We are calling for Ed Miliband to removed from the decision making process of Nationally significant Energy infrastructure. We believe that there is sufficient evidence to show that he is unable to make balanced decisions in his haste to reach net zero - whilst we believe that is worthy goal it should not be at all costs, projects need to be assessed on merit not just a net zero target.

Below is the supporting legal evidence we feel should be applied.

The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, Rt Hon Ed Miliband MP, has demonstrated predetermination in favour of green energy infrastructure, compromising his ability to assess planning decisions impartially. It calls for his recusal from infrastructure planning decisions, particularly those involving compulsory acquisition and NSIP designation, under principles of natural justice, Wednesbury reasonableness, and apparent bias. 

 Legal Framework 
 Predetermination and Bias 

• Localism Act 2011, Section 25: Codifies that decision-makers must not have a closed mind when making decisions. 
• Magill v Porter [2002] 2 AC 357: Established the test for apparent bias—whether a fair-minded and informed observer would conclude there is a real possibility of bias. 
• Kelton v Wiltshire Council [2015] EWHC 2853 (Admin): Reinforces that councillors must avoid the appearance of bias even if actions are above reproach. 
• Wednesbury Unreasonableness (Associated Provincial Picture Houses v Wednesbury Corp [1948]): A decision is unlawful if it is so unreasonable that no reasonable authority could have made it. 

 Application to Ministerial Conduct 

• Ministers are bound by public law principles, including impartiality and procedural fairness. 
• Bias and Predetermination in Planning Law – Landmark Chambers: Notes that even elected officials must not act with a closed mind when exercising quasi-judicial functions. 
• Westferry Printworks Case (2020): Planning decision quashed due to apparent bias and timing manipulation by Secretary of State. 

Evidence of Predetermination 
 Public Statements 
Miliband’s speech at the Energy UK Conference outlined a “clean energy imperative,” framing green infrastructure as the solution to all national challenges. 
He stated: “British-based renewable energy is the cheapest and fastest way to reduce vulnerability to volatile global fossil fuel markets.” 

 Policy Commitments 

• Miliband’s 2030 Mission Control plan commits to 95% clean energy on the grid, requiring rapid infrastructure rollout regardless of local opposition or strategic planning delays. 
• His department’s NESO report was criticized for using inflated gas and carbon price assumptions to justify grid expansion. 
   Public Criticism 
• Centre for Policy Studies: Accused Miliband of “spin and ideology rather than data and evidence,” citing flawed assumptions in his energy plans. 
• City AM: Warned that Miliband’s net zero obsession risks alienating the public and undermining the energy transition. 
  . Implications for Planning Decisions 
• Miliband’s ideological commitment to green energy risks overriding:
  • Strategic need assessments. 
  • Procedural fairness in NSIP designation. 
  • Landowner rights under Section 122 of the Planning Act 2008. 

His role in approving or influencing infrastructure planning decisions may breach: 

• Natural justice principles. 
• Wednesbury reasonableness. 
• Apparent bias tests under Magill and Westferry precedents. 

 Recommendations 
 Ministerial Recusal 
Ed Miliband should be formally recused from infrastructure planning decisions involving: 

• NSIP designation. 
• Compulsory acquisition powers. 
• Strategic grid rollout. 

 Parliamentary Oversight 

• A Select Committee investigation into predetermination risks in infrastructure planning. 
• Review of ministerial statements and NESO modelling assumptions. 
• Automatic government funded Judicial review into ALL projects Miliband has approved since taking post. 

Legislative Reform 

• Amend Planning Act 2008 to require independent review of ministerial decisions where strategic need is disputed. 
• Review section 122 of the Planning Act 2008 and limit its use by private businesses and protect the rights of landowners. 
• Introduce statutory safeguards against ideological bias in infrastructure planning.