The Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
(Kwasi Kwarteng) With permission, Mr Speaker, I will make a
statement on the British energy security strategy. Our strategy
provides a clear, long-term plan to accelerate our transition away
from expensive fossil fuel prices set by global markets we cannot
control. It builds on our success over the past decade in which we
gave the go-ahead to the first nuclear power plant in a generation
and achieved a...Request free trial
The Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial
Strategy ()
With permission, Mr Speaker, I will make a statement on the
British energy security strategy.
Our strategy provides a clear, long-term plan to accelerate our
transition away from expensive fossil fuel prices set by global
markets we cannot control. It builds on our success over the past
decade in which we gave the go-ahead to the first nuclear power
plant in a generation and achieved a fivefold increase in
renewables. The British energy security strategy marks a
significant acceleration in our ambition. It is confirmation of
three mutually reinforcing goals of our energy policy and,
indeed, of any well-constituted energy policy: security,
affordability and sustainability.
We recognise the pressures that many people across our country
are facing with the cost of living. This has been greatly
influenced, as we all know, by global factors. That is why my
right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced a £9
billion package of support, including a £150 council tax rebate
this month and a £200 energy bill discount in October to cut
energy bills quickly for the vast majority of households. We are
also expanding the eligibility for the warm home discount, which
will provide around 3 million low-income and vulnerable
households across England and Wales with a £150 rebate on their
energy bills this winter. As I speak, our energy price cap is
still protecting millions of consumers from even higher wholesale
spot gas prices. Furthermore, we are investing over £6 billion in
decarbonising the nation’s homes and buildings—set out very
clearly in last year’s heat and buildings strategy—which saves
the lowest-income families around £300 a year on their bills. I
want to reassure the House that the Chancellor has promised to
review his package of support before October and will decide on
an appropriate course of action at that time.
Cheap renewables are our best defence against fluctuations in
global gas prices. By 2030, 95% of our electricity will be
produced by low-carbon means. By 2035, we aim to have fully
decarbonised our electricity system. We will double down on every
available technology. The strategy sets out a new ambition to
propel our offshore wind industry. It will increase the pace of
deployment to deliver 50 GW by 2030, instead of the 40 GW
committed to in the manifesto. Of that 50 GW, up to 5 GW will be
floating offshore wind. The strategy also commits us to slash
approval times for new offshore wind farms from four years to one
year. We also feel—this is reflected in the strategy—that our
solar capacity can grow by up to five times by 2035.
As is well known, most of Britain’s nuclear fleet will be
decommissioned this decade. We need to replace what we are
losing, but we also need to go further. From large-scale plants
to small nuclear modular reactors, we aspire to provide a steady
baseload of power that will complement renewable technology.
Obviously, the right time to take those decisions would have been
20 years ago, but of course the Labour party all but killed off
the British nuclear industry. That is why we will be reversing
decades of under-investment and building back British nuclear. We
aim to deliver up to 24 GW of nuclear power by 2050,
approximately three times more than today, which will represent
25% of our projected energy demand.
We are also doubling our ambition for low-carbon hydrogen
production. The capacity we aim to reach by 2030 is 10 GW, with
at least half of that total coming from green,
electrolyser-produced hydrogen. This fuel will not only provide
cleaner energy for vital British industries to move away from
fossil fuels, but will also be used for storage, trains, heavy
equipment and generating heat. The transition to cheap, clean
power cannot happen overnight. Those calling for an immediate end
to domestic oil and gas ignore the fact that it would simply make
the UK more reliant on foreign imports. It would not, in fact,
lead to greater decarbonisation globally.
Producing more of our own energy will protect us into the future.
We feel that this historic change, this decarbonisation
challenge, represents a huge opportunity for the United Kingdom:
more wind, more solar and more nuclear, while also using North
sea gas to transition to cheaper and cleaner power. This is a
long-term plan to ensure greater energy independence and to
attract hundreds of billions of private investment to back new
industries that can create hundreds of thousands of high-quality
jobs and stimulate business across the UK. This is not only a
matter of reaching net zero, vital as that is, but an issue of
national security. These are all objectives that everyone across
the House, I am sure, shares. We all wish to see a homegrown
clean energy system that will protect our people into the future,
create good clean jobs, attract private investment and, above
all, drive down bills for the British people. I commend this
statement to the House.
Several hon. Members rose—
Mr Deputy Speaker ( )
Order. Before I call , I would just like to say that we are going to move
on from this statement at 7.20 pm, so a lot of people are going
to be disappointed. Can you please focus on asking a question
without any preludes, so that we can get as many people in as we
possibly can?
6.49pm
(Doncaster North) (Lab)
I thank the Secretary of State for his statement, but I have to
tell him that after all the hype and all the promises, his energy
relaunch fails to live up remotely to the scale of the crisis
that families are facing. The Government have already failed to
deliver the immediate measures needed to help millions of
families with their energy bills this year, and they now have an
energy security strategy that has rejected the measures that
could have made the most difference in the years ahead. It fails
to seize the moment on the two most elementary tests of any
decent green energy sprint—that is, going all-in on the cheapest
forms of home-grown power, such as onshore wind, which
remarkably, was not even mentioned in his statement, and finally
delivering on the biggest no-brainer when it comes to an energy
strategy: energy efficiency.
Hon Members do not need to take my word for it. We know from all
the briefings and interviews that the Secretary of State gave
before the relaunch that he has failed to deliver what he wanted.
We know that he wanted a hard target to double onshore wind by
2030 and to treble it by 2035, because we have the earlier
version of the document in which there were those targets. The
Secretary of State was right because the ban on onshore wind that
the Government introduced in 2015 has driven up bills for
consumers. What did he say 10 days before the relaunch? He said
that he wanted to see a major “acceleration” in onshore wind. The
Prime Minister was said to be “horrified” at the delays, but when
we got the document, we saw that there was no target, no plan and
more imports and higher bills as a result of his failure. Perhaps
he can tell us what the nasty accident was that befell the
earlier version of his strategy.
On solar, let us be clear that the Government destroyed the solar
industry with their decisions in 2015, abolishing the feed-in
tariff. In this document, we see weak and vague language—it is
even weaker, the House will be interested to know, than in the
original version of the document, which is pretty weak in itself.
Will the Secretary of State explain why there is no firm target
for 2030 and a retreat on large-scale solar?
Let us take energy efficiency next, the biggest failure of all.
We know that the Secretary of State wanted extra resources for
energy efficiency, because he helpfully briefed the media to that
effect. He was right, because that would immediately cut bills,
imports and fuel poverty, but again, he failed. There is not a
penny more for energy efficiency in this document. Even the
Secretary of State’s Minister, Lord Callanan—we have to admire
his candour—said on the day:
“It would have been good to go further but, regrettably, that was
not possible in this case.”—[Official Report, House of Lords, 7
April 2022; Vol. 820, c. 2196.]
Will the Secretary of State tell us why the Government are
failing to deliver when the economic, social and climate case is
so overwhelming?
The Government’s failures on onshore wind, solar and energy
efficiency matter because they are not just the cheapest and
cleanest responses to the crisis that we face, but the quickest
to deliver. That is why E.ON, the energy company, said of the
strategy, that
“there is little in today’s announcement that will deliver…this
decade, let alone this year.”
Why? Because the Secretary of State and the Prime Minister caved
in to Back Benchers who dislike green energy and a Chancellor who
refuses to make the green investments that the country needs.
They cannot deliver a green energy sprint because they face both
ways on green energy and simply will not make the public
investment that we need.
On the other elements of the strategy, we support more ambition
on hydrogen and offshore wind. On the latter, however, there are
real questions about the investment required in the grid; perhaps
the Secretary of State will respond to that point.
On new nuclear, the last Labour Government identified a whole
series of sites for new nuclear. The Government have had 12 years
in power and they have not completed a single power station.
Of course, the North sea has a role to play in the transition,
but will the Secretary of State explain how maximising North sea
oil and gas is consistent with all the advice from the
International Energy Agency and the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change on limiting global warming to 1.5°?
On fracking, which the Secretary of State was also too
embarrassed to mention, why commission another review rather than
having the courage to say out loud what he believes: that
fracking is outdated, will make no difference to prices and is
unsafe, unpopular and should have no part in our future energy
system?
In conclusion, the truth is that this cobbled-together energy
relaunch does nothing on the cost of living and fails to deliver
the green sprint that we needed. When it comes to the solutions
to energy security, energy bills and the climate crisis, the
Secretary of State has shown once again that the Government
cannot deliver what the national interest demands.
I am pleased, in this Easter season, when Christians celebrate
the resurrection of Jesus, that the right hon. Gentleman is back
in his place. I thought that he had disappeared for a bit, but it
is very good to see him again spinning out the same lines.
Let me deal with some of his accusations. There is plenty about
onshore wind in the strategy. The one thing that we say about
onshore wind—unlike the right hon. Gentleman’s position—is that
it has to be pursued in the context of local community support.
We have always had that position and have not moved away from it.
People also say, “What about the energy efficiency measures?” He
will remember that we had a whole document at the end of last
year devoted to energy efficiency—it was called the heat and
buildings strategy. He and the hon. Member for Southampton, Test
(Dr Whitehead) kept asking month after month, “When will the heat
and buildings strategy come out?” It did come out and it
addressed precisely the energy efficiency issues that he wished
it to.
On nuclear—this is the last thing I will say about the remarks
from the right hon. Member for Doncaster North ()—his attempt to pretend
that the last Labour Government somehow made us more secure on
nuclear is laughable. That did not happen. They were notorious
for doing nothing to promote the nuclear industry. They were
rather like our Scottish National party friends, who are at least
honest about their position—they do not want nuclear. I am still
not sure what he believes about nuclear, but we are driving
forward nuclear and we are delighted to make it the centrepoint
of our strategy.
(Workington) (Con)
My right hon. Friend is right to point out that the Labour party
destroyed Britain’s nuclear industry by failing to build new
nuclear projects while in office. Labour is famous for selling
off the family gold, but it also sold off cupboards full of
silverware, including the UK Atomic Energy Authority Ltd, a very
profitable nuclear company. Will my right hon. Friend update us
on our new nuclear company, Great British Nuclear, its remit for
new nuclear power stations and what that might mean for Moorside
in Cumbria?
The development vehicle that we have announced in the strategy
will inaugurate a new era for the nuclear industry. If hon.
Members speak to anybody in the industry, they will hear people
say that no Government in the past 25 years have been so positive
and enthusiastic about nuclear power. There will be a great
future and that represents a great endorsement for the skills and
the industry that my hon. Friend has so ably promoted in the
House.
(Kilmarnock and Loudoun)
(SNP)
Clearly, this is not a strategy at all, but a series of
high-level targets or rehashed information that the Government
have spoken about several times. The reality is that the 2022
energy price cap is 75% higher than the April 2021 price cap,
putting 6.5 million UK households into fuel poverty. People are
going to die and yet there was no additional support announced to
alleviate fuel poverty. How many fuel-poor households does the
Secretary of State think is acceptable in modern-day Britain?
Will he confirm that less than a third of his £9 billion support
package is actually direct money from the Treasury that will not
be clawed back?
Charities and energy companies alike are calling for much greater
investment in energy efficiency, so why is there no additional
funding for that? I am pleased that no new money has been
announced for the Secretary of State’s nuclear fantasy. Does he
stand by the impact assessment that states that the cost of a new
nuclear power station, including capital finance, is as high as
£63 billion?
The Government have included a blue hydrogen target, so why is
the Acorn carbon capture and storage cluster still a reserve? Why
is there no additional funding to match the doubling of the green
hydrogen target? The 50 GW offshore wind target is very welcome,
but what is the Secretary of State doing to upgrade the offshore
transmission network strategy and to take account of the ScotWind
leasing round? When, oh when, will they remove the iniquity of
the transmission charges that prejudice Scotland, and does he
understand the concerns about the new nodal pricing proposal that
has been announced?
When will the Secretary of State get to grip with a funding
mechanism for pumped storage hydro, so that SSE can get on and
complete the Coire Glas project? If the new dash for oil and gas
is to provide energy security, will the Secretary of State advise
what percentage of North sea oil and gas gets traded and exported
and how much goes abroad for refining?
Finally, will the Secretary of State commit to working with the
Treasury to publish figures showing how much in additional oil
and gas revenues, how much additional VAT from our energy bills
and how much additional VAT on the petrol prices increase it has
received, so that we can see the Treasury windfall that has
happened during this cost of living crisis?
I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his barrage of
questions; I will try to answer a few of them. His position on
nuclear and mine could not be more different, and I am very glad
that he is honest and frank about nuclear. I still do not
understand what his answer is on decarbonised baseload, in terms
of security of supply, but I am grateful for his honesty. He will
know that the transmission charges are a matter for Ofgem, and I
would be very happy to speak to him and Ofgem about how we can
move forward on that.
Several hon. Members rose—
Mr Deputy Speaker ( )
Order. Don’t forget: we want short questions and short responses,
please.
Dame (South Northamptonshire)
(Con)
My right hon. Friend is aware that the Back-Bench committee on
business, energy and industrial strategy has done a very swift
and urgent inquiry into how businesses and households can reduce
their energy bills this winter. Will he and the Minister for
Energy, Clean Growth and Climate Change meet me and my
vice-chairs to discuss some of the very sensible and practical
measures in the inquiry?
Absolutely. I always want to take the opportunity to commend the
great work that my right hon. Friend did when she headed the
Department, when I was Energy Minister. We are really continuing
in that vein. The Minister for Energy, Clean Growth and Climate
Change and I will be delighted to meet her and her committee to
discuss ideas that will give us security, affordability and
sustainability.
(Gower) (Lab)
This morning, at the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
Committee, I was moved to tears listening to the chief executives
of the energy companies telling us how horrific it is going to be
for the public and vulnerable people to pay their bills. Now it
will be fine and for the summer they will have increases, but in
October it is going to be terrible. A short-term fix is not good
enough—the people in this country deserve better. We deserve a
long-term fix to our prices. The cost of living is extortionate,
and the Secretary of State needs to help.
As I said in my statement, we are fully aware of the pressure on
people’s household bills: it is a really, really extreme issue
and we want to deal with it. I also said that my right hon.
Friend the Chancellor will look at the matter again in October
and see whether measures are appropriate. The hon. Lady will know
that the price cap is set in August, so there is still a long
period before we can work out what it is. It is a matter for
Ofgem, and we are waiting to see what level it is set at in
August.
(Cleethorpes) (Con)
My right hon. Friend is well aware of the expertise and expansion
in offshore renewables, hydrogen and carbon capture in northern
Lincolnshire and the wider region. Does he agree that we could
focus on exporting? We have great skill in financial management,
planning and construction. Is he working with the Department for
International Trade to expand our exports?
My hon. Friend makes a remarkable and interesting point. He will
remember that just over two years ago, I visited Grimsby and saw
him and many other local MPs, and we talked about the investment
and the opportunities. I am very pleased that two and a half
years later we have realised a lot of those ambitions. There is
still a long way to go, but it is absolutely right to think of
exporting our expertise, our talent and our sheer manufacturing
ingenuity around the world. I am delighted to support him in
that.
(Bristol North West) (Lab)
It was reported that there were no further announcements on the
strategy for home insulation because when the Secretary of State
asked the Chancellor to use £300 million of departmental
underspend for that project, the Chancellor said no. Is that true
or false?
I do not remember that particular incident, but the hon.
Gentleman will know that energy efficiency was the centrepiece of
the heat and buildings strategy, which he welcomed only at the
end of last year.
(South Holland and The Deepings)
(Con)
I refer hon. Members to my entry in the Register of Members’
Financial Interests. The commitment to solar is vital, but does
the Secretary of State recognise that food security is as
important as energy security? Every building, every warehouse and
every commercial enterprise should be covered in solar before a
single acre of valuable arable land is consumed by solar
farms.
I would be very interested to hear my right hon. Friend’s views
on solar. I think solar is crucial. I am delighted that we have
so many former Energy Ministers in the Chamber today; my right
hon. Friend was a very distinguished holder of the post, and I am
very pleased to engage with him on this important subject.
(Brighton, Pavilion)
(Green)
The triple test of the strategy is whether it helps to cut
dependence on Russian gas, whether it brings down bills and
whether it secures a safe climate. It manages to fail on all
those fronts. It also has a massive hole where energy saving
should be.
It has been reported today that the Government are considering
scrapping green levies, which support renewables and address fuel
poverty, as the Secretary of State knows, and which therefore
help to get fuel bills down. Can he reassure me that that rumour
is false and that any changes made will simply be about moving
those levies to general taxation—or will this be another policy
led by a handful of Tory Back Benchers?
I engage with Front-Bench and Back-Bench colleagues all the time
and they have lots of brilliant ideas. I do not recognise the
hon. Lady’s characterisation of the strategy; I think it does
deliver on security, it does deliver on longer-term affordability
and it does deliver on the sustainable net zero targets that many
in this House agree with.
(North East Bedfordshire)
(Con)
One of the hurdles that families face when they look at putting
in a heat pump or investing in home insulation is that they
cannot afford the up-front costs to get the long-term gains. The
enterprise investment scheme has been extremely successful in
encouraging investment in entrepreneurship, which has a somewhat
similar cash-flow profile, so will my right hon. Friend have a
word with the Chancellor about whether we can implement a net
zero enterprise investment scheme to marshal private capital to
help with the social objective of achieving net zero?
We have a number of such schemes in existence and have trialled a
number of others. We are always iterating the way in which we
attract private capital to meet net zero; that is what we have
been doing for the past three years, since net zero was passed
into legislation.
(Bath) (LD)
When fracking was halted in June 2019, Ministers said that they
would not bring it back without compelling evidence. Now,
however, the Government say that all options are back on the
table. Where is the compelling new evidence that puts fracking
back on the table?
I have been very clear. The hon. Lady is right to mention 2019:
in October 2019 I was responsible—as was my right hon. Friend the
Member for South Northamptonshire (Dame ), who was Secretary of State
at the time—for announcing the moratorium. The facts about the
wholesale price have changed: it is 10 times higher than at the
end of 2019. I think that it is perfectly right to look at the
resources that we have in our country to see whether we can use
gas here for greater energy security.
(Ludlow) (Con)
May I build on the excellent question from my right hon. Friend
the Member for South Holland and The Deepings ( ), with which I agree? The
Secretary of State has included in his medium and long-term
strategy the ambition to raise solar power from 14 GW to 70 GW,
which would obviously make an enormous contribution to renewable
energy generation. Will he follow up the excellent work that he
undertook with the Treasury to remove VAT on solar panel
installation and also press for VAT to be removed from
electricity storage for battery walls and similar products in
domestic homes?
My right hon. Friend will appreciate that tax issues specifically
are not in my portfolio, but I speak to the Chancellor of the
Exchequer all the time about how we can incentivise investment in
new, exciting green technologies. That is something that we are
very pleased to do.
(Glasgow East) (SNP)
I think that all of us in this House, when we think of the energy
crisis, would want to encourage our constituents to take forward
energy efficiency measures, but in one particular type of
property—the tenement properties that we have right across
Glasgow’s east end—energy efficiency is even more problematic.
Will the Secretary of State meet me to look at the specific
energy efficiency challenges that Glaswegians face?
I would be very happy to meet the hon. Gentleman, as I meet many
of his Scottish colleagues, to discuss really critical energy
issues.
(Penistone and Stocksbridge)
(Con)
I very much welcome the commitment to rebuilding Britain’s
nuclear industry. It is great news for consumers and it should be
great news for the UK steel industry, particularly Speciality
Steel in Stocksbridge in my constituency, which specialises in
producing the kind of high-value steel required for such
projects. I know that my right hon. Friend has welcomed Sizewell
C’s decision to sign the UK steel charter. Can he confirm that
that means it must commit to purchasing steel made and poured in
the UK?
I cannot make any commitments on behalf of the company, because
it is at arm’s length and has its own corporate structure, as my
hon. Friend will know. However, as Secretary of State I have
always championed the steel industry, which is vital for national
security and for levelling up. It is a hugely important industry
and I am very happy to work with her to promote it.
(Feltham and Heston)
(Lab/Co-op)
Onshore wind is the cheapest power available to us, and the
cleanest. Does the Secretary of State accept that bills for
families and business will be much higher as a result of his
failure to back it?
We have done more than many in driving onshore wind. The hon.
Lady will know that we suspended the pot 1 auction and have
brought it back, that we have more onshore wind than pretty much
any other country in northern Europe, and that we continue
aggressively and passionately to promote onshore wind.
(Rugby) (Con)
The retail energy market saw the big six suppliers increase to
90. Several were granted licences despite being undercapitalised,
which caused them to fail and placed a burden on all consumers.
We know that competition in the market is vital; what steps will
the Secretary of State will be taking to make it effective?
In partnership with Ofgem, we have discussed trying to secure a
much more resilient energy retail market, with financial
covenants involving much more financial discipline and financial
disclosure, as well as other ways in which we can ensure that
what happened last winter does not happen again.
(Liverpool, Walton) (Lab)
Some 12,000 households in my constituency rely on prepayment
meters. The chief executive of ScottishPower rightly raised that
issue with the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Committee
today, saying that it was perverse that those people—often the
most vulnerable—can end up paying higher rates than people with
direct debit arrangements. Will the Secretary of State take this
up with the energy companies, and, if necessary, compel them to
ensure that the most vulnerable members of society are not paying
the highest prices?
I think it was Keith Anderson who spoke to the Committee this
morning. I speak to Keith and others in the sector all the time,
as does the Minister for Energy, Clean Growth and Climate Change,
my right hon. Friend the Member for Chelsea and Fulham (). We will definitely look into
this issue, because it seems disproportionate and unfair that
people with prepayment meters should be paying so much more than
those with direct debits, and we shall be happy to take it up
with the leaders in the sector.
(Maldon) (Con)
I welcome my right hon. Friend’s commitment to a new generation
of nuclear power stations. Can he confirm that the eight
designated sites remain the Government’s preferred locations for
those, including Bradwell in my constituency, and has he yet
reached a view on whether a Chinese-designed reactor could be
included?
As my right hon. Friend will know, Bradwell passed the generic
design assessment. That was an arm’s-length process in which the
Government did not become involved. There is clearly a discussion
to be had about how we can take Bradwell forward, but, as my
right hon. Friend knows, there is an absolute commitment to up to
eight sites. I am not saying eight, because obviously we have
small modular reactors as well, but eight sites would mean
roughly 24 GW.
(Bristol East) (Lab)
My hon. Friend the shadow Secretary of State visited Bristol
recently to look at the ambitious projects that are going on
there, including new water source heat pumps and the City Leap
partnership. Is the Secretary of State aware of what is going on
in Bristol, and what can he do to help cities to decarbonise?
I know that Bristol has a strong tradition of green,
carbon-reducing policies. I should be happy to visit the city and
see the great work that is being done there. It is a part of the
world that I know well from Airbus and other great industrial
concerns.
(Weston-super-Mare) (Con)
I congratulate the Secretary of State on this excellent document.
May I press him on the review of energy market arrangements and
the long-term fundamental reform of the underlying market? Will
he reassure me, and others on this side of the House—at the very
least—that that will be done in a spirit that will maximise
competition and consumer choice to ensure that we make the
customer the king and the queen, and that it will include price
cap reform?
All these issues are being looked at. The six-month periods for
the price cap are being reviewed, and, as I have said, financial
resilience for new entrants will be considered. A subject that
has not been mentioned so far is the future system operator and
the electricity system operator. That is a remarkable innovation,
and I am proud that it is included in the document. I should be
happy to talk to my hon. Friend about these matters.
(East Antrim) (DUP)
The Secretary of State has said that this is a long-term
strategy, and obviously we need that, but there is a short-term
problem, namely that people cannot afford to pay their bills at
present. That is partly due to the green levies, which amount to
about £400 a year in additional costs to individuals. What plans
has the Secretary of State to deal with that? Given his plans for
a number of new offshore wind turbines, may I ask how many he
believes are needed, and at what cost? What is the cost of
connection to the grid, and how will that affect the capital
costs on people’s energy bills?
As the right hon. Gentleman will know, in the time during which
I—indeed, I suspect, both of us—have been in the House,
renewables have really taken off. They are the one bit of the
energy story here in the UK that has been genuinely
transformative and a world leader, and I am very proud of that.
As for the immediate support for hard-pressed consumers facing a
global price hike, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor committed
£9 million to help people to pay their bills.
(Loughborough) (Con)
What steps are being taken to ensure that the future energy
strategy of the UK is secured by the manufacture of hydrogen fuel
cells in the UK—in, say, Loughborough?
I had a feeling that my hon. Friend was going to mention
Loughborough. She will know that we are absolutely committed to
hydrogen. It has many uses: it can be used, potentially, in the
gas grid, in transport—to which she alluded—and in industrial
processes. We are very excited about the opportunities, outlined
in the strategy, for more capacity so that we can drive
innovation in those areas.
(Lancaster and Fleetwood) (Lab)
In 2019—it was during the general election campaign, but I am
sure that was just a coincidence—the Government said that
fracking in Lancashire would be off the table, that there would
be a moratorium and that the wells would be filled with concrete.
May I ask the Secretary of State what has changed between 2019
and today that has put fracking back on the table? What on earth
did he get from COP26?
There has been an issue with the wholesale gas price, which has
gone up about 10 times during that period. It seems entirely
reasonable, if we have gas underneath our feet, to consider the
possibility of using it.
(Morecambe and Lunesdale)
(Con)
Would my right hon. Friend like to come to Heysham and look at
the two reactors that are working in my constituency? The whole
community is behind the nuclear power industry, and it is our
future, so I extend that invitation to my right hon. Friend.
I should be very happy to go with my hon. Friend to see the
nuclear reactors. The future is decarbonised baseload power. That
is what we need, and it is something with which my hon. Friend
and I are 100% aligned.
(Aberdeen South) (SNP)
The Secretary of State has said that his energy strategy
would
“drive down bills for British people”.
By how much?
That obviously refers, relatively, to whatever the wholesale
price of gas will be. I am not a gas trader, and nor is the hon.
Gentleman. He has no idea what the wholesale gas price will be
either. The strategy will have a tendency to lower prices.
(Brigg and Goole) (Con)
If recent events have shown us one thing, it is the importance of
having our own strategic steel industry—something that I know the
Secretary of State understands. The announcement of the expansion
of the energy-intensive industries compensation scheme is
welcomed by the industry, but can the Secretary of State tell us
when we will know the details of that?
We are in constant conversation about this. It was a hard-earned
win for the Government, and we are very pleased to be backing
steel. My hon. Friend knows of my commitment to the industry. We
have won some battles, and I look forward to engaging with him on
this in the future.
(Preston) (Lab/Co-op)
Mr Deputy Speaker, you will know, as a Lancashire MP, that the
people of Lancashire are fed up to the back teeth with fracking.
As the Secretary of State knows, the moratorium came in 2019
because Lancashire was experiencing tremors measuring 8 on the
Richter scale. It was a safety measure, because we were worried
about safety. It was nothing to do with the wholesale gas price,
so please, Secretary of State, do not come out with that now.
There was drilling, and I remember it well. When I was the Energy
Minister, I was receiving daily updates on the Richter scale, and
yes, there were moments—there were times—when the level exceeded
the limit that we had imposed. I think it entirely legitimate
now, given where gas prices are, to look again at some of the
evidence.
(Vale of Glamorgan) (Con)
I congratulate my right hon. Friend on the publication of the
report, which provides certainty for so many sectors,
particularly oil and gas, and nuclear. However, much attention
has rightly been paid to the support for energy-intensive
industries, and there have understandably been many questions
involving the steel industry. Will my right hon. Friend confirm
that the support extends to the chemical industry, given that Dow
Corning has a site in my constituency, as well as others?
My right hon. Friend knows very well that the chemical industry
is central not only to people in his constituency, but to those
throughout the north-east. We engage with energy-intensive
sectors such as the glass, steel and chemical sectors, and
others.
(Stoke-on-Trent South)
(Con)
Ceramics?
Ceramics, yes. All those industries are covered by the
energy-intensive scheme that we want to promote.
(York Central)
(Lab/Co-op)
One of the greatest constraints on decarbonisation is the skill
supply. Will the Secretary of State publish a workforce plan for
the energy sector, so we can ensure that we are making the
necessary investment in the skills that we need, both now and in
the future?
The hon. Lady is absolutely right. That is why, when I was the
Energy Minister, I—along with my right hon. Friend the Member for
South Staffordshire (Sir ), the then Education
Secretary—set up the green jobs taskforce, working with unions
across the sector. We came up with some very good proposals. We
are driving that forward, because we recognise the skills gap and
want to close it.
(Ynys Môn) (Con)
I am delighted that Wylfa is specifically included in the British
energy security strategy, and I look forward to welcoming the
Energy Minister to Ynys Môn in a few weeks. The new Wylfa nuclear
plant will bring local jobs for local people. Will the Minister
consider discounting electricity bills for locals, and locating
the headquarters of the new Great British Nuclear vehicle in
north Wales, in recognition of the nuclear expertise and heritage
in the area?
I think I would be getting a bit ahead of myself if I were to
decide here and now at the Dispatch Box where that body will be
sited, but I pay tribute to my hon. Friend’s tireless and
passionate advocacy for the nuclear industry. She, among a number
of others in this Chamber, has been a brilliant champion, and I
look forward to working with her to drive nuclear power in Wylfa
and across the country.
(Leeds Central) (Lab)
People used to have their water supply cut off if they could not
pay their bill, until it was made illegal to do so. Given that
more and more of our constituents will be unable to pay their gas
and electricity bills as the year progresses, does the Secretary
of State share my concern that more and more prepayment metres
will be installed in response, and that our constituents will in
effect end up disconnecting themselves because they do not have
enough money to put in the meter? If so, what is he going to do
about it?
As I said in an earlier answer, I speak to the industry all the
time. This has been raised, and we want to prevent people from
having to take up prepayment metres if they can avoid it. That is
something that we have done through a number of interventions to
try to reduce the impact of very high prices globally. I also
refer the right hon. Gentleman to the fact that my right hon.
Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has announced a £9 billion
package to help people who face high bills.
Several hon. Members rose—
Mr Deputy Speaker ( )
Order. I am afraid that this will have to be the last question. I
call .
Energy price fluctuations are a particular issue for the ceramics
sector. Over Easter, I was delighted to visit 1882 Ltd, a
ceramics producer in my constituency that has raised these
concerns with me. What is my right hon. Friend doing to support
the ceramics sector, and all energy-intensive sectors, to reduce
the cost of energy and help to increase energy
sustainability?
My hon. Friend will have noticed that there is a commitment in
the strategy to energy-intensive users. From his first day here,
he has been a tireless champion of the ceramics industry. I was
pleased to see him in his constituency when I went there, and to
the other Stoke constituencies. I look forward to working with
him to ensure that we protect our precious ceramics industry in
the UK.
|
