Great British Energy Bill Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateBaroness Williams of Trafford
Main Page: Baroness Williams of Trafford (Conservative - Life peer)Department Debates - View all Baroness Williams of Trafford's debates with the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero
(1 day, 13 hours ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, I shall speak against Amendments 23 and 24. If the Conservative Benches had put forward something saying that Labour should be held to account for the promises that they have made, then yes, they should. Should those promises be enacted in this overpoliticised amendment? No, because that is not the way that we do things.
This is a very politicised amendment. It does nothing to help bill payers, nothing to make Great British Energy any better at delivering for bill payers and nothing to reduce costs for bill payers. Amendments 23 and 24 are amendments for leaflets and nothing more. They are pointless, petty grandstanding.
Yes, they can write a quick leaflet saying that they held the Government to account, when actually they achieved nothing other than tabling an amendment. The last Tory Government had a de facto ban on onshore wind, did little to develop renewable technologies, left us dependent on Russian gas and ended up spending £40 billion subsidising bill payers to import foreign gas, for little or no long-term benefit. The previous Government gave up on delivering on nearly all energy-efficient measures and left UK citizens in cold and damp homes. We believe that, if done well, GB Energy will provide energy security, reduce energy bills, create green jobs and kick-start economic growth. Many of these arguments also apply to Amendment 24.
Without wasting time, our response is much the same as to the previous amendment. Frankly, we feel that holding the Government to account by enacting something in a Bill is pretty delusional. It would be far better to do that outside of the Chamber.
My Lords, it is 10.25 pm. We still have six more groups to go. There was no agreement to go beyond 10 pm, and indeed the Order Paper says that the House should sit until 10 pm. We had three and a half days in Committee, and I expressed my reservation about getting Report done in one day. A number of things have happened today which are beyond people’s control, so it was a challenge anyway. I ask the Chief Whip to adjourn the House.
My Lords, I have been clear with the Opposition that we are going to complete Report stage of the Great British Energy Bill today. I made that clear in my meeting with the noble Baroness last week.
In my time in the House—which will be 15 years in June—and particularly in over three years as Opposition Chief Whip, I always played fair with the Government. On more than one occasion I sat here until 2 am or even 3 am so that the Government could get their business through, often on Bills that the noble Baroness was trying to get through this House. The Opposition, who were the Government only a few months ago, would have been absolutely furious if I had come to that Dispatch Box to ask for the House to be adjourned at only 10.26 pm. The Government have a right to get their business through. The Opposition have the right to oppose and the House has the right to scrutinise legislation. All these things can be accommodated very easily, but if the Opposition are determined not to play fair then we get into these difficulties. It is unnecessary.
I can only imagine the complaints from the noble Baroness if I was behaving like this last year. It is wrong, it is unnecessary and it does the Opposition no credit whatever. We need to complete Report tonight. We have only two amendments left to vote on—I have been advised that that will be Amendments 46 and 50. With a bit of good will on all sides, we can complete Report easily before midnight.