The Government's Energy Bill came back to Parliament for the third reading/report stage this week, so I spent most of today in the Chamber debating various amendments tabled by MPs.

I had tabled a number of amendments to try to strengthen the Bill, and have my support to some introduced by fellow MPs.

Unfortunately, the majority of Lib Dem and Conservative MPs refused to back these efforts - you can read my response to the outcome of the final votes here.

Here's a summary of the amendments which I supported:

1. Decarbonisation target

Conservative MP Tim Yeo’s amendments on a clean electricity target were a real improvement compared to the Government’s position, so I added my name to them in February.  

As I highlighted in my reaction to the publication of the Bill in November (see here), and again in my contribution to the debate at the Second Reading stage, I believe that a firm target to decarbonise the power sector by 2030 - at the latest - is absolutely essential.

It's therefore deeply disappointing that a majority of MPs today failed to support it.

2. Nuclear power

I tabled my own amendments on parts of the Bill that would introduce public subsidies for nuclear power.

The scale of subsidy required to bring forward new nuclear generation will impose enormous and unjustifiable costs on householders and businesses.

It also flies in the face of the Coalition’s 2010 pledge not to use public money to subsidise new nuclear power.

There are serious concerns about the ongoing secretive negotiations between Ministers and energy company EDF over new nuclear, as set out in this article and in this letter published in the Sunday Telegraph. 

Similar arguments have been put forward by four of the UK’s leading environmentalists in a recent letter to the Prime Minister on the economics of nuclear power.

3. Preventing a dash for gas & handouts for fossil fuels 

This amendment related to the proposals for a ‘capacity mechanism’ that would lead to public money being used to incentivise the construction of large numbers of new gas-fired power stations, rather than alternative solutions such as energy storage, interconnectors, and demand-side measures.

The Government’s dash for gas is deeply irresponsible, because it will fatally undermine our hopes of tackling climate change and increase the risk of higher energy bills.

We know that gas prices have been the main cause of recent energy bill rises and are expected to increase further.

4. Energy efficiency and demand reduction

The most effective way of tackling fuel poverty and high energy bills is to reduce the overall amount of energy we need keep our homes warm and to cut energy waste.

So I tabled a new clause to introduce an ambitious economy-wide target for energy demand reduction.

5. Boosting renewable energy and giving local people more ownership of our energy system - breaking the big six monopoly

My fourth set of amendments aimed to provide better support for renewable energy – including projects owned and developed by community groups and independent generators by introducing a decentralised generation feed in tariff. 

A new clause would have given local communities a right to first access to power generated locally and to ownership of the local grid.

These would radically democratise our energy system, end the dominance of the big six energy companies, and be likely to result in lower electricity prices too.

 In addition to the above, I also:

- tabled an amendment on energy contract rollovers for small businesses, as in my Private Members Bill: http://www.carolinelucas.com/media/caroline-launches-bill-to-protect-local-micro-businesses-from-energy-rip-off.html  

- jointly tabled an amendment on a new independent panel of experts to advise on whether contracts for difference are good value from consumers

- supported an SNP amendment on fuel poverty tax

- supported amendment preventing unsustainable quantities of biomass being burned in big inefficient power stations