Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Martin Vickers and Ed Davey

Thursday 19th March 2015 Commons Chamber

[Mr Davey]

I am surprised that the hon. Gentleman asked that question. He knows that I have read the report, because I have talked to him about it. I have told him in this Chamber that I wanted to respond to it. I thought that the reply had winged its way to him. If it has not, I shall chase it up. Let me say to him and the House that I read his report and thought it was very good.

[Martin Vickers (Cleethorpes) (Con)]

I recently met senior management at the Phillips 66 refinery in my constituency. The refinery has the lowest per barrel SO₂ emissions in the country, but it fears that the continuing demands of the industrial emissions directive will increase costs with little benefit to the environment. Does the Minister share my concerns, and what action is he taking to protect the industry and the jobs?

Annual Energy Statement

Debate between Martin Vickers and Ed Davey

Thursday 31st October 2013 Commons Chamber

[Martin Vickers (Cleethorpes) (Con)]

My constituents will welcome the possible introduction of criminal sanctions if any company is found guilty of rigging the market. Although I note Ofgem’s powers of compensation, would it not be more appropriate if consumers were to benefit if price or market rigging were found? Can we take action to ensure that such money goes back into consumers’ bank accounts?

[Mr Davey]

The measures in the Energy Bill provide that, if an individual consumer has been done wrong by an energy company—mistreated or subjected to any other malpractice—the fine, thanks to this Government, will go to the consumer. The criminal sanctions I have referred to today would be applied for systemic anti-competitive practices or manipulation of the energy markets by an individual or company.