Labour is facing criticism after it ditched its pledge to spend £28 billion a year on green projects, as senior party figures sought to defend the U-turn.
Environmental groups, trade union allies and energy industry figures have all expressed disappointment at the move – while the Tories have continued to attack Labour’s fiscal credibility.
Shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves blamed the Conservatives’ mishandling of the economy, citing Liz Truss’ mini-budget fiasco, as she warned Labour would face a “bleak inheritance” if it wins power at the next general election.
Sir Keir Starmer announced on Thursday the figure would be drastically scaled back to £23.7 billion over the course of the next parliament if his party wins the next election.
He insisted the ambitions behind Labour’s flagship green prosperity plan remain the same, and recommitted to his mission to achieve clean power by 2030.
But the party’s plan to insulate homes is set to be one casualty of the climbdown, with five million expected to be completed in the first five years rather than the 19 million initially promised.
Ms Reeves faced questions on BBC Breakfast about why voters, after the latest about-turn, should believe Labour when it sets out promises and pledges.
She said: “I’ll make no apologies for ensuring that our plan is fully costed, fully funded and deliverable within the inheritance we’re going to get.
“It is going to be a bleak inheritance after the damage the Conservatives have done to our economy.”
She said: “In the almost three years that I’ve been shadow chancellor, I think people have heard loud and clear from me that fiscal responsibility, economic responsibility, are the most important things for me because it is absolutely essential that the public finances are managed well.”
“And when economic circumstances change, your plans have to change as well,” Ms Reeves added.
Speaking to Sky News, shadow business secretary Jonathan Reynolds insisted the plan was still ambitious.
“If the cost of borrowing has gone up at the rate it has, we have to reflect that.
“I’d love it to be different but we have to be honest and candid about the impact it has.”
The spending pledge was first made in September 2021 and Labour has blamed Tory stewardship of the economy and higher interest rates since then for the reversal.
Concerns have been expressed by some Labour MPs on the left of the party, including Clive Lewis and Barry Gardiner, while the Unite union – a major party donor – said the party risks “outsourcing their policy-making to the Conservatives”.
Emma Pinchbeck, chief executive of trade association Energy UK, also warned that “business needs to know that politicians won’t pull the rug from under them”.
The Tories had seized on the original pledge as a key attack line in the run-up to an election this year, claiming Labour would ultimately have to raise taxes to meet the “unfunded spending spree”.
Those attacks continued in the wake of the announcement, with Mr Sunak mocked the Labour U-turn during a visit to the South West.
The Prime Minister told broadcasters: “I think what Labour announced yesterday just demonstrates what we’ve been saying – they absolutely don’t have a plan.
“Their signature economic policy is in tatters, and when you don’t have a plan, you can’t deliver any change for the country.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel