised, and the infrastructure required to revive the UK’s economy, but both the Liberal Democrats and the Green party saw strong showings in the election partly in response to their calls to adapt new infrastructure schemes in line with the desires of local communities.

The bill will simplify the consenting process, allowing some development to take place on what may previously have been green belt land, and in some areas where it was opposed. Labour has already lifted the effective ban on onshore windfarms in England; the reforms to national policy statements will give a presumption in favour of development, from renewable energy to new housing.

Nature, however, only gets a small reference, with a promise to “use development to fund nature recovery”, mainly through the biodiversity net gain mechanism by which developers must restore and improve the natural environment and species habitats in return for being allowed to build. The wider issue – of biodiversity loss in the UK and what the government plans to do about it - will have to wait for another day.