Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Charles Hendry and Lord Barker of Battle

Thursday 16th January 2014 Commons Chamber

[Gregory Barker]

It is a great shame that the hon. Gentleman did not have that view when Labour was in government. Let us not forget that Labour created the big six. There were 14 major energy companies when Labour took office and those were driven into the big six. The big six are Labour’s creation. We are on the side of competition, technological change and the consumer; under this Government, we are putting the consumer first.

[Charles Hendry (Wealden) (Con)]

Will my right hon. Friend look at taking some specific measures to tackle fuel poverty for those who are off the gas grid? Will he encourage the use of syndicates, which can buy oil and LPG more cheaply? Will he look again at whether this vital sector should be regulated by Ofgem, and will he explore whether some of the revenues from future shale gas development could be used directly to extend the gas grid?

[Gregory Barker]

I take my hon. Friend’s points extremely seriously, not least because he did a great deal for this group of people when he was an energy Minister. Speaking as someone who is off the gas grid, I am delighted to say that I recently joined my local community’s syndicate for buying heating oil, and it has delivered a very good price. I encourage others to do the same. The good point that my hon. Friend raises is under review. We are looking at more effective data matching to identify those in fuel poverty in rural areas who are often much harder to find than those in similar circumstances in urban areas. We are absolutely on it; I can assure my hon. Friend of that.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Charles Hendry and Lord Barker of Battle

Thursday 17th October 2013 Commons Chamber

[Gregory Barker]

We are certainly seeing a change in the industry, and we expect to see a structural change. New companies are now entering the market. The growth that we are seeing is not in the big energy companies created by the last Labour Government, but in the small and medium-sized enterprises, the independents and entrepreneurs who are being championed by the coalition. The ECO is helping more than 215,000 households, and we expect it—in combination with other measures—to enable nearly a quarter of a million homes to benefit from insulation, and from a range of new products that were not available before, by the end of the year.

[Charles Hendry (Wealden) (Con)]

Does my right hon. Friend agree that fuel poverty would be worsened if the cost of the capital required for the billions of pounds of new investment rose because of heightened political risk associated with the United Kingdom? Indeed, is that not exactly what the Leader of the Opposition has achieved? Surely his comments will make fuel poverty worse.

[Gregory Barker]

My hon. Friend, who has huge experience in these matters, is absolutely right. Labour’s policy would scorch investment. According to an analysis by Cornwall Energy, which leads the monthly forum for independent energy companies, Labour’s policy is “wrong”, and

“based on imperfect information, flawed assumptions and emotion, which will cost the consumer dearly. There are at least five significant problems with it.”

Labour’s policy would indeed have an impact on the cost of capital and on investment, and consumers—particularly vulnerable consumers—would be left to pick up the pieces.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Charles Hendry and Lord Barker of Battle

Thursday 11th July 2013 Commons Chamber

[Gregory Barker]

The hon. Lady must understand that this is a 20-year programme, not some knee-jerk reaction. I know that the Labour party is heavily invested in failure and is made up of a series of doom-mongers who are never happier than when they are talking down the green economy. I have much greater faith in SMEs to deliver a transformational green economy than they do.

[Charles Hendry (Wealden) (Con)]

Does the Secretary of State agree with me that some people’s concerns about shale gas are based on fact but many are not? Will he ensure that his Department produces and maintains an up-to-date online database so that people can see what claims are evidently false and, where they are based on fact, what the Government are doing to address them?

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Charles Hendry and Lord Barker of Battle

Thursday 13th December 2012 Commons Chamber

[Charles Hendry (Wealden) (Con)]

My right hon. Friend the Minister of State has spoken about his support for geothermal energy in the United Kingdom. Will he drive forward the Department’s work with Iceland to develop that country’s vast geothermal potential? Does he agree that an interconnector is not just technically feasible but has the potential to bring vast amounts of low-carbon electricity, thereby helping our security of supply and avoiding price shocks?

[Gregory Barker]

My hon. Friend and former ministerial colleague left a huge record of achievement in the Department of Energy and Climate Change, including that of fostering greater links and a coherent strategy with Iceland. I assure him that the Government will build on his legacy to take that project forward.

Energy Bill [Lords]

Debate between Charles Hendry and Lord Barker of Battle

Wednesday 14th September 2011 Commons Chamber

[Gregory Barker]

There will be access to the energy annual statement, which will make that crystal clear.

Energy suppliers are already prohibited from disconnecting households in the winter months when they know or have reason to believe that the customer is a pensioner or lives with pensioners or with those under 18 years old. We plan to extend those protections to the non-payment of green deal charges.

We have had a very good debate. I have commented on the green investment bank to make clear the Government’s views on what appropriate interventions for the green investment bank would be. Although we understand the intention behind new clause 8, we will not support it. I hope that the hon. Member for Brighton, Pavilion is reassured by my explanation and will not press her amendments 26, 27, 49 and 50 or new clause 8; and that the hon. Member for Manchester, Withington and my hon. Friend the Member for Brigg and Goole are similarly reassured on amendment 28. I hope also that the hon. Member for Manchester, Withington found my explanation regarding amendment 45 equally compelling and will not press that, either. I urge the House to support Government amendments 29 to 34 and 36 and new clause 10.

Question put and agreed to.

New clause 10 accordingly read a Second time, and added to the Bill.

New Clause 11

Agreement about modifying decommissioning programme

‘(1) Section 46 of the Energy Act 2008 (approval of a decommissioning programme) is amended as follows.

(2) After subsection (3) insert—

“(3A) When approving a programme the Secretary of State may agree to exercise, or not to exercise, the section 48 power—

(a) in a particular manner;

(b) within a particular period.

(3B) An agreement under subsection (3A) may subsequently be amended by the Secretary of State and the other party to the agreement.

(3C) The Secretary of State may not make such an agreement or amend such an agreement unless satisfied that the agreement (or the agreement as amended) includes adequate provision for the modification of the programme in the event that the provision made by it for the technical matters (including the financing of the designated technical matters) ceases to be prudent.

(3D) Provision in such an agreement (including the provision mentioned in subsection (3C)) may include provision—

(a) for a determination by a third party in relation to a relevant matter specified in the agreement, and

(b) for the Secretary of State to be bound by such a determination.

(3E) A “relevant matter” is a matter relating to the provision made by the programme for the technical matters.

(3F) Subsections (3A) to (3D) apply notwithstanding that the agreement or amendment fetters the Secretary of State’s discretion.

(3G) In subsection (3A) “section 48 power” means the power of the Secretary of State under section 48 to propose a modification of the programme or a modification of the conditions to which the approval of the programme is subject.”

(3) In subsection (4) for “(3)” substitute “(3B)”.’.—(Charles Hendry.)

Brought up, and read the First time.

[The Minister of State, Department of Energy and Climate Change (Charles Hendry)]

I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.