Large-scale Energy Projects and Food Security
Mark Hendrick Excerpts(1 month ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
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
Sir Mark Hendrick (in the Chair)
Order. We are going to go very close to the time limit in this debate. I ask Members who want to speak to resist intervening. Members will only get three minutes each, in order to accommodate the wind-up speeches from the Front1 Benches.
Mr Charters
What will really help is if we work towards a position of having a land management framework, so that we can have the clarity of addressing some of these challenges.
Let me continue. The argument that there has to be a trade-off between food security and renewable energy is misguided. If anything, our farmers’ future depends on our commitment to both. With a small slice of land, a forward-thinking approach and a commitment to combating climate change, we can ensure that our fields are productive for generations to come. The solution is clear: renewables should be seen not as an obstacle to food security, but as a powerful tool to help secure it. As I said, golf courses will take up more land than solar projects, so let’s not get caught in the rough—we need to aim straight for the green.
Sir Mark Hendrick (in the Chair)
I remind Members to bob or to stand if they wish to speak. We are going to be very short of time and I will cut to the Front Benchers when appropriate, even if some Members have not spoken, so if you speak for too long, you are taking time off others.
Sarah Dyke
I will not, given the time.
Poorer quality land can still be productive, as sheep can graze underneath the solar panels, while the solar array provides a diversification opportunity for the farmer. It is important that the updated NPPF keeps that distinction so that poorer quality land with the ability to under-graze remains preferable to the best and most versatile.
We must make it easier for farmers to put solar panels on agricultural buildings. Solar arrays are space intensive, and can sometimes compete for land that would otherwise be used for other purposes. Putting solar panels on the roofs of farm buildings would avoid any land use conflict.
Rural communities such as Glastonbury and Somerton are leading the solar energy movement. My constituency is in the top 50 English parliamentary constituencies for domestic solar generation capacity. The Government should be looking to improve on the success of rural communities by enabling more solar panels on agricultural buildings, with affordable access to rural electricity grid connections. To ensure we are food secure, we must ensure that the future of British farming is safe. We must therefore give our farmers the support they need to feed the nation and protect our environment. To reach net zero by 2045, we must support the roll-out of renewables. Supporting farmers to host renewable infrastructure is common sense, but it must not be on our best, most versatile and most productive land. I look forward to hearing the Minister’s comments—
Making Britain a Clean Energy Superpower
Mark Hendrick Excerpts(3 months, 4 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Wera Hobhouse
Indeed. We have had a Westminster Hall debate on that very subject, and I absolutely agree. Saving private companies money is no reason not to do something that is better for communities. Half the time it is all about what is affordable, so I agree that there is a very fine balance to be struck, but where other solutions exist than having big pylons that ruin the landscape, National Grid should look at them.
Sir Mark Hendrick (Preston) (Lab/Co-op)
The hon. Member claimed that Labour’s manifesto did not mention community energy. In fact, a statement from Community Energy England says:
“Labour’s Local Power Plan would turbocharge community energy and local climate action”.
It is an integral part of the Labour party manifesto.
Sir Mark Hendrick (Preston) (Lab/Co-op)
Madam Deputy Speaker, congratulations on your elevation.
Today, we stand on the brink of a new era for our country, with the recent announcement of an historic partnership between Great British Energy and the Crown Estate that will usher in billions of pounds of investment for clean power. This landmark collaboration will be a defining moment in this new Government’s mission to make Britain a clean energy superpower, highlighted by the introduction of the Great British Energy Bill to this House.
I share the concern of many in this Chamber that, for too long, families and businesses had to endure sky-high energy bills. That was due to mismanagement and exposure to volatile international markets. Great British Energy will be owned by British people and fortified with £8.3 billion of new investment. It is positioned to drive clean energy deployment across the United Kingdom, promoting job creation, energy independence and economic revitalisation. The formation of Great British Energy signifies a definitive break with the past, steering us towards our ambitious goal of clean power by 2030.
The Crown Estate, with its extensive £16 billion portfolio and newly enhanced investment capabilities, will synergise with Great British Energy’s strategic oversight. This will enable up to £60 billion in private investments and ensure that the benefits of our home-grown, secure energy will be felt across our nation, from urban areas to rural communities.
It is essential that we collaborate with the private sector, which will allow us to amplify our renewable energy capacity—to double onshore wind, triple solar power and quadruple offshore wind—by 2030. This broad-based investment in renewable energy represents an investment in our future energy security and independence. This ambitious plan will not only produce cheaper power for our constituents, but ensure that profits are reinvested back into our communities.
The creation of Great British Energy marks a critical step towards generating clean energy, cutting energy bills and delivering good jobs, particularly at a time when our constituents are grappling with the consequences of previous Government failures, which led to an energy insecurity crisis.
I have served on the Energy Security and Net Zero Committee since its formation. I strongly believe that accelerating our investment in energy infrastructure is critical. Initiatives such as the green prosperity plan will create hundreds of thousands of new jobs in clean industries by 2030. This plan is vital to securing British leadership in the global clean energy transition.
I am sure that my hon. Friend the Minister is proud that Great British Energy will be headquartered in Scotland, ensuring that every corner of our United Kingdom plays a critical role in this green revolution. Alongside the lifting of the onshore wind ban, approval of significant solar power projects, and the establishment of a mission control headed by Chris Stark, yesterday’s announcements underscore our Government’s commitment to securing Britain’s energy future. Furthermore, the Government’s plan to impose a windfall tax on the record profits of oil and gas companies will serve as a financial leveller. It will redistribute excess profits and ease the public burden.
The transition to renewable energy must be meticulously planned and executed. In this context, the burning of woody biomass for electricity presents substantial risks to our clean energy future. The Government need to reconsider subsidies for large biomass generators—such as Drax and Lynemouth power stations—which under current subsidy arrangements could significantly undermine our carbon reduction goals.
Investigations have revealed that Drax, the UK’s largest emitter of carbon, has been involved in practices that are environmentally unsustainable and counterproductive to our objectives. Extending the subsidies could result in an increase in carbon emissions and burden bill payers with higher costs. The Government must heed the advice of independent bodies, such as the Climate Change Committee and the National Audit Office, by ensuring that any future subsidies are conditional on sustainable practices. That will promote the use of local waste biomass over imported material.
Furthermore, an equitable transmission away from North sea oil and gas remains crucial. Despite 50 years of drilling, those resources are depleting and cannot meet UK demand. Increased domestic oil and gas production would not alleviate high energy bills or enhance energy security, as global market forces determine those prices. By ending new oil and gas licences and speeding up the adoption of renewable energy, we solidify our position as a world leader in climate action—
