Jackdaw and Rosebank Oil and Gas Fields

Graham Leadbitter Excerpts

Thursday 3rd September 2026 Commons Chamber

[Katie White]

I thank my hon. Friend for his comments and interest in this and other energy decisions. I cannot make any further comments on these particular projects because of the robust regulatory process that is under way.

[Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)]

Both Labour and the Conservatives are guilty of failing oil and gas workers by driving uncertainty in this debate: the Conservatives by their U-turn on climate change policy, something which both the oil and gas sector and the renewables sector are deeply unhappy with, and the Labour Government by their complete lack of pace in decision making on regulatory issues, such as the transmission network use of system—TNUoS—charges, the 18 months to decide what is happening at Ardersier, and now on Jackdaw and Rosebank. The whole energy sector needs pace in and clarity of decision making. Scotland would make this a priority with the full powers of independence. Will the Government put the same pace and effort in?

[Katie White]

I agree with the hon. Member that the Opposition have made a certain number of U-turns, and those U-turns keep coming so we will continue to see what their position is. Also, their lack of clarity on strategic planning for our energy systems—they are not listening—has had regretful consequences. Where I would disagree is that the deadline was in August, and everybody would expect us to listen to that evidence and take account of all that input. On not moving at pace, nobody would say that this Government have not moved at pace in terms of our clean energy mission.

Oral Answers to Questions

Graham Leadbitter Excerpts

Tuesday 7th July 2026 Commons Chamber

[Ed Miliband]

What is he on, Mr Speaker? To be clear, even in the most ambitious scenarios, our plans for solar in 2030 would use 0.6% of agricultural land; I am happy to repeat that. I do not know what makey-uppy nonsense the shadow Minister is producing. The wider issue is that the Conservatives complain about energy bills, and energy bills are too high, but we have the cheapest form of power available—solar power—and they say no to it. They want to keep us hooked on fossil fuels, and we saw the impact of that with the Iran war and the Russia-Ukraine crisis. I think the Conservatives have got to go back to the drawing board.

[Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)]

6. Whether he held discussions with the Scottish Government and local authorities prior to announcing potential nuclear energy sites in Scotland.

[The Minister for Energy (Michael Shanks)]

Ministers commissioned Great British Energy Nuclear’s study of Scotland’s potential for new nuclear last autumn. That study indicates that Scotland has land areas with high potential for future development. We remain open to discussions with the Scottish Government on opportunities for new nuclear in Scotland, and I welcome the conversations I have with the new Scottish Energy Minister on a range of topics.

[Graham Leadbitter]

Two years ago, Labour promised to cut bills for every household by £300. Not only are households now paying hundreds of pounds more instead of less, but Labour’s nuclear tax on household energy bills will cost Scots a further £300 million over the next decade. The Minister knows that Scottish energy consumers pay among the highest electricity prices in the UK; he knows that there are serious alternatives that are quicker to implement and could actually reduce bills, such as geothermal energy; and he knows that the Government’s own figures for a nuclear waste disposal facility are up to £53 billion. With serious and far more cost-effective alternatives available, will the Minister listen to the Scottish people, stop the obsession with costly nuclear power that Scotland neither needs nor wants, and transfer energy power to—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I think the Minister has got the message.

Cost of Heating Oil

Graham Leadbitter Excerpts

Wednesday 15th April 2026 Westminster Hall

[Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Allin-Khan. I congratulate the hon. Member for North Norfolk (Steff Aquarone) on securing this important debate.

In his statement to Parliament yesterday, the Prime Minister said that energy bills had gone down on 1 April, yet for literally tens of thousands of my constituents, that is simply not true. It is estimated that in my constituency alone, 22,500 households—approaching 50,000 constituents—are not connected to the gas grid. Thousands of those homes are reliant on oil and LPG tank gas to heat their homes.

Let us delve a bit deeper. One low-income house in Newtonmore, which is in the Cairngorms national park, an arctic-alpine mountain environment, went from paying £640 to £1,220. The supplier told them there was a minimum order of 1,000 litres. A constituent in Forres went from paying £307 plus VAT in December, to £827 in March for 500 litres. That constituent is disabled, with multiple health conditions.

This inequity is not new. When it comes to their electricity bills, people in Moray, the highlands and across Scotland are paying among the highest energy prices in Europe, and substantially more than most of the rest of the UK, despite vast amounts of that energy being produced right beside them.

[Torcuil Crichton]

Like the hon. Member’s constituency, many businesses in my constituency, including distilleries, rely on kerosene heating oil for manufacturing processes. Would he urge the UK Government and the Scottish Government to devise a loan scheme to help these businesses to get over this Trump spike?

[Graham Leadbitter]

I will come on to the energy powers that should be devolved, but it is currently the UK Government’s responsibility.

Over the years, Scotland has sent over £350 billion to the Treasury from oil and gas activity, yet when it comes to the crunch, all the Treasury can come up with is the equivalent of £35 per household for oil. Yet again, the Scottish Government have had to step in and boost support by more than doubling the fund, for an issue that the UK Government have failed to address properly in the first place.

Rural homes and communities in Scotland are being overlooked and ignored. Is the Minister really happy that he is presiding over discrimination that is putting so much financial stress on vulnerable households? Will the Government take urgent measures to increase significantly the support funding? Will they provide support to those reliant on LPG gas for their heating? Will they properly regulate heating oil with a price cap, which I fully support?

If the Government are unwilling to take those actions, will they devolve energy powers and budgets to the people of Scotland, so that they can make their own decisions in their own Parliament on these vital and urgent issues?

Oil and Gas

Graham Leadbitter Excerpts

Tuesday 24th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)]

I will start with some facts: energy security is national security, global instability is rife, and our closest ally is now, at best, hugely unpredictable, and it is questionable whether it is reliable. When the UK Government should be protecting energy supply, they are instead sacrificing North sea jobs and communities on the altar of ideology. Job losses continue month on month, and the loss of skills is rife. “Just transition” are mere words for the communities affected. For me, this is a repeat of what Thatcher did to Scotland’s mining communities and the steel industry in Motherwell in the ’80s, destroying an industry without proper future planning and transition arrangements. Scottish Labour MPs—indeed, all Labour MPs—should be ashamed of their Government’s actions in that regard. It is utterly shameful.

[Brian Leishman (Alloa and Grangemouth) (Lab)]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for giving way, which is generous of him. I have been very critical of my Government in relation to the closure of Grangemouth refinery, but I will give you the opportunity of being critical of your Government’s inaction on the issue.

[Graham Leadbitter]

I think I am here to scrutinise what your Government are doing—that is the job of MPs in the House of Commons. I would also say that Conservative Members are no better on this. Government Members have an ideology of driving towards net zero and clean power, but it appears with no regard for the North sea; Conservative Members have an ideology of protecting oil and gas in the North sea, while getting rid of climate change targets. The industry does not like either of those positions—not the oil and gas sector, and not the renewables sector—and everybody in the Chamber knows that. Those sectors need each other to survive, and they need the skills to transition from one to the other. If we lose skills in the oil and gas sector, we will not develop the renewables sector as quickly as we need to, and those are the facts of the situation. If those skills and jobs are lost, or disappear into other places around the world, such as the Caspian sea or the Gulf of Mexico, they will not easily be brought back.

[Graeme Downie (Dunfermline and Dollar) (Lab)]

The hon. Gentleman talks about the North sea industry and ideology. What were his views when his Government were in coalition with the Green party, which wilfully wanted to destroy those jobs immediately overnight because of ideology? Did he support that Government coalition?

[Graham Leadbitter]

I supported the coalition at the time because we were gaining plenty of other benefits from it, but I concede that I was not 100% supportive of its position on oil and gas. I suggest that under the current SNP leadership, there is a balanced view of the North sea, and a pragmatic approach to protecting jobs in its oil and gas sectors, while still driving towards renewable jobs and the reindustrialisation of Scotland through the diversification into renewables that we need, recognising that oil and gas will be needed for decades to come.

[Andrew Bowie (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine) (Con)]

There is some confusion about current SNP policy on oil and gas. Is it, or is it not, still SNP policy to be against new oil and gas in the North sea?

[Graham Leadbitter]

Current SNP policy on oil and gas is that there should be a proper assessment of each individual application. That is the normal licensing process. I would think most Members of the House would recognise that if a process is put in place, it should be applied rigorously and consistently.

[Harriet Cross]

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

[Graham Leadbitter]

No, I will not give way again because I do not have much time.

There are many reasons why we need to support oil and gas, not least protecting the workforce and not losing the skills. There are also numerous other areas where the Government are not making decisions quickly enough. On the transmission network’s use of system charges, Government policy has taken 18 to 20 months to come through, and it will be several more months before it is in place. That will be after the start of allocation round 8, which is being accelerated, and many companies in the North sea are saying that they will hold on and wait for AR9 before making an investment decision, because they want certainty. That lack of certainty, pace and pragmatism is preventing those jobs from being created and preventing a just transition.

I can apply the same point to Ardersier, which is in my constituency, and the proposal by a Chinese company, Ming Yang, which wants to invest there. I understand that the Government have reasons and things that they need to consider in this matter, but it has been on their desk for 18 months. A decision is needed to either move on to other investors or decide that there is a risk, so that we can mitigate the risk, let them get on with it, create supply chain jobs and have serious, high-skilled, high-paid jobs that will provide a just transition and a serious opportunity for North sea workers. That decision needs to be made sooner rather than later. We experienced an excessive delay in the run-up to decisions on carbon capture, usage and storage; it took forever to get there, and jobs have been lost because of that lost time.

Let me turn very quickly to consumer pricing. The Government have been waxing lyrical about price gouging by energy companies at the moment. The Government and previous Governments have been responsible for state-sponsored price gouging in the energy market, with the highest prices for electricity in Scotland. With that, I urge Members to—

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

Order.

There was a particularly unedifying exchange between Members in which the use of “you” and “your” was very liberal indeed; I assume that it was addressed directly to me. Can we all try to do a little better? While I am on my feet, I will say that after the next speaker, the time limit will have to be reduced to three minutes in order to get all Members in.

Oral Answers to Questions

Graham Leadbitter Excerpts

Tuesday 24th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Martin McCluskey]

I was pleased to join my hon. Friend in Stornoway last week to meet those organisations. It is absolutely crucial—whether it is through the local government schemes that we are running in England or through the centralised scheme that the Scottish Government are running—that we take advantage of local knowledge to ensure that the support reaches the people who need it.

[Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)]

In Aviemore it will be snowing tomorrow—in fact, in quite a lot of north Scotland it will be snowing to a pretty low level. People in those areas are suffering hugely from massive energy prices for electricity, heating oil and liquefied petroleum gas for tanks. In Aviemore, a 2,500-litre tank, which was filled in November for £1,400, now costs £3,400 to fill. That is the differential that people are having to pay. Does the Minister agree that £35 per household is frankly a drop in the ocean?

[Martin McCluskey]

I think the hon. Member should be careful not to sow fear about these issues among his constituents, which is precisely what his remarks do. My right hon. Friend the Chancellor provided £4.6 million to the Scottish Government, who have increased the fund to £10 million. It is absolutely imperative that the Scottish Government tell hon. Members and constituents how to access the funding. They are delivering that £10 million scheme, which they have told us will be available from 1 April, so it is up to them to set out how it will get to people.

Local Power Plan

Graham Leadbitter Excerpts

Tuesday 10th February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Ed Miliband]

The two ideas that my hon. Friend puts forward sound absolutely ideal for this fund to me, but as for the eventual outcome, I must not put my thumb on the scale too much. He is right about this. We are starting something that will grow bigger and bigger over time. This is partly about raising our eyes and thinking, “Well, if it works in Germany and Denmark, why shouldn’t it work here? Why shouldn’t local people get the benefits of this?”. It represents a big, transformative shift in our thinking about what is possible.

[Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)]

The SNP has been very committed to community energy projects for a long time; indeed, we have invested more than the previous Government in community energy projects—over £67 million in nearly 1,000 projects. This announcement on community and renewable energy, while belated, is welcome. When the Secretary of State talks about community energy, does he include in that community heat projects that can be combined with community energy projects? A turbine with a community heat network, for example, can drive a huge amount of benefit to the local community.

[Ed Miliband]

Yes is the answer to that question. Community energy includes all kinds of innovative projects. As we open these funds for bidding—both from local authorities and community groups—we will find local people coming forward with innovative, imaginative ideas for how to drive this scheme forward. I suspect that we will be overwhelmed with the imaginative innovation that we see, and that is what is so exciting about this.

Oral Answers to Questions

Graham Leadbitter Excerpts

Tuesday 10th February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Chris McDonald]

I am extremely grateful to my hon. Friend for engaging with me on this topic in advance of the recent changes to the emissions trading scheme to include maritime emissions. It is incredibly important that domestic maritime emissions are included, so as to incentivise the investment required to decarbonise. I am aware of the issue in the Isle of Wight. On one route, two vessels will be affected. I know that he has invited me to visit the Isle of Wight and meet the businesses concerned, and I am allowed to make the commitment from the Dispatch Box that I will do that.

[Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)]

Businesses and public services in the north of Scotland pay among the highest commercial energy prices in the whole UK. The Government have had 18 months to try and fix that. Why do they still think it is okay to discriminate against people in the north of Scotland in that way?

[Chris McDonald]

In fact, the Government are taking an approach across the whole United Kingdom to deliver the energy infrastructure and energy generation capacity to guarantee low-cost, home-grown, secure energy for the future, ensuring that the jobs and benefits from that are seen across the country. I would have thought that the hon. Member might wish to welcome those jobs in Scotland. There will be 20,000 additional jobs by 2030 in clean energy industries in his community and mine.

Warm Homes Plan

Graham Leadbitter Excerpts

Wednesday 21st January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Order. I have confidence that the Secretary of State is across his brief and does not need to be warmed up before a question, so get straight to the question so that we get on to the next Member.

[Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)]

I welcome the additional investment in energy efficiency measures, which is a good thing. I certainly welcome the simplification of the energy efficiency systems that people can bid into, which can only be a good thing for consumers because that has been a veritable maze. However, the biggest barrier for many of my constituents and people across Scotland is price. They cannot invest in their home if they cannot get a decent price for their energy and deal with the cost of living that is affecting them right now, with the bills they are getting on their doorstep right now. The north of Scotland has the highest energy prices in the UK, and the SNP has put forward proposals for a social tariff. Will the Secretary of State seriously consider those measures, and put in place a social tariff to enable people to take advantage of such schemes?

[Ed Miliband]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question. It is because we recognise the immediacy of the affordability crisis that we took the action we did in the Budget to take £150 of costs off bills. It is because we recognise the affordability crisis that we significantly increased the numbers eligible for the warm home discount, for which I think hundreds of thousands more people in Scotland are now eligible. I would point out that the Scottish Government have some responsibility here, having cut some of their own schemes, but we want to work with the Scottish Government and do all we can to help his constituents.

Offshore Wind

Graham Leadbitter Excerpts

Wednesday 14th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Ed Miliband]

I have a long-standing promise, which I will fulfil—[Interruption.] Everyone seems to know about that promise to visit my hon. Friend’s constituency to see what GE Vernova is doing. She makes an important point about ensuring that procurement, in which I know GE Vernova has a particular interest, should as much as possible be from the UK. My Department is working on that through not just the clean industry bonus, but many other things that we are doing.

[Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)]

Although the news on Berwick Bank and Pentland is hugely welcome, it risks masking serious jeopardy for Scotland’s offshore wind sector. There is great worry that today’s news represents a longer-term shift in the renewables industry from north to south, due to the unfair and disproportionate transmission charges regime. If Scotland’s offshore wind sector is to have a future, we need to see reform of transmission charges before auction round 8—will we?

[Ed Miliband]

Even by the standards of the UK all-comers record for SNP miserabilism, that question takes some beating. I think the hon. Member gets the award. This is a great news story for Scotland, and not just in terms of Berwick Bank but in relation to floating wind. We want to carry on with that progress in AR8.

Factored Energy Arrangements: Pricing

Graham Leadbitter Excerpts

Wednesday 14th January 2026 Westminster Hall

[Graham Leadbitter (Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey) (SNP)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered energy pricing for consumers with factored energy arrangements.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stuart. I am pleased to have secured this debate on a systemic regulatory failure that is quietly draining the bank accounts of residents across Scotland and the wider UK. We are in the midst of a cost of living crisis, yet large numbers of domestic residents are being charged inflated business electricity tariffs for the essential communal services that keep their buildings safe and functional.

In a nutshell, the issue is that in many residential developments, services such as stairwell lighting, fire alarms, lifts and door entry systems are powered via shared electricity meters. Despite that electricity being used entirely for domestic living, residents are routinely charged business energy rates. It is not a niche issue; it is a systemic failure driven by outdated rules and weak enforcement.

The financial harm to our constituents is stark. A typical communal supply, using around 1,000 kWh per year, would cost roughly £380 on a fixed domestic tariff. Under the frequently used standard variable business tariffs, that same usage can rise to around £1,465, an excess cost of approximately £1,100 per meter every year. Across a modest development of 75 flats, it can add around £12,000 annually to residents’ collective bills.

What makes that particularly galling is that many residents are entirely unaware of how their communal electricity is billed. They may not know whether it is on a separate meter, how many accounts are involved, or whether it is charged at domestic or business rates. The costs are simply absorbed into factoring charges, leaving consumers unaware of both the issue and their rights—unaware when they are being roundly fleeced for someone else’s failure to either act properly or correctly inform them. The root cause of the issue is simple: it is a regulatory mismatch. The problem sits at the intersection of Ofgem regulation, supplier interpretation and third party management structures.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Gentleman for bringing forward this debate. He and I spoke beforehand, but he might not be aware that consumers with factored arrangements in Northern Ireland were historically vulnerable to high, unregulated prices, similar to consumers in GB, but the Northern Ireland Assembly moved to correct that vulnerability. Does he agree that, UK-wide, those in communal schemes must have protection from gouging and be able to access better priced energy?

[Graham Leadbitter]

That is absolutely the case. To take Scotland as an example, consumers have a route to address complaints about this issue through the regulation of factors, but it is complex and cumbersome. There should be a simpler way to do it through the energy regulator, as I will touch on later in my speech.

Many communal meters are correctly classed as profile class 01, a domestic designation based on usage. However, where a property factor, managing agent or company holds the contract, suppliers often automatically apply the business tariff.

[Adam Dance (Yeovil) (LD)]

I thank the hon. Member for securing this debate. Business owner Gary Helliar, from Yeovil, signed an energy contract through a broker who convinced him that energy prices were going to rise to 35p per kilowatt and that the 15p kilowatt was a great deal. Energy prices have fallen below that, but Gary has been stuck in that contract and is facing bills of about £390,000. Does the hon. Member agree that we need greater oversight of energy brokers, so that local businesses are not pushed into rip-off contracts?

[Graham Leadbitter]

I certainly agree on that point. It is not entirely the purpose of my debate to address that issue today, but it one that I recognise. I think there has to be a route for people to challenge the advice they are given and to take to task those who have given incorrect advice, and that has to be reasonably simple. In many cases currently, it is not.

Ofgem’s guidance on domestic communal supplies, which suppliers ought to follow, is very clear: where the non-commercial collective purchase of energy is for mainly domestic use, that should be treated as a domestic supply, provided that the arrangement is not commercial in nature. That guidance makes it clear that classification should be based on how the energy is used, not on the legal entity holding the contract, yet in practice it is inconsistently applied and weakly enforced.

Inconsistent supplier behaviour has created staggering inconsistency across the energy market. Some suppliers, including Ecotricity, Octopus and OVO, correctly apply domestic rates based on usage and do not override domestic classifications simply because a factor is involved. However, others, including EDF, British Gas, E.ON and SSE, often default to business rates, based solely on the identity of the contract holder. Indeed, in research carried out by my office, representatives of EDF have explicitly stated that they

“override the domestic classification if the usage is for a communal area managed by a business entity”.

That is in clear contradiction to Ofgem’s advice. The result is a supplier lottery. Two identical buildings on the same street can pay vastly different amounts for the same stairwell lighting, purely because of which supplier the managing agent selected.

The lack of regulatory oversight is deeply frustrating for our constituents. No meaningful reform has followed the 2023 call for evidence and multiple parliamentary questions. The current Government have carried out some further consultation, but have not yet moved things on, either. When I come to my conclusion, I will have specific asks for the Minister in that regard.

In April 2024, the Minister’s Department suggested that, due to physical set-ups, these consumers would continue to receive energy via non-domestic contracts. I have additionally met Ofgem on this issue. It recognises the problem, but consistent standards have not been enforced. Residents who do not choose their supplier are excluded from key domestic protections, including price cap coverage and Energy Ombudsman access. They are effectively trapped. More worryingly, when debts arise, suppliers may pursue residents directly as the “end users”, despite residents having no control over the contract. It is a Catch-22, where responsibility exists without authority, leaving residents unable to discuss the debts they are being chased for, because they do not hold the contract. If residents wish to complain, they often find the ombudsman route unavailable to them because the contract is held by a third party, leaving courts or tribunals as the only effective route for redress.

I therefore have six targeted and practical policy asks of the Minister. No. 1 is to reform standard licence condition 6 in order to prioritise actual usage over contract structure. No. 2 is to mandate a standardised appeal process for tariff classification across suppliers. No. 3 is to enforce profile class integrity, so that domestic or PC 01 meters are not billed at business rates. No. 4 is to strengthen Ofgem’s enforcement powers, so that protections are enforceable and not just advisory. No. 5 is to reopen the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero call for evidence and commit to legislative change. No. 6 is to ensure that residents under third party communal contracts can access the Energy Ombudsman.

The current system is a failure of logic and protection and a further cost of living blow to the people who can least afford it. We are effectively telling residents that, because they live in a flat with a shared hallway, rather than in a semi-detached house, they must pay business prices to power their light bulbs and fire alarms. To put it simply, the current situation is like someone being charged a commercial freight rate for a first-class stamp simply because the person posting the letter for them happens to be a professional administrator. It is time that the Government and Ofgem ensured that domestic use always equals a domestic price, and that residents are made fully aware of their rights when communal energy arrangements are put in place.