(12 years, 11 months ago)
Commons ChamberI beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
With this it will be convenient to discuss the following:
Amendment (a) to new clause11, line 5 leave out ‘, or not to exercise,’.
Amendment (b) to new clause 11, line 9 leave out
‘and the other party to the agreement’.
Amendment (c) to new clause 11, line 15 leave out ‘prudent.’ and insert
‘adequate to protect the interests of the public and taxpayers.’.
Government new clause 12—Adjustment of electricity transmission charges. Government new clause 13— Consultation.
New clause 17—Proposal for modification of approved programme—
‘(1) Section 48 of the Energy Act 2008 (approval of decommissioning programme) is amended as follows.
(2) In paragraph (2)(c) leave out “(provided that the site operator consents to the proposed modification)”.
(3) In subsection (3) leave out “, in particular,” and insert “only”.
(4) In paragraph (3)(a) leave out second “, or” and insert “.”.
(5) Leave out paragraph (3)(b).’.
Government amendments 35, 37, 38 and 39.
Amendment 51, page 93, line 33, in clause 115, leave out paragraph (a).
Government amendments 40 to 44.
We now move on to a series of technical and miscellaneous new clauses and amendments, which cover nuclear decommissioning transmission charging, the process of consultation and the Home Energy Conservation Act 1995 and how it applies in Scotland.
I shall first address the issue of the nuclear decommissioning programmes. In Committee, hon. Members raised concerns about how any agreement that sets out the manner in which the Secretary of State will, or will not, exercise his power to propose a modification to an approved programme will deal with “unforeseen circumstances” in the future. I have listened very carefully to hon. Members’ concerns, we have had very useful meetings and I am very grateful for the constructive way in which they have engaged to ensure that we have a new clause that is acceptable to both sides.
I recognise that the funded decommissioning programme and any agreement entered into under the new clause are very long-term arrangements, and that the arrangements will need to take account of “unforeseen circumstances” that may arise in the future.
In the light of the Committee’s concerns, we wish with new clause 11 to amend the relevant measure in order to require that the Secretary of State enter into an agreement only when he is satisfied that it includes adequate provision for the modification of a programme if the programme no longer secures prudent provision for the liabilities.
Let us be clear: we would not impose an additional test to the existing requirement that the Secretary of State must be satisfied that the programme and the agreement as a whole secure prudent provision for the liabilities. The new clause would make it explicit that, as part of ensuring prudent provision, the Secretary of State needed to be satisfied with the arrangements for making modifications to the programme when he entered into the agreement.