Proceeding contribution from Lord Whitty (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 8 February 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee proceeding on Energy Bill [HL].
Energy Bill [HL]
My Lords, I thank the Minister and everybody who took part in what was a rather wider debate than I originally envisaged. I thank particularly the noble Baroness, Lady Parminter, and my noble friend Lady Smith for their support for the amendment. My noble friend Lord O'Neill, not for the first time and I suspect not the last, provoked me into saying more than I ever intended and more than was particularly helpful to this amendment. As my noble friend Lord Lea said, the preference or otherwise is largely a matter for the fiscal system, which is already there. But if there is in addition a disadvantage to one sector as against another in the process, we should address that as well. I am grateful to the Minister for saying that this is at least on the radar screens of the department. But it has been on the radar screens of the department and predecessor departments for at least eight years to my knowledge. We need to hurry this up. Whatever I may have said earlier, this is not about giving a preferential position. Nor is it dealing with the whole of the ocean. It is dealing with those areas where a licence or lease has been given or is about to be given or where a project is already operating. The rest of the ocean is open to the oil and gas industry in any case. Nor is the amendment saying that in no circumstances will oil and gas be allowed to operate there. All I am requiring them to do is to negotiate to reach an agreement. I hope that the Government can help to set up a process whereby that happens and thereby to equalise the hoops that any new developer will have to go through. There are two different forms of consenting and they are not the same. Some would say that they slightly—I think they are significantly—disadvantageous to renewables as against oil and gas. I am grateful to the department in the terms in which the Minister has responded. However, I ask her and her officials to hurry up because this is an outstanding issue. In a sense, the oil and gas industries can go to their boards—the noble Lord, Lord Oxburgh, used to sign these off himself. Yes, they have the option of going anywhere in the world, but so does the kind of City finance that, by and large, offshore, wind and certainly the newer technologies of tidal and wave will have to go for. They also have the option of going elsewhere and it is important that the element of risk is reduced and that coexistence is a reality. It must be coexistence between equal partners in the delivery of our energy mix and not one that gives an advantage to one sector as against another. Having said that, I accept the Government’s good faith in looking at this. I would be grateful if in a month or two we could complete that process and come back with a system that addresses the problem. In the mean time, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment 36 withdrawn. Clause 99 : Agreement about modifying decommissioning programme Amendment 36A Clause 99 : Agreement about modifying decommissioning programme Amendment 36A Moved by
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 725 c52-3GC
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords Grand Committee
- Subjects
- Conservation Housing Licensing Energy Heating Exploration Prices Offshore industry National park authorities Renewable energy Taxation Wind power Broads Authority Coal Authority Geothermal power
- Legislation
- Energy Bill (HL) 2010-12
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 20:59:10 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_712436
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_712436
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_712436