Select committee: Energy Security and Net Zero Committee
Conclusion 1
1st Report - Retrofitting homes for net zero
Published 22 May 2025
Addressed to Department for Energy Security and Net Zero
Energy Security and Net Zero Committee Retrofitting homes for net zero All items in this report Report on parliament.uk ↗ Inquiry on parliament.uk ↗
Conclusion (the committee's words)
There is a clear and urgent need to provide long-term certainty for the sector through the Government’s retrofit support schemes. Stop-start measures and short funding cycles have undermined the confidence of consumers, installers and the wider supply chain. The Government has not clarified how it will support retrofit beyond 2026, when key schemes are due to expire. (Conclusion, Paragraph 38)
From: Energy Security and Net Zero Committee, 1st Report - Retrofitting homes for net zero (HC 453), 22 May 2025
Government response
The government responded to the whole report on 18 August 2025 (deadline 22 July 2025).
Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response. It is not the government's own words.The government's response sets out much of its position through the forthcoming Warm Homes Plan, recognising several of the Committee's concerns while giving a longer timeline on gas network work and expressing scepticism on one funding proposal.
- On long-term retrofit support, the government states that £13.2 billion "has been committed" to the Warm Homes Plan over 2025/26 to 2029/30, with allocations for individual programmes to be set out "by October this year".
- On Energy Performance Certificates, the government is reforming them and "expects" changes to the metrics to be introduced in 2026; it will publish its consultation response "in due course".
- On repurposing the gas network, the department "anticipates a longer timeline to be needed than the Committee's recommendation" and will publish a Call for Evidence in 2026.
- On the Heat Training Grant, the government says it is "sceptical about plans to compensate installers for lost earnings", citing the complexity of avoiding "risks of fraud".