---

Energy Bill

I was slightly shocked when I saw the noble Lord, Lord Teverson, come in with such a heavy collection of documents. I had no idea what it included—the Marine Bill or other Bills. I was simply worried for his good health because he seemed to be carrying such a collection. But I was not shocked that it included the Marine Bill. I understand the spirit in which the noble Lord, Lord Redesdale, moves Amendment No. 2. He has raised an important point on the interaction—which has just been mentioned by the noble Lord, Lord De Mauley—with environmental bodies when granting licences for offshore gas storage and unloading, on the one hand, and carbon dioxide storage activities, on the other. Through the strict wording of the amendment, the noble Lord seeks a requirement in the Bill that, before issuing offshore gas unloading and storage or carbon dioxide storage licences, the Secretary of State shall consult with the relevant environmental bodies, particularly on marine plans, when granting licences. As Members of the Committee know, Chapters 2 and 3 of Part 1 of the Bill establish the framework for offshore gas unloading and storage and carbon dioxide storage within which the detailed regulatory provisions can be made. A key consideration in determining licence applications and terms and conditions will of course be the protection of the environment. We will be consulting early next year on the detailed provisions that will be required but we will also ensure that the resulting regime builds on the foundation provided by existing environmental legislation. As the Committee knows, the offshore UK oil and gas industry is currently subject to a comprehensive and even robust legislative regime that is administered by my department, ensuring that environmental protections are in place. The framework includes strategic environmental assessments, environmental impact assessments and habitats and birds assessments as and when appropriate. We have committed to ensuring that existing requirements applicable to offshore activities will extend equally to the offshore gas unloading and storage and carbon dioxide storage regimes. These requirements already require duties of consultation with the relevant environmental bodies, such as government departments and their agencies with particular responsibility for environmental issues. I turn to the issues of marine spatial planning, which is a focus of the amendment. As many will be aware, oil and gas activities are not covered in the Marine Bill. A major part of the thinking behind that is the unique regulatory challenge posed by this large and complex industry, which is best addressed by tailored specific legislation administered by a specialist team expert in oil and gas issues. However, the expertise of the specialist team within the department is not just confined to oil and gas issues. The department has also built up considerable expertise in regulating and understanding issues unique to the offshore oil and gas sector in the context of sustainable development. It must also deal with marine spatial planning concerns, including the impact of oil and gas installations on shipping and navigation. That expertise must be used to understand and determine the impact on the environment from any future licence applications for new technologies, such as offshore LNG unloading. My department consults Defra, other government departments and the devolved authorities, or their relevant agencies, as appropriate, and is in regular contact with the Marine and Fisheries Agency, which will be replaced—as the noble Lord knows, of course—by the new Marine Management Organisation. This arrangement works well and provides the flexibility to allow for the department to consult, for example, the new MMO and the Maritime and Coastguard Agency on matters in which they have an interest. We are keen to avoid imposing a requirement that would effectively mean that the department must always in every imaginable circumstance consult environmental bodies on a statutory basis. Where the MFA or the replacement Marine Management Organisation or any other similar organisation has a clear interest, we will of course continue to consult. However, where a licence application clearly complies with any environmental or spatial planning concerns—for example because the strategic environmental assessment, or other environmental assessments, has already ensured that the necessary consultation has taken place—we would not wish to impose an additional statutory consultation process and further delay the licence process. We are serious about ensuring environmental protection, but we are also serious about removing any unnecessary barriers delaying these important investments in infrastructure. As so often in these matters, the objective is to get that balance correct. The noble Lord posed two questions and I shall do my best to reply. The first is who will regulate the carbon storage regime. Decisions on the appropriate regulatory authority for the storage of carbon dioxide will be taken in due course once the arguments about which authority is best placed to exercise licensing and other functions are carefully assessed. This will be part and parcel of a consultation that the Government are launching shortly. Meanwhile, as I have just argued, regulatory agencies will continue to work together to develop the detailed regulatory regime. The noble Lord also asked how we will ensure that CO2 storage does not conflict with the proposed protected areas under the Marine Bill. I have gone some way, I hope, to answering him on that. Let me go further by saying that activities that involve oil and gas will be subject to marine planning and conservation zones. Any application to undertake activities in these areas will be subject to appropriate scrutiny and controls. Regardless of whether that applies retrospectively, we do not expect the first licence for CO2 storage to be in place before the Marine Bill is enacted and comes into force. I hope that I have provided the noble Lord with some reassurance that the environment is being, and will continue to be, adequately protected, which is something that everyone concerned with the Bill is very keen to see. On that basis, I hope he will feel somewhat reassured.