Britain's Most Reckless and Hypocritical MP?—Miliband Investigated

Detailing the Energy Secretary's conduct in office.

First elected MP for Doncaster North in 2005, Edward Samuel Miliband rose quickly. He led Labour from 2010 to 2015, after serving in Gordon Brown’s Cabinet alongside his brother.

Following Labour’s defeat in the 2015 general election, he stepped down as leader and retreated to the backbenches.

Under Sir Keir Starmer, Miliband has been handed one of the most consequential posts in government: Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero.

He has an annual budget of over £9 billion (as of 2024), can sign off on various green subsidies and grants, and determine all sorts of energy regulation.

His appointment doesn’t really mark a change in agenda—the Conservatives largely loved Net Zero—but rather in the nature of that agenda. Everything is fast-tracked, more aggressive.

It is due to this aggression that many argue his record reads like a checklist of recklessness: soaring public spending, high-stakes green gambles, and relentless climate alarmism.

What follows is a brief but hopefully revealing summary of his conduct since becoming energy secretary.

---

Conflicts of Interest

It seems right to start off with Miliband’s conflicts of interest, which should have perhaps disqualified him as Energy Secretary. Yet, they appear to have been ignored.

Last September, investigative journalist David Rose exposed unethical links between Ed Miliband and the green-energy sector. Ones that involve his own brother, former Foreign Secretary David Miliband.

David Miliband currently works as a paid adviser for Giant Ventures, a London-based investment firm.

David Miliband

Among Giant’s investments is Field Energy, a battery storage firm, set to profit from Labour’s energy policies as they store the energy from renewable sources like wind and solar.

Curiously, three weeks after Labour's 2024 election win, Ed personally approved a technical rule change affecting Britain's electricity market. And it directly benefitted Field Energy.

Under the old rules, companies like Field had a problem.

Battery capacity deteriorates with use. To stay within contract limits, firms had to install more capacity upfront—at their own cost—to ensure their supply promises wouldn’t be breached as performance declined.

Miliband scrapped the rule that prevented firms from topping up capacity later. Now, instead of overspending at the start, battery companies can cut costs, then add new units later—if and when they need them.

On the same day, Miliband also sent a letter to the National Grid setting out the future of the “capacity mechanism”—offering fresh incentives for battery construction.

The reforms created precisely the conditions that firms like Field, and the venture capitalists behind them, have been hoping for.

But it gets worse, there’s also direct conflicts—again, concerning his brother.

As Outlet Guido Fawkes recently spotted, Miliband’s department has handed over £1.1 million in public contracts to Verian Group UK, a research and comms firm.

Sitting on Verian’s board? David Miliband.

That’s over a million pounds in taxpayer-funded contracts going from a department run by one brother to a company employing the other.

And what were these contracts for? Not energy security. Not infrastructure. But vague exercises in “public understanding of Net Zero” and “understanding secondary heating behaviours”.

Unfortunately, it appears Miliband’s department isn’t just fraught with financial conflicts—the credibility of its research has also been brought into question.

In November, Ed Miliband praised a report from the government-owned National Energy System Operator (NESO), which supported the government's Clean Power by 2030 target.

He declared, “Expert analysis backs our policy and its benefits for the country. Defeatist critics should take note.”

What he failed to disclose: that very same report from NESO was based off feedback Miliband’s department gave to them.

In short, his department shaped the “impartial” research he used to justify policy.

---

Hypocritical Conduct

As someone who, just two months ago, said “the climate crisis is an existential threat to our way of life in Britain,” you would expect the Energy Secretary’s actions to reflect the severity of the “crisis”.

They do not.

Since taking office, FOI requests have revealed that Miliband has racked up at least 44,600 air miles as of April 16th—a carbon footprint twelve times higher than that of the average Brit.

Some of his recent trips include a journey to New Delhi, costing £17,159 for flights alone, and a visit to China to launch “formal energy and climate discussions and demonstrate global climate leadership,” which cost a meaty £32,844.

On both occasions, Miliband’s team (up to five people) flew business class. His other travel destinations have included Brazil, New York, Scotland, and Northern Ireland.

It might be a little obvious to point out but, if the climate crisis is as dire as claimed, why ignore Zoom? The videoconferencing platform could easily replace in person meets with virtual discussions. Carbon emissions solved.

That same February trip to China? Miliband departed from Heathrow Airport (LHR)—the very airport whose expansion he has vehemently opposed.

In fact, Heathrow is the airport he frequents the most, with four flights from LHR compared to only one each from Stansted and Gatwick.

“Reckless” Policy

This issue is a bit of a minefield.

Labour’s “clean” energy plan (like the Conservatives’ before) is riddled with so many flaws and costs, you could write a dissertation on it. But the heart of the problem is simple: it’s an expensive ideological project detached from reality.

For decades, Britain’s energy grid ran on stored power. Coal and nuclear plants provided a steady baseload, while gas turbines adjusted to match real-time demand.

The system worked because the fuels—coal, gas, oil, uranium—could be stockpiled and used when needed.

Then Westminster intervened.

Wind and solar were pushed in, and reliable coal and nuclear were pushed out.

But there was a flaw: when renewables did generate power, it was inconsistent.

Unlike fossil fuels, they also required constant and careful maintenance—replacing turbine blades, handling toxic solar panel waste, and dealing with degrading battery storage.

It is this dynamic that has partly made Britain’s electricity the most expensive in the developed world.

Taxes, green levies, and subsidies now make up more than three-quarters of the average household electricity bill. And the costs keep rising.

Professor Gordon Hughes, a senior fellow at the National Centre for Energy Analytics, estimates it will take £150 billion over the next five years to build the wind and solar farms Miliband wants. That entire sum will land on consumer bills.

All this, while inflation climbs, unemployment rises, household incomes fall, and public debt hits 95.8% of GDP.

Miliband’s department in the interim has, however, found the time and cash for some heat pump PR.

In March, they hired model and former Strictly contestant Daisy Lowe to pose beside a heat pump at Muncaster Castle in Cumbria. The campaign’s slogan: “heat pump pride” over “heat pump prejudice.”

But pride apparently comes at a price.

Even after a £7,500 subsidy, a heat pump can still cost the average Brit around £6,000—far more than a typical gas boiler, which costs closer to £1,200.

And the technology has its faults too.

In 2023, one major heat pump supplier—in what must have been a fit of honesty—warned the Scottish Government against adopting them, citing a number of flaws.

Among them? They struggle in cold weather, fail to heat water to the 60°C required to kill legionella bacteria, and make so much noise that residents near some installations won’t open their windows.

The pain…

---

---

• Do you really believe our best days lie ahead?

• Will you keep watching as our politicians and broadcasters push for yet more surveillance, censorship, and control?

• If you want to push back—if not today, maybe someday—supporting independent journalism can, genuinely, make a real impact.

• In the past year, The Stark Naked Brief reached over 100 million people on X. Sometimes, all it takes is one post—one uncomfortable truth—to wake someone up and put another dent in the uniparty’s monopoly.

---