---

Energy Bill

Without trying to escape my responsibilities today, that information is not immediately available. Again, perhaps it could be part of the general letter that I send on these issues, which I shall send as soon as I possibly can—and clearly well before Report. Obviously, a project that generates more electricity in one year than others of a similar type or specification will gain a greater share of the fixed sum that the RO provides in any one year. Competition is crucial to drive innovation and future cost reductions, once a technology has passed the early stages. The RO, including the changes we are making in this Bill to introduce banding, will support the innovation and competition that we want to see. It is for those reasons that we do not believe that the amendment is necessary, although I completely understand why the noble Lord wants to find out where research and development fit in with the new banding regime. I have done my best to try to answer him, in saying that he should not be overconcerned in that we would argue that it is clearly covered by the list that is set out in the relevant part of the Bill. In those circumstances—and of course he, too, will be interested in the information that we will pass to Members of the Committee—I invite him to withdraw his amendment.