Draft Onshore Hydraulic Fracturing (Protected Areas) Regulations 2015

Debate between Huw Irranca-Davies and Andrea Leadsom
Tuesday 27th October 2015

(8 years, 11 months ago)

General Committees
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Andrea Leadsom Portrait Andrea Leadsom
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I assure my hon. Friend that the Government, in conjunction with the regulators, have taken every step possible to ensure that we can safely exploit shale. Let us be clear: at the moment no hydraulic fracturing is going on in the UK. This industry is at the very early stages and we have used every bit of our more than 50 years of regulatory experience to make the process the safest possible.

Huw Irranca-Davies Portrait Huw Irranca-Davies (Ogmore) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

The Minister has been at pains to give assurances on environmental protection, but does she accept that one of the assurances that even those who are adamantly opposed to onshore hydraulic fracking as part of unconventional gas set great store by was that it would not take place in protected areas such as sites of special scientific interest or anywhere near any groundwater source zones? There is a fear that, with these regulations, that assurance is being undone.

Andrea Leadsom Portrait Andrea Leadsom
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The regulations tighten the protections on hydraulic fracturing; that is precisely what they are for. As I have made clear, they deal with the subsurface implications of hydraulic fracturing, a process that occurs far below ground level, and they will tighten the protections. Far from loosening them or turning back on whatever the hon. Gentleman seems to think, they will improve the protections.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Huw Irranca-Davies and Andrea Leadsom
Thursday 25th June 2015

(9 years, 3 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Huw Irranca-Davies Portrait Huw Irranca-Davies (Ogmore) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

13. What recent assessment she has made of the potential contribution of carbon abatement technologies to the Government’s decarbonisation strategy.

Andrea Leadsom Portrait The Minister of State, Department of Energy and Climate Change (Andrea Leadsom)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I welcome the hon. Gentleman to his new position as Chairman of the Environmental Audit Committee. To meet our legally binding target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by 2050 we are taking action right across the economy. This means delivering carbon savings through a range of technologies from nuclear and carbon capture and storage to low carbon heat technologies and energy efficiency measures in homes and businesses.

Huw Irranca-Davies Portrait Huw Irranca-Davies
- Hansard - -

I welcome both Ministers to their positions. The fourth carbon budget report stressed the criticality of carbon abatement technology, and increasingly so post-2030, but the International Energy Agency report shows that if we fail, particularly on carbon capture and storage, the costs of decarbonisation and lower emissions could be up to 70% higher. On that basis, if the fifth carbon budget recommends greater investment in carbon abatement technologies and a faster trajectory to decarbonisation, will the Government accept those recommendations without reservation?

Andrea Leadsom Portrait Andrea Leadsom
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The Government have an open mind on the subject. We will put forward our policies towards the fifth carbon budget by the end of 2016. The hon. Gentleman is exactly right to point out the vital importance for the future of carbon capture and storage. He will be aware of the two projects—White Rose and Peterhead—that are currently under discussion, looking to achieve fulfilment so that we can prove the technology works. We hope to make progress on that.

Onshore Wind Energy

Debate between Huw Irranca-Davies and Andrea Leadsom
Thursday 10th February 2011

(13 years, 7 months ago)

Westminster Hall
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text

Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.

Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

Andrea Leadsom Portrait Andrea Leadsom (South Northamptonshire) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Mr Walker. I thank the Backbench Business Committee for enabling me to introduce this very important debate about onshore wind farms.

First, I congratulate the Front-Bench team on their part in bringing the Localism Bill to Parliament. It is absolutely key that we in Britain reverse the tide of centralisation and start to give power back to communities and people. I applaud the intention to remove regional spatial strategies and to abolish regional renewables targets. Putting power back into the hands of local communities and better allowing people to determine the outcomes for their area is certainly something that we need to do, so I thank the Front-Bench team for that.

The debate about onshore wind farms goes to the heart of the question of localism versus the national interest. Where onshore wind farms are concerned, a big tug-of-war is going on. There are real issues of national interest that must be taken into account. I shall mention three, the first of which is the energy gap. Although this is not a party political debate, Labour’s leaving of our economy in such a shambles is one of the legacies that we are fighting. The other is the way that it left our energy situation. The sad fact is that between now and 2020, some 35% of British power generating capability through nuclear and conventional power stations will be retired due to old age.

Huw Irranca-Davies Portrait Huw Irranca-Davies (Ogmore) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

I welcome the debate initiated by the hon. Lady. It is a good opportunity. I also welcome her saying that it is not party political, but will she note that in the middle of the economic recession that we had and the difficulties that we had, and still have, the wind sector grew by thousands and thousands of jobs? It was not coincidental that that growth began from 2007-08 onwards. Is that not a good story about green jobs started under the Labour Administration?

Andrea Leadsom Portrait Andrea Leadsom
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

As I plan to say, wind energy plays a part, but what we actually needed to do was to rebuild conventional power sources, and start building new ones, that will genuinely meet the needs of the country in the next decades.

--- Later in debate ---
Huw Irranca-Davies Portrait Huw Irranca-Davies
- Hansard - -

I thank the hon. Lady for giving way again in this good-humoured debate. May I point out that the comments of the hon. Member for North Wiltshire (Mr Gray) are a complete fallacy? In the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Workington (Tony Cunningham) and in many places in Wales, including in the uplands of south Wales, more than 60% of the land is within the TAN8—technical advice note 8—area for development. It is not true to say that wind farms are to be found predominantly in Conservative or Liberal Democrat areas. That is not how the mapping is done.

Andrea Leadsom Portrait Andrea Leadsom
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank the hon. Gentleman, but the fact remains that not many Opposition Members are present in the Chamber.

--- Later in debate ---
Andrea Leadsom Portrait Andrea Leadsom
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My right hon. Friend makes a good point. I agree that the issue of the local need versus the national interest still applies. Let us start from the basis that we build wind farms where it is windy and not where it is not windy.

Huw Irranca-Davies Portrait Huw Irranca-Davies
- Hansard - -

On a point of order, Mr Walker. The hon. Lady intrigues me. It is a very good debate and she has put some powerful points. However, has there been some policy announcement today? From what she has said, it sounds as though it may be beneficial. Are we hearing here and now a policy announcement?