---

Energy Bill [HL]

I shall speak to Amendment 160A which is in this group. It follows on from what my noble friend Lady Smith said about transparency, information and confidence in the field of energy conservation. As noble Lords will know, this is a rerun of Amendment 34 in Committee. I pay tribute to the noble Baroness, Lady Maddock, for her tireless work in supporting energy conservation and for moving the amendment eloquently in Committee. She emphasised the lack of interest of Governments over the years in the issue of saving energy rather than producing more to meet an often unnecessary demand. My noble friend Lord O’Neill of Clackmannan supported her and urged publication of the information. I am trying again to see whether I can squeeze a little more out of Ministers at this stage. I pay tribute to the Association for the Conservation of Energy which has been tireless in promoting this part of the energy debate on conservation, which is often put into the ““too difficult”” category by government. The noble Baroness, Lady Northover, responded in Committee and said that the Government are already obliged to report annually to Parliament on the progress towards legally binding carbon budgets. She also said that, "““the principle of this amendment is sensible and laudable, although we feel that the case for specific reporting from Government may be stronger for the energy company obligation””.—[Official Report, 19/1/11; col. GC 107.]" Surely the information on conservation is as important as is the information on energy production. I remind the House of a few facts given in Committee. The European Climate Foundation reports that emissions from buildings can be reduced by 95 per cent, which breaks down into 40 per cent from reduced demand and 45 per cent as a result of the electrification of heating. It is important to bring all these figures together at least in one report—we can debate whether or not it is annual—given the enormous challenges the Government have in meeting our carbon reduction targets. It is also worth reminding the House that Chris Huhne, the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, said that the cheapest way of closing the gap between energy demand and supply is to cut energy use. Many other Ministers have said similar things. The Association for the Conservation of Energy has been calling for a cost benefit assessment of energy saving for many years and it asked the Government about six months ago whether they had carried out a long-term assessment of the costs and benefits of energy saving and efficiency as against those of energy generation. The answer was that there was nothing specific in the public domain. I suggest that there should be because consumers need that information. I hope that when the Minister responds he will accept the principle of the amendment and agree that the Government should publish a cost benefit assessment. How can the Government have properly thought through their overall energy policy without that? If they do not have that information, they should have. If they do have it, perhaps they should publish it. I refer noble Lords to the Long Title of the Bill, which refers in line 5 to, "““information relating to energy consumption, efficiency and tariffs””." It would be a small step for the Government to produce a report and then we would know both sides of the equation: the production; and the consumption and conservation.