The claim is that Kemi Badenoch welcomes action to cut the cost of energy. Multiple sources confirm that Badenoch has consistently and publicly welcomed action to cut energy costs: 1. **Her own policy proposals**: Badenoch and the Conservative Party proposed a "Cheap Power Plan" to cut household electricity bills by 20%, including scrapping VAT on energy bills, removing green levies, and maximizing North Sea oil and gas production. Her own website states: "Our Cheap Power Plan would cut household electricity bills by 20 per cent." 2. **Her response to the government's VAT cut**: In an op-ed in The Sun, Badenoch wrote: "So I'm not going to criticise him for finally catching up with me by cutting VAT from electricity bills. I've been saying that for years." She acknowledged "Energy bills are too high" and "ANDY BURNHAM is right about one thing." 3. **Her consistent public advocacy**: On BBC's Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg, Badenoch said the government should cut taxes on energy bills before considering bailouts. She told Sky News: "We need to get Britain drilling. A strong economy relies on cheap, abundant energy." While Badenoch criticized the funding mechanism for the VAT cut (calling it unfunded) and argued the measure didn't go far enough, these qualifications do not contradict the core claim that she welcomes action to cut energy costs. She explicitly welcomed the VAT cut itself and has her own broader plan to reduce energy bills. Sources: - BBC News, "Cut taxes on energy bills before giving bailouts, Kemi Badenoch says" — https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1d941vw172o - BBC News, "Remove VAT from energy bills for three years, Tories urge" — https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4gx01d0re1o - The Sun, "Burnham's VAT cut is robbing Peter to pay Paul…" by Kemi Badenoch — https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/39832186/burnham-vat-cut-labour-kemi-badenoch/ - The Independent, "Badenoch dismisses calls for fuel rationing…" — https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/kemi-badenoch-north-sea-drilling-iran-oil-b2947669.html - Kemi Badenoch MP, "Drilling the North Sea is the answer to the energy crisis" — https://www.kemibadenoch.org.uk/news/kemi-badenoch-mp-drilling-north-sea-answer-energy-crisis - The Independent, "Burnham announces £850m tax cut on energy bills but faces questions over funding" — https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/vat-andy-burnham-cabinet-john-healey-government-b3018683.html

The claim that energy costs are "too high because of Ed Miliband's policies" implies his policies are the primary cause of high energy costs. The evidence consistently shows this is not the case. **Ofgem (official regulator)** attributes the July 2026 price cap rise (13%) to global gas prices and the Middle East conflict. CEO Tim Jarvis stated: "Today's price change reflects continued volatility in global energy markets. This means higher wholesale gas prices, driven by ongoing conflict in the Middle East, is impacting the price we pay for energy." Ofgem's summary document states the outbreak of war in the Middle East in late February was "the primary driver for wholesale market movements over the last three months." **UKERC (independent academic analysis)** found that of the £169 real-terms increase in typical electricity bills between 2021 and 2025, 66% (£112) came from wholesale gas costs, 17% (£28) from network costs, and only 13% (£22) from policy costs. UKERC explicitly states: "Expensive gas still [the] biggest driver of high UK electricity bills." **Policy costs are a small and shrinking share of bills.** The Atlas Institute's analysis of the April-June 2026 price cap shows policy costs account for only ~7% of the bill, while wholesale costs are 42% and network costs are 30%. The government cut policy levies by £130 (from £236 to £106) in April 2026 by scrapping the Energy Company Obligation and shifting Renewables Obligation costs from bills to general taxation. The Resolution Foundation found bills in 2026 were expected to be more than £200 lower in real terms than in 2024. **Regarding Miliband's specific policies** (Clean Power 2030 target, ban on new North Sea drilling licenses, blocking zonal pricing reforms): Energy UK notes that "any increase in gas supply will not have a direct or material impact on energy prices" because UK gas is priced at international market rates — undermining the argument about the North Sea drilling ban. Network cost increases are partly driven by grid expansion for renewables, but Ofgem says these investments will ultimately cut bills relative to the alternative, and much stems from historic underinvestment by previous governments. Much of the policy cost on bills (RO, FiT) was inherited from governments predating Miliband. The dominant driver of high UK energy costs is global wholesale gas prices, not Miliband's policies. While some of his specific decisions may add modest amounts to certain bill components, the evidence indicates the named cause did not produce the effect as claimed. Sources: Ofgem — "Changes to energy price cap between 1 July and 30 September 2026" (https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/news/changes-energy-price-cap-between-1-july-and-30-september-2026); Ofgem — "Energy price cap will rise by 13% from July" (https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/press-release/energy-price-cap-will-rise-13-july); Ofgem — "Summary of changes to energy price cap 1 July to 30 September 2026" (https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/sites/default/files/2026-06/Summary-of-changes-to-energy-price-cap-1-July-to-30-September-2026.pdf); UKERC — "Review of Energy Policy 2025" (https://ukerc.ac.uk/publications/review-of-energy-policy-2025/); UKERC — "The Price of Power" discussion paper (https://ukerc9.rl.ac.uk/publications/working_paper/Price-of-Power-Discussion-Paper-Final.pdf); Carbon Brief — "Expensive gas still biggest driver of high UK electricity bills, says UKERC" (https://www.carbonbrief.org/expensive-gas-still-biggest-driver-of-high-uk-electricity-bills-says-ukerc/); BBC News — "Electricity prices: Three reasons why they are high in the UK" (https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn8n5vnmjlzo); BBC News — "Energy bills to rise for millions as impact of Iran war hits" (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce8pw464986o); BBC News — "Source of Miliband's energy bill pledge casts doubt on savings" (https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwy7gj181k0o); Energy UK — "Briefing: The situation in the Gulf and impact on energy prices" (https://www.energy-uk.org.uk/publications/energy-uk-briefing-the-situation-in-the-gulf-and-impact-on-energy-prices/); Resolution Foundation — "Power cut" (https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/app/uploads/2026/02/Power-cut.pdf); Atlas Institute — "Energy Bills as Political Risk" (https://atlasinstitute.org/energy-bills-as-political-risk-unpacking-the-april-june-2026-price-cap-into-the-drivers-that-shape-net-zero-consent/); Carbon Brief — "Q&A: How the UK government aims to break link between gas and electricity prices" (https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-how-the-uk-government-aims-to-break-link-between-gas-and-electricity-prices/)

Based on the search results, Andy Burnham became Prime Minister of the United Kingdom on July 20, 2026 — one day before Kemi Badenoch's tweet. The claim that "Burnham has new policies" is straightforwardly and abundantly supported by multiple primary and reputable news sources. **Evidence:** 1. **GOV.UK official speech (July 20, 2026):** Burnham's first speech as Prime Minister, published on the UK government website, outlined numerous new policies, including ending rough sleeping, building more council homes, a "new economic model," re-industrialising Britain using public procurement, changing the education system, and more mental health support. He also announced a forthcoming "10-year plan for Britain." 2. **The Guardian (July 21, 2026):** Reported that Burnham announced removing VAT from electricity bills from October 1 (costing £850m), reducing the national bus fare cap from £3 to £2, accelerating a national care service, and major Whitehall restructuring including a new Office for the Prime Minister and Cabinet. 3. **BBC News:** Published a detailed article listing Burnham's policies across devolution, housing (largest council house building programme "since the post-War period"), social care reform, rough sleeping, water/energy public control, welfare reform, personal taxes, business rates reform, and electoral reform. 4. **Bloomberg (July 20, 2026):** Reported on Burnham promising a "new economic model" in his first speech as PM. The evidence overwhelmingly confirms that Burnham has announced and advocated for a wide range of new policies as of July 21, 2026. The claim is factual and well-documented across government sources and multiple independent news organizations. Sources: - GOV.UK, "Andy Burnham's first speech as Prime Minister: 20 July 2026" — https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/andy-burnhams-first-speech-as-prime-minister-20-july-2026 - The Guardian, "Andy Burnham urges cabinet to examine 'all possible ways' to tackle..." (July 21, 2026) — https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/jul/21/defence-uplift-national-care-service-andy-burnham-policies-funding - BBC News, "What are Andy Burnham's potential policies as prime minister?" — https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/clywzj2vk3zo - Bloomberg, "Burnham Promises 'New Economic Model' to Bring Stability to UK" (July 20, 2026) — https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-07-20/burnham-promises-new-economic-model-in-first-speech-as-uk-pm - BBC News, "Burnham's policy choices reveal what kind of PM he wants to be" — https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3r0x5nzg0eo - LabourList, "What would Andy Burnham do if he becomes Prime Minister?" — https://labourlist.org/2026/06/andy-burnham-policies-downing-street/

The claim that "it is unclear how Burnham will fund all his new policies without raising taxes or borrowing more" is well-supported by multiple independent and authoritative sources as of July 21, 2026. **Multiple policies lack identified funding:** - The BBC reported that Burnham's planned council house building programme — "the biggest since the post-War period" — has no funding details set out. The Institute for Government explicitly stated: "He will not be able to pretend there is money to fund every priority without raising taxes or making cuts elsewhere," noting Burnham faces a "tax lock" (pledge not to raise income tax, NI, or VAT) and has re-committed to fiscal rules limiting borrowing, while having ambitious spending plans for social care, housing, and more. - The VAT cut on electricity bills (£850m) is claimed to be funded by scrapping the Digital ID programme, but Darren Jones — the former minister who ran the Digital ID programme — said it was "never fully funded," with The Sun reporting this as blowing "a hole in Burnham's funding claim." - Social care reform (national care service, estimated up to £18.7bn/year by 2035) has no detailed funding plan beyond vague suggestions of a "care levy." - Thames Water special administration could cost £2-4bn with no identified funding source (City AM). - Defence spending has a £4.7bn gap to be filled at the next Budget (BBC). - Personal allowance changes are unfunded, estimated by the IFS to cost £2-9bn/year. **Complicating factors:** - The £2 bus fare cap IS funded (£454m, from switching international climate finance to loans and DESNZ savings). - Burnham has not categorically ruled out tax rises, hinting at "some room for movement" and declining to rule out a 50p top rate of income tax — so the premise that he is entirely avoiding tax rises is not fully accurate. - The government insists all decisions will be "funded and consistent with the Government's fiscal rules" at the autumn Budget. **Assessment:** While some individual policies have identified funding and Burnham appears open to some tax rises, the overall picture is one of unresolved funding questions across multiple major policy areas. The claim accurately characterizes the situation as of July 21, 2026. Sources: Institute for Government, https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/comment/burnham-starmer-reeves-tax-lock-manifesto; BBC News, https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/clywzj2vk3zo; BBC News, https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cp9ezldrkkgo; ITV News, https://www.itv.com/news/2026-07-17/welfare-tax-and-migration-the-challenges-facing-andy-burnham; iNews, https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/taxes-could-rise-pay-burnhams-cost-of-living-boost-4656840; The Independent, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/vat-andy-burnham-cabinet-john-healey-government-b3018683.html; The Sun, https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/39832186/burnham-vat-cut-labour-kemi-badenoch/; BBC News, https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy9rgg9ddw2o; The Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/jul/21/defence-uplift-national-care-service-andy-burnham-policies-funding; ITV News, https://www.itv.com/news/2026-07-22/andy-burnham-unveils-2-bus-fare-cap-in-pledge-to-be-cost-of-living-government; City AM, https://www.cityam.com/burnham-risks-2bn-bill-in-thames-water-special-administration/

The claim is that Darren Jones was "in charge of DigitalID until the day before this tweet was posted" (i.e., until July 20, 2026). Multiple official and news sources confirm the following: 1. **Darren Jones's role overseeing Digital ID**: A UK government press release on the Digital ID advisory group identifies "Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister, Darren Jones" as the minister who brought together the advisory group to support delivery of digital ID. A separate government "machinery of government" announcement confirmed Jones would be "co-ordinating policy across government, leading on legislation and working with DSIT on the delivery and implementation of the scheme." He was appointed Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister on 1 September 2025. 2. **Jones's removal on July 20, 2026**: Andy Burnham became Prime Minister on 20 July 2026. That same day, multiple news outlets (BBC, Bristol Post) reported that Jones was told by Burnham he would not be part of the new cabinet. The BBC article was published at 19:39 UTC on July 20, 2026. Jones issued a statement confirming his departure. 3. **Timing**: The tweet was posted on July 21, 2026. "Until yesterday" = July 20, 2026, which is the day Burnham became PM and the day Jones was sacked. This timing checks out. 4. **BBC live coverage** also confirms that Jones commented on the Digital ID programme being "unfunded" after his sacking, which aligns with the broader context of Badenoch's tweet. The evidence consistently supports that Darren Jones was the minister responsible for coordinating the Digital ID programme, and that he lost this role on July 20, 2026 — the day before the tweet was posted. While DSIT handled the technical build and delivery, Jones held the cross-government coordination and legislative lead role, making "in charge of" a fair characterization. **Sources:** - GOV.UK, "Business and civil society leaders brought together to help build digital ID system that works for the public" — https://www.gov.uk/government/news/business-and-civil-society-leaders-brought-together-to-help-build-digital-id-system-that-works-for-the-public - GOV.UK, "Machinery of government: digital ID" (wired-gov.net) — https://www.wired-gov.net/wg/news.nsf/articles/Machinery+of+government+digital+ID+23102025161000?open= - GOV.UK, "The Rt Hon Darren Jones MP" — https://www.gov.uk/government/people/darren-jones - GOV.UK, "Andy Burnham's first speech as Prime Minister: 20 July 2026" — https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/andy-burnhams-first-speech-as-prime-minister-20-july-2026 - GOV.UK, "The Rt Hon Andy Burnham MP" — https://www.gov.uk/government/people/andy-burnham - BBC News, "Bristol MP Darren Jones excluded from Andy Burnham's cabinet" — https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj03j50n98do - BBC News, "Starmer ally takes swipe at Burnham's first big policy" — https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62xzn3j1p2o - BBC News live coverage, "Andy Burnham to become PM as Keir Starmer prepares to leave No 10" — https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cgrkv8e8l9qt - Bristol Post, "Bristol MP Darren Jones sacked from Cabinet by Andy Burnham" — https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/bristol-mp-darren-jones-sacked-11068913 - NBC News, "Andy Burnham becomes new British prime minister, Keir Starmer leaves" — https://www.nbcnews.com/world/united-kingdom/andy-burnham-british-prime-minister-keir-starmer-labour-king-charles-rcna588324

Darren Jones was appointed Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister on 1 September 2025, as confirmed by the official UK government appointments page (GOV.UK). He held this role alongside being Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Minister for Intergovernmental Relations. On 20 July 2026, Andy Burnham became Prime Minister and formed his new cabinet, in which Darren Jones was excluded. The BBC reported on 20 July 2026 that Jones "has been told by new Prime Minister Andy Burnham that he 'won't be a part of his new cabinet.'" The Bristol Post also reported on 20 July 2026 that Jones was "sacked from Cabinet by Andy Burnham." Multiple sources (BBC, The Independent, Bristol Post) confirm that Jones was removed from his cabinet role on 20 July 2026. The tweet was posted on 21 July 2026, stating "Until yesterday, Darren Jones was... the Chief Secretary to the PM." "Yesterday" would refer to 20 July 2026, which is exactly when Burnham formed his cabinet and Jones was excluded. This is accurate. One minor nuance: the tweet refers to him as "Chief Secretary to the PM," which is shorthand for "Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister" — the official title. Jones also held the separate role of Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster simultaneously, but the claim specifically about the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister title is correct. Sources: - GOV.UK, "Appointments: 1 September 2025" — https://www.gov.uk/government/news/appointments-1-september-2025 - GOV.UK, "Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister" — https://www.gov.uk/government/ministers/minister-of-state--197 - BBC News, "Bristol MP Darren Jones excluded from Andy Burnham's cabinet" (20 July 2026) — https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj03j50n98do - BBC News, "Who's in Andy Burnham's new Labour cabinet?" (20 July 2026) — https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckg4we9g58do - Bristol Post, "Bristol MP Darren Jones sacked from Cabinet by Andy Burnham" (20 July 2026) — https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/bristol-mp-darren-jones-sacked-11068913 - The Independent, "Andy Burnham's cabinet – who's in and who's out" — https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/andy-burnham-new-cabinet-appointments-in-full-chancellor-b3018079.html - AP News, "New UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham gathers his Cabinet" — https://apnews.com/article/uk-prime-minister-burnham-cabinet-meeting-economy-18d380d746c0e2df0d2a1f3d35cf4ce0

→ Darren Jones would be well-informed about the DigitalID programme’s funding if he said it was unfunded.

**Key findings:** 1. **Darren Jones's role with Digital ID**: Multiple sources confirm Darren Jones was the minister in charge of the Digital ID programme. The Manchester Evening News states "Mr Jones, who was the minister in charge of the digital ID scheme." PoliticsHome describes him as someone "who led on digital ID while in government." A gov.uk press release shows Jones personally convened the advisory group for Digital ID delivery. 2. **Darren Jones's seniority**: He was appointed Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister on 1 September 2025 (a Cabinet-level role), and previously served as Chief Secretary to the Treasury — the department responsible for government spending and budget allocation. 3. **The funding question**: The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), in its fiscal outlook at the last budget, stated that "no specific funding has been identified" for the Digital ID programme, estimated to cost £1.8bn. The OBR explicitly characterised this as an "unfunded cost." While the government (while Jones was still in office) said it "did not recognise" the OBR's figures and insisted costs would be met from existing departmental budgets, no specific savings had been identified. 4. **Jones's public statement**: After being sacked by Burnham on 20 July 2026, Jones posted on X: "But the Digital ID program was unfunded. The government will have to set out how it will pay for its new policies at the budget." 5. **Burnham's funding claim**: Burnham announced he would fund a VAT cut on electricity bills (£850m) by cancelling the Digital ID programme — but as the OBR noted, no specific funding had been allocated to Digital ID in the first place. **Assessment:** The claim that Darren Jones would be well-informed about the Digital ID programme's funding is well-supported. He held three relevant positions: (a) the minister directly in charge of the Digital ID programme, (b) Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister (a senior Cabinet role overseeing government delivery), and (c) former Chief Secretary to the Treasury (the department that controls public spending). Any one of these roles would give him direct knowledge of the programme's funding status; all three together make him exceptionally well-placed to comment. Furthermore, his statement that the programme was "unfunded" aligns with the independent assessment of the OBR, which stated no specific funding had been identified. The government's own position was that funding would come from unspecified "reprioritisation" within existing departmental budgets — meaning no concrete funding had been allocated. The claim is accurate. Darren Jones's combination of roles — programme lead, Cabinet minister, and former Treasury chief — means he would indeed be well-informed about the Digital ID programme's funding status, and his characterisation of it as unfunded is consistent with the OBR's independent findings. Sources: - GOV.UK, "The Rt Hon Darren Jones MP" — https://www.gov.uk/government/people/darren-jones - GOV.UK, "Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister" — https://www.gov.uk/government/ministers/minister-of-state--197 - GOV.UK, "Business and civil society leaders brought together to help build digital ID system" — https://www.gov.uk/government/news/business-and-civil-society-leaders-brought-together-to-help-build-digital-id-system-that-works-for-the-public - City AM, "Unfunded Digital ID will not free up new cash for Burnham's cost of living plans" — https://www.cityam.com/digital-id-cut-may-not-free-up-new-cash-for-burnhams-cost-of-living-plans/ - PoliticsHome, "Confusion In Whitehall Over Burnham Plan To Scrap Digital ID" — https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/confusion-in-whitehall-over-burnham-plan-to-scrap-digital-id - Manchester Evening News, "Andy Burnham's £850m energy bills tax cut faces questions over funding" — https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/andy-burnhams-850m-energy-bills-34325762 - PublicTechnology, "Government 'does not recognise' OBR figures of £1.8bn 'unfunded cost' for digital ID regime" — https://www.publictechnology.net/2025/12/16/economics-and-finance/government-does-not-recognise-obr-figures-of-1-8bn-unfunded-cost-for-digital-id-regime/ - GOV.UK, "Andy Burnham's first speech as Prime Minister: 20 July 2026" — https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/andy-burnhams-first-speech-as-prime-minister-20-july-2026

The claim that "The DigitalID programme was unfunded" is directly supported by the OBR's own official assessment that "no specific funding has been identified" for the programme. The IFS corroborated this. The person who was in charge of the programme (Darren Jones) confirmed it was unfunded. The government's counter-argument about the programme being "scored" does not contradict the claim — being scored means the cost was estimated in fiscal projections, but the OBR explicitly said no specific funding source had been identified. Funding was meant to come from "unidentified Whitehall savings," which is essentially another way of saying it was unfunded. Key evidence: 1. The OBR, in its Economic and Fiscal Outlook, explicitly stated that "no specific funding has been identified" for the digital ID programme, which was estimated to cost £1.8bn over three years. The OBR described costs as "provisional" and warned there was "no explicit provision" to pay for it. 2. Darren Jones, who was Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister and in charge of the Digital ID programme, stated on X: "the DigitalID program was unfunded. The government will have to set out how it will pay for its new policies at the budget." 3. Helen Miller, director of the IFS, confirmed the OBR's assessment and noted the government would need to make "around £850m of as yet unspecified cuts." 4. Multiple news outlets (BBC, City AM, The Independent, The Standard, PoliticsHome) all reported the OBR's finding. The government's counter-argument that the programme was "scored" by the OBR does not contradict the claim — being scored means the cost was recognized in fiscal projections, not that money had been allocated to pay for it. Sources: - BBC News, "Starmer ally takes swipe at Burnham's first big policy," https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62xzn3j1p2o - City AM, "Unfunded Digital ID will not free up new cash for Burnham's cost of living plans," https://www.cityam.com/digital-id-cut-may-not-free-up-new-cash-for-burnhams-cost-of-living-plans/ - The Independent, "Burnham announces £850m tax cut on energy bills but faces questions over funding," https://www.the-independent.com/news/uk/home-news/andy-burnham-vat-cabinet-john-healey-government-b3018683.html - PoliticsHome, "Confusion In Whitehall Over Burnham Plan To Scrap Digital ID," https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/confusion-in-whitehall-over-burnham-plan-to-scrap-digital-id - GOV.UK, "The Rt Hon Darren Jones MP," https://www.gov.uk/government/people/darren-jones

Andy Burnham became Prime Minister on 20 July 2026, delivering his first speech on the steps of Downing Street that day after accepting the King's invitation to form a government. The tweet was posted on 21 July 2026, which is indeed one day later. Multiple sources — including the official GOV.UK transcript, AP News, BBC, CNN, and others — confirm Burnham's first day in office was 20 July 2026. Therefore, the claim that "Burnham's Government had been in office for only one day" at the time of the tweet is accurate. Sources: - GOV.UK, "Andy Burnham's first speech as Prime Minister: 20 July 2026" — https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/andy-burnhams-first-speech-as-prime-minister-20-july-2026 - AP News, "New UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham gathers his Cabinet" — https://apnews.com/article/uk-prime-minister-burnham-cabinet-meeting-economy-18d380d746c0e2df0d2a1f3d35cf4ce0 - NBC News, "Andy Burnham becomes new British prime minister, Keir Starmer leaves" — https://www.nbcnews.com/world/united-kingdom/andy-burnham-british-prime-minister-keir-starmer-labour-king-charles-rcna588324 - BBC News, live coverage — https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cgrkv8e8l9qt - ABC News (Australia), "Andy Burnham becomes British PM" — https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-07-20/andy-burnham-becomes-british-pm-after-kissing-hands-with-king/106937868

→ The explanations associated with Burnham’s Government are already becoming untenable.

The claim that "The Conservatives have set out a Cheap Power Plan" is straightforwardly true. The Conservative Party has publicly unveiled and documented a policy package called the "Cheap Power Plan." It appears on the Conservative Party's official website under their "Plan for Britain" page, was announced by Shadow Energy Secretary Claire Coutinho at Conservative Party Conference, and has been promoted extensively by Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch on her own website and in media appearances. The BBC and other news outlets have reported on it as a named policy package. The plan includes abolishing VAT on household energy bills for three years, scrapping the carbon tax (ETS and Carbon Price Support), ending legacy renewable subsidy schemes (Renewables Obligation Certificates), expanding North Sea oil and gas drilling, and repealing the Energy Profits Levy — with a claimed saving of approximately £200 per average household. The claim being verified is simply that the Conservatives have "set out" this plan, which is a factual matter of public record confirmed by multiple sources including the party's own website and independent news reporting. Sources: - Conservative Party official website, "Our Plan to get Britain back on Track" — https://www.conservatives.com/our-plan-for-britain - Conservative Party official website, "Energy is prosperity" — https://www.conservatives.com/news/energy-is-prosperity - BBC News, "Remove VAT from energy bills for three years, Tories urge" — https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4gx01d0re1o - Kemi Badenoch MP website, "Drilling the North Sea is the answer to the energy crisis" — https://www.kemibadenoch.org.uk/news/kemi-badenoch-mp-drilling-north-sea-answer-energy-crisis - New Civil Engineer, "Conservatives launch campaign to expand North Sea production" — https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/conservatives-launch-campaign-to-expand-north-sea-production-but-face-backlash-31-03-2026/

The claim that the Conservatives' Cheap Power Plan is "fully funded" is a self-assertion by the Conservative Party that faces significant challenges from independent evidence. **The plan's costs and revenue losses:** - Abolishing VAT on household energy bills for 3 years costs approximately £2.2–2.5 billion per year in foregone revenue (~£7 billion over 3 years), per multiple analyses. - Repealing the Energy Profits Levy (EPL) would *reduce* government revenue. The EPL raised £2.9 billion in 2024/25, according to the House of Commons Library. This is a revenue loss, not a saving. - Scrapping the UK Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) and Carbon Price Support (CPS) also removes government revenue. The IFS notes CPS revenue was forecast at ~£200 million/year by 2028-29, and the UK ETS generates additional revenue. **The Conservatives' claimed funding sources:** - Scrapping green energy subsidies/levies: ~£1.6 billion/year (per the party's own website). However, the BBC reports the government has already committed to funding 75% of the Renewable Obligation scheme through general taxation until 2028-29, meaning some of these savings are already accounted for in current fiscal plans. - Additional North Sea tax receipts: The Conservatives estimate ~£2.5 billion/year. This is directly contradicted by OBR forecasts, which show total UK oil and gas revenues (including EPL) declining from £2.7 billion in 2025-26 to £0.1 billion by 2030-31 due to declining production. The Conservatives' estimate appears to assume that expanding production will increase revenue even while simultaneously repealing the EPL (which cuts the tax rate from 78% to ~40%), an assumption the OBR's own modelling does not support. **Independent analysis:** - The Oxford Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment found that even maximising North Sea extraction and redistributing ALL tax revenues directly to households would save only £16–£82/year — far less than the £200 claimed. If the EPL is scrapped, the savings drop to just £16/year. - No independent fiscal body (OBR, IFS) has verified the plan is "fully funded." The IFS has been broadly skeptical of Conservative fiscal claims, describing similar past plans as "definite giveaways paid for by uncertain, unspecific and apparently victimless savings." - BusinessGreen noted the Conservatives did not explain how they would pay for outstanding Renewables Obligation Certificate (ROC) payments if removed from bills. - Friends of the Earth noted that the ETS cannot be unilaterally scrapped without EU agreement (it's part of the UK-EU Trade Deal), and scrapping CPS alone saves households only ~£15/year. **Assessment:** The plan does identify some genuine savings from scrapping green levies and carbon taxes. However, the claim that it is "fully funded" is undermined by three major problems: (1) repealing the EPL *reduces* revenue by billions, (2) the £2.5 billion/year North Sea revenue projection is contradicted by OBR forecasts showing declining production and revenue, and (3) the VAT cut alone costs ~£2.2–2.5 billion/year with no clearly identified offset. No independent fiscal authority has verified the costing. The net effect appears to be a plan that costs more in foregone revenue and repealed taxes than its claimed savings and projected new revenues can cover, based on the best available independent forecasts. Sources: BBC News — "Remove VAT from energy bills for three years, Tories urge" (https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gx01d0re1o); Conservative Party — "Our Plan to get Britain back on Track" (https://www.conservatives.com/our-plan-for-britain); OBR — "Oil and gas revenues" (https://obr.uk/forecasts-in-depth/tax-by-tax-spend-by-spend/oil-and-gas-revenues/); House of Commons Library — "Taxation of North Sea oil and gas" (https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn00341/); IFS — "Temporary VAT cut on household electricity bills: IFS response" (https://ifs.org.uk/articles/temporary-vat-cut-household-electricity-bills-ifs-response); IFS — "Response to scrapping of Carbon Price Support" (https://ifs.org.uk/articles/response-scrapping-carbon-price-support); Oxford Smith School / The Conversation — "Would more North Sea drilling lower UK energy bills? Our analysis says no" (https://theconversation.com/would-more-north-sea-drilling-lower-uk-energy-bills-our-analysis-says-no-278467); The Standard — "'Sheer fantasy' to claim draining North Sea oil would cut bills – experts" (https://www.standard.co.uk/business/business-news/north-sea-government-donald-trump-iran-b1275180.html); New Civil Engineer — "Conservatives launch campaign to expand North Sea production" (https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/conservatives-launch-campaign-to-expand-north-sea-production-but-face-backlash-31-03-2026/); BusinessGreen — "Conservatives vow to scrap UK carbon tax" (https://www.businessgreen.com/news/4519999/conservatives-vow-scrap-uk-carbon-tax-climate-policy-turn); Friends of the Earth — "Fact check: Why are our energy bills so high?" (https://policy.friendsoftheearth.uk/insight/fact-check-why-are-our-energy-bills-so-high); WooSee — "It's the Gas, Not the Tax: Why the Conservative Cheap Power Plan Won't Lower Bills" (https://woosee.pro/en/conservative-cheap-power-plan-gas-not-tax/); LBC — "Business Secretary hails energy bills tax cut despite concerns over funding" (https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/energy-bills-business-secretary-unfunded-tax-cut-5Hjddwq_2/); The Guardian — "Scrapping North Sea windfall tax would not reduce UK energy bills, experts say" (https://www.theguardian.com/business/2026/mar/10/north-sea-windfall-tax-rachel-reeves-uk-energy-bills-experts)

The claim that "getting Britain drilling" (increasing North Sea oil and gas production) would "pay for" the Conservatives' Cheap Power Plan (aiming to cut household energy bills by ~£200/year) has a weak causal link based on the evidence. **Key findings:** 1. **The plan's direct bill reductions come from scrapping taxes and levies, not from drilling.** The Conservatives' own breakdown attributes the ~£200 in savings to three measures: £94 from removing VAT on energy bills, £75 from scrapping the carbon tax, and ~£22 from ending legacy renewable subsidies (New Civil Engineer). None of these savings are directly attributable to drilling revenue. 2. **The primary funding mechanism is scrapping Net Zero schemes.** The BBC reports the party said its proposals would be funded by scrapping renewable energy schemes and green levies. Conservative MP Andrew Bowie wrote in LBC: "Our Cheap Power Plan will be funded by scrapping various taxpayer-funded Net Zero schemes, including Ed Miliband's GB Energy, heat pump subsidies, and abolishing the Renewable Obligation subsidies." 3. **North Sea drilling is presented as a supplementary revenue stream, not the primary funding mechanism.** Badenoch said the plan would work "by using the revenues from the North Sea to reduce the wider tax burden." The Conservatives estimate ~£2.5 billion/year in additional North Sea tax receipts. However, the BBC frames this separately, suggesting it is additional to the core funding, not the core funding itself. 4. **Expert analysis strongly contests whether drilling would generate meaningful revenue or reduce bills.** The Oxford Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment (March 2026) found that fully exploiting remaining North Sea reserves would save households only £16–£82/year, and only if all fiscal revenues were directly redistributed. Without redistribution, there would be "no discernible benefit" because oil and gas prices are set on international markets. The report's co-author called the "drill baby drill" approach "sheer fantasy" for reducing bills. Labour's Exchequer Secretary Dan Tomlinson and the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit echoed this skepticism. 5. **The Conservatives' own policy also repeals the Energy Profits Levy (windfall tax).** Repealing this tax would reduce the fiscal take from North Sea operations — the Oxford analysis found that without the windfall tax, savings drop to just ~£16/household/year, creating tension with the claim that drilling would fund the plan. **Assessment:** The causal link between "getting Britain drilling" and "paying for the Cheap Power Plan" is weak. The Conservatives present drilling revenue as part of their funding narrative, but the primary and direct funding mechanism is scrapping Net Zero schemes. The drilling component is speculative (dependent on production ramping up, international prices, and whether revenues are redistributed), contested by independent expert analysis, and potentially undermined by the Conservatives' own proposal to repeal the windfall tax. The claim overstates the role of drilling in funding the plan. Sources: BBC News, "Remove VAT from energy bills for three years, Tories urge" (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4gx01d0re1o); New Civil Engineer, "Conservatives launch campaign to expand North Sea production" (https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/conservatives-launch-campaign-to-expand-north-sea-production-but-face-backlash-31-03-2026/); Conservative Party, "Our Plan to get Britain back on Track" (https://www.conservatives.com/our-plan-for-britain); LBC, "Net zero dogma won't keep the lights on" — Andrew Bowie MP (https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/get-britain-drilling-now-opinion-5HjdX68_2/); Oxford Smith School, "Impact of Oil and Gas Exploitation in the North Sea on UK Household Energy Bills" (https://www.smithschool.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2026-03/North_Sea_Rapid_Analysis_March2026_OxfordSmithSchool.pdf); Oxford Smith School news release, "'Drill baby drill' approach to North Sea would cost households more" (https://www.smithschool.ox.ac.uk/news/drill-baby-drill-approach-north-sea-would-cost-households-more-fully-renewable-uk-finds-oxford); Graham Stuart MP, "Cheap Power Plan" (https://www.grahamstuart.com/cheappowerplan)

The Conservatives explicitly state that their Cheap Power Plan (cutting household energy bills by ~£200) would be funded by scrapping Net Zero schemes, including GB Energy, heat pump subsidies, and Renewable Obligation subsidies. The £200 saving breaks down as ~£94 from removing VAT on energy bills, ~£75 from scrapping the carbon tax, and ~£22 from ending legacy renewable subsidies. However, the framing is substantially circular: approximately £97 of the £200 saving (£75 from carbon tax + £22 from renewable subsidies) comes directly from removing green levies from bills — scrapping the levies IS the bill cut, not a separate funding source. The VAT removal component (~£94) requires separate Treasury funding, which the Conservatives say would come from North Sea drilling tax revenue, a different mechanism from "scrapping Net Zero policies." The financial arithmetic is heavily contested. Labour called the plan "a multi-billion-pound unfunded spending commitment" whose "sums still don't add up." The Oxford Smith School found that maximised North Sea extraction would save households only £16–£82/year (far below the £200 claimed), while a renewables-led approach would save £105–£441/year. The IFS and Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit similarly question the viability. Additionally, repealing the Climate Change Act entirely would reduce government revenue (OBR estimates ETS receipts at £2.6bn/year), not increase it. The claim accurately reflects the Conservatives' stated policy approach, but the causal link between "scrapping Net Zero policies" and "funding" the plan is only partially and contestably established — partly circular, partly reliant on disputed North Sea revenue assumptions. Sources: BBC News, "Remove VAT from energy bills for three years, Tories urge" (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4gx01d0re1o); GB News, "Kemi Badenoch pledges to ditch carbon levies 'killing British industry'" (https://www.gbnews.com/politics/kemi-badenoch-ditch-carbon-levies); Conservative Party, "Our Plan to get Britain back on Track" (https://www.conservatives.com/our-plan-to-get-britain-back-on-track); Kemi Badenoch MP, "We MUST get our oil and gas out of the ground" (https://www.kemibadenoch.org.uk/news/kemi-badenoch-mp-we-must-get-our-oil-and-gas-out-ground); BBC News, "Tories pledges to fully scrap carbon taxes on business" (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c145elk3deeo); New Civil Engineer, "Conservatives launch campaign to expand North Sea production" (https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/conservatives-launch-campaign-to-expand-north-sea-production-but-face-backlash-31-03-2026/); Oxford Smith School, "Impact of Oil and Gas Exploitation in the North Sea on UK Household Energy Bills" (https://www.smithschool.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2026-03/North_Sea_Rapid_Analysis_March2026_OxfordSmithSchool.pdf); IFS, "Temporary VAT cut on household electricity bills: IFS response" (https://ifs.org.uk/articles/temporary-vat-cut-household-electricity-bills-ifs-response); The Conversation, "Would more North Sea drilling lower UK energy bills? Our analysis says no" (https://theconversation.com/would-more-north-sea-drilling-lower-uk-energy-bills-our-analysis-says-no-278467)