Draft Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Scheme (Amendment) Order 2026

What happened: On 4 February 2026, the House of Commons voted on the Draft Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Scheme (Amendment) Order 2026, a government statutory instrument (a type of secondary legislation that amends existing law without requiring a full new Act of Parliament). The order passed by 392 votes to 116. The vote was a deferred division, meaning MPs cast their votes in a designated slot rather than immediately after the debate.

Why it matters: The UK Emissions Trading Scheme (UK ETS) is the primary mechanism through which the government puts a price on carbon emissions from major industrial sectors. By requiring companies to hold permits for each tonne of greenhouse gas they emit, the scheme creates a financial incentive to cut pollution. This amendment order adjusts the rules governing the scheme, tightening or extending its coverage in line with the government's net zero commitments under the Climate Change Act 2008. The changes affect businesses operating in sectors covered by the scheme -- including, from related debates around the same period, a parallel extension to maritime activities -- and have implications for energy costs, industrial competitiveness, and the UK's progress toward its legally binding emissions targets.

The politics: The vote divided largely along party lines. Labour (including Labour and Co-operative MPs), the Liberal Democrats, the Scottish National Party, Plaid Cymru, and the Greens all voted in favour, producing a comfortable government majority. All 98 voting Conservatives, all 8 Reform UK MPs, and all 5 Democratic Unionist Party MPs voted against. A small number of independents voted on both sides. There were no notable cross-party rebellions. The vote sits within a broader pattern of climate-related divisions in this Parliament, where the government has been steadily expanding the UK ETS -- a related order extending the scheme to maritime activities passed the following week -- while the Conservative and Reform opposition have consistently challenged what they characterise as the regulatory and economic burden of net zero policy.