John Bercow
Main Page: John Bercow (Speaker - Buckingham)I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
With this it will be convenient to discuss the following:
Amendment 24, in clause 79, page 46, line 20, leave out “31 March 2016” and insert “1 March 2017”.
This amendment and amendments 25, 26, 40, 41, 42, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38 and 39 have the effect of closing the Renewables Obligation for onshore wind a month earlier than the original date set out in the Statutory Instrument: Renewables Obligation Closure Order 2014: 2388, rather than a year earlier, as the Bill does in its present form.
Amendment 25, page 46, line 25, leave out “31 March 2016” and insert “1 March 2017”.
Amendment 22, page 47, line 22, leave out clause 80.
Amendment 26, in clause 80, page 47, line 27, leave out “31 March 2016” and insert “1 March 2017”.
Amendment 27, page 47, line 30, leave out “31 March 2016” and insert “1 March 2017”.
Amendment 28, page 47, line 36, leave out “31 March 2017” and insert “1 March 2017”.
Amendment 29, page 47, line 42, leave out “31 March 2017” and insert “1 March 2017”.
Amendment 30, page 48, line 3, leave out “31 March 2016” and insert “1 March 2017”.
Amendment 31, page 48, line 6, leave out “31 March 2017” and insert “1 March 2017”.
Amendment 32, page 48, line 20, leave out “31 March 2016” and insert “1 March 2017”.
Amendment 33, page 48, line 33, leave out “1 April 2017” and insert “2 March 2017”.
Amendment 34, page 48, line 43, leave out “1 April 2017” and insert “2 March 2017”.
Amendment 35, page 49, line 8, leave out “1 April 2017” and insert “2 March 2017”.
Amendment 36, page 49, line 17, leave out “1 April 2017” and insert “2 March 2017”.
Amendment 37, page 50, line 13, leave out “18 June 2015” and insert “18 May 2016”.
Amendment 1, page 50, line 18, leave out “planning permission” and insert
“an application for 1990 Act permission or 1997 Act permission”.
Amendment 38, page 50, line 19, leave out “18 June 2015” and insert “18 May 2016”.
Amendment 2, page 50, line 20, leave out “or judicial review”.
Amendment 3, page 50, line 30, after “Act” insert
“(excluding an extension agreed for the purposes of section 78(2) of the 1990 Act or section 47(2) of the 1997 Act)”.
Amendment 52, page 50, line 34, after “application”, insert
“(provided that this period does not include any extension agreed for the purposes of section 78(2) of the 1990 Act or section 47(2) of the 1997 Act”.
Amendment 4, page 50, line 35, leave out paragraph (iii).
Amendment 39, page 50, line 40, leave out “18 June 2015” and insert “18 May 2016”.
Amendment 53, page 50, line 40, after “18th June 2015”, insert “whether”.
Amendment 6, page 50, line 40, leave out “following an appeal”.
Amendment 5, page 50, line 40, after “following an appeal” insert—
“or a decision made by the Secretary of State, Welsh Ministers or Scottish Ministers following directions given under section 77 of the 1990 Act or section 46 of the 1997 Act, and”.
Amendment 54, page 50, line 40, after “appeal”, insert “or otherwise”.
Amendment 23, page 50, line 46, at end insert
“, or
(e) evidence that—
(i) an application for 1990 Act permission or 1997 Act permission was made on or before 18th June 2015 for the station or for additional capacity,
(ii) a grant of planning permission was resolved by the relevant planning authority on or before 18th June 2015,
(iii) planning permission was granted after 18th June 2015, and
(iv) any conditions as to the time period within which the development to which the permission relates must be begun have not been breached.”.
Amendment 7, page 50, line 46, at end insert—
“( ) evidence that—
(i) an application for 1990 Act permission or 1997 Act permission was made on or before 18 June 2015 for the station or additional capacity,
(ii) the period allowed under section 78(2) of the 1990 Act or (as the case may be) section 47(2) of the 1997 Act (excluding an extension agreed for the purposes of section 78(2) of the 1990 Act or section 47(2) of the 1997 Act) ended on or before 18 June 2015 without the things mentioned in section 78(2)(a) or (aa) of the 1990 Act or section 47(2)(a) or (b) of the 1997 Act being done in respect of the application,
(iii) the application was referred to the Secretary of State, Welsh Ministers or Scottish Ministers in accordance with directions given under section 77 of the 1990 Act or section 46 of the 1997 Act,
(iv) 1990 Act permission or 1997 Act permission was granted after 18 June 2015, and
(v) any conditions as to the time period within which the development to which the permission relates must be begun have not been breached.”.
Amendment 8, page 50, line 46, at end insert—
“( ) evidence that—
(i) an application for 1990 Act permission or 1997 Act permission was made on or before 18 June 2015 for the station or for additional capacity,
(ii) the relevant planning authority resolved to grant 1990 Act permission or 1997 Act permission on or before 18 June 2015,
(iii) 1990 Act permission or 1997 Act permission was granted after 18 June 2015, and
(iv) any conditions as to the time period within which the development to which the permission relates must be begun have not been breached.”.
Amendment 9, page 50, line 46, at end insert—
“( ) evidence that—
(i) an application for consent for the station or for additional capacity was made under section 36 of this Act,
(ii) the consultation period prescribed by Regulations made under paragraphs 2(3) or 3(1)(c) of Schedule 8 to this Act had expired on or before 18 June 2015,
(iii) the Secretary of State caused a public inquiry to be held under paragraph 2(2) or 3(3) of Schedule 8 to this Act or decided that a public inquiry need not be held,
(iv) consent was granted by the Secretary of State after 18 June 2015, and
(v) any conditions as to the time period within which the development to which the permission relates must be begun have not been breached.”.
Amendment 10, page 50, line 46, at end insert—
“( ) evidence that—
(i) an application for development consent for the station or for additional capacity was made under section 37 of the Planning Act 2008,
(ii) the deadline for receipt of representations under section 56(4) of the Planning Act 2008 had expired on or before 18 June 2015,
(iii) consent was granted by the Secretary of State after 18 June 2015, and
(iv) any conditions as to the time period within which the development to which the permission relates must be begun have not been breached.”.
Amendment 11, page 50, line 46, at end insert—
“( ) evidence that—
(i) planning permission for the station or additional capacity was granted on or before 18 June 2015,
(ii) planning permission under sections 73, 90(2), 90(2ZA) or 96A of the 1990 Act or sections 42, 57(2), 57(2ZA) or 64 of the 1997 Act, a consent under section 36C of this Act, or an order under section 153 of, and paragraph 2 or 3 of Schedule 6 to, the Planning Act 2008 varying the planning permission under clause 32LJ(4)(i)(i) was granted after 18 June 2015, and
(iii) any conditions as to the time period within which the development to which the permission relates must be begun have not been breached.”.
Amendment 12, page 50, line 46, at end insert—
“( ) evidence that—
(i) 1990 Act permission or 1997 Act permission for the station or additional capacity was granted on or before 18 June 2015,
(ii) consent under section 36 of this Act that permits a greater capacity for the station than that permitted by the planning permission under clause 32LJ(4)(j)(i) was granted after 18 June 2015, and
(iii) any conditions as to the time period within which the development to which the permission relates must be begun have not been breached.”.
Amendment 13, page 50, line 46, at end insert—
“( ) evidence that—
(i) planning permission for the station or additional capacity was granted on or before 18 June 2015,
(ii) planning permission under clause 32LJ(4)(k)(i) was superseded by a subsequent planning permission granted after 18 June 2015 permitting a station with the same or a lower capacity than that granted under the planning permission referred to in clause 32LJ(4)(k)(i), and
(iii) any conditions as to the time period within which the development to which the permission relates must be begun have not been breached.”.
Amendment 14, page 50, line 46, at end insert—
“( ) evidence that—
(i) planning permission for the station or additional capacity was granted or refused on or before 18 June 2015, and was subsequently confirmed or granted after that date following a statutory challenge under section 288 of the 1990 Act, section 237 of the 1997 Act or section 118 of the Planning Act 2008, or following a judicial review, and
(ii) any conditions as to the time period within which the development to which the permission relates must be begun have not been breached.”
Amendment 15, page 50, line 48, leave out sub-paragraph 5(a) and insert—
“(a) evidence of an agreement with a network operator to carry out grid works in relation to the station or additional capacity and was originally made on or before 18th June 2015 notwithstanding the fact that may have subsequently been amended or modified, and
(ab) a copy of a document written by, or on behalf of, the network operator which estimated or set a date for completion of the grid works which was no later than 31 March 2017; or”.
Amendment 40, page 50, line 49, leave out “18 June 2015” and insert “18 May 2016”.
Amendment 41, page 51, line 10, leave out “18 June 2015” and insert “18 May 2016”.
Amendment 16, page 51, line 26, at end insert
“and includes planning permission deemed to be granted in accordance with section 90 of that Act”.
Amendment 17, page 51, line 31, at end insert
“and includes planning permission deemed to be granted in accordance with section 57 of that Act”.
Amendment 18, page 52, line 6, leave out “from a recognised lender”.
Amendment 42, page 52, line 16, leave out “31 March 2017” and insert “1 March 2017”.
Amendment 19, page 52, leave out lines 27 to 29, and insert—
“In this section “recognised lender” means a bank or financial institution or trust or fund or other financial entity which is regulated by the relevant jurisdiction and which is engaged in making, purchasing or investing in loans, securities or other financial instruments.”.
Amendment 20, page 52, line 32, leave out subsection (6).
Amendment 43, page 54, line 19, leave out “31 March 2016” and insert “1 March 2017”.
Amendment 44, page 54, line 21, leave out “31 March 2017” and insert “1 March 2017”.
Government amendment 50.
Amendment 45, in clause 81, page 56, line 3, leave out “31 March 2016” and insert “1 March 2017”.
Amendment 21, page 56, line 3, leave out subsection (a) and insert—
“(aa) by a 33kV connected onshore wind generating station consented after 30 September 2015, or
(ab) by a cluster connected onshore wind generating station consented after 31 October 2015, and”.
Amendment 46, page 56, line 6, leave out “31 March 2016” and insert “1 March 2017”.
New clause 2 is straightforward. It would re-devolve the power to issue a closure order in respect of the renewables obligation for onshore wind back to the Scottish Government, where it used to belong. That power was re-reserved, so to speak, on the explicit understanding that there would be no changes—no closure and no material impact on Scotland from agreeing to that proposal. The proposal would have allowed for closure of the renewables obligation later next year, as had previously been agreed.
We have been through this. There has been extensive debate on the renewables obligation. It is worth reiterating briefly some of the concerns. As I said, power over the renewables obligation was removed from Scotland against the explicit undertaking that the Government had given to Scottish Ministers. An element of betrayal of trust has come about. That has woven its way through the entirety of the Government’s handling of onshore wind and the closure of the renewables obligation. For a long time the industry had trust in the Government. That trust has vanished.
Today’s debate and a number of the amendments offer the opportunity to improve the measure that introduces the closure of the renewables obligation, notably the numerous amendments tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill (Philip Boswell), who has meticulously detailed how the closure of the RO and the accompanying grace periods could be carried out in a way that is fairest to developers.
Last week the Energy and Climate Change Committee produced a report on investor confidence which suggested:
“Sudden and numerous policy announcements have marred the UK’s reputation for stable and predictable policy development.”
That is fairly damning. I am not steeped in the ways of Select Committee reports and how Committees finesse their arguments, but that is a clear criticism of the Government’s policy and how it has been implemented. It did not need to be done that way.
Through the various stages of the Bill we have accepted that the Government have a commitment to pursue that policy. We disagree with it. Their policy is short-sighted and is not the correct way of going about things. Onshore wind, in the view of the Scottish National party, has a significant role to play in the energy mix in the United Kingdom and should not have been taken out of the mix in a rather crude and cack-handed manner, but the Government have chosen to act in that way. [Interruption.] If the Government are to do that, they should do so in the best way possible. [Interruption.] I feel there is something else happening that I am not aware of.
Very disorderly conduct. The hon. Gentleman is pressing a serious case. If I may, at the risk of making an in-joke, be permitted to say this, that whatever is the subject of this debate, fortunately, not least for him, Otis is not.
Fortunately for the hon. Gentleman, he does not need to do so. He is innocent. He has been transgressed against; he has not transgressed. He can now speed ahead with his oration, to which we look forward.
Speed is the operative word, I think. We have called for the re-devolution of the power and for the grace periods to be dealt with in the most appropriate manner. In its manifesto and in debates the Conservative party has professed a desire to see local control of this matter, and nobody would argue with that. However, that requires that we respect local decisions, but the grace periods as they stand do not do that. That is why the new clause and the amendments are necessary, particularly amendment 8, in the name of my hon. Friend the Member for Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill, which relates to planning decisions at committee that were dealt with before the closure date, but where the approval certificate was not granted, in Scotland, owing to section 75 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997, on planning gain—in England, I think it is section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. This issue is clearly about local decision making, and the Government should give their consent so that it can be included in the Bill.
We accept that the change is going to happen. Having been explicitly opposed to it, the industry now sees that it is better to have some certainty, rather than continued uncertainty. However, that certainty needs to be correct certainty—it needs to be fair certainty and it needs to be certainty that does what it is intended to do.
We should respect local decision making. Where locally elected bodies—councils in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, although there are different stipulations there—have agreed to projects but have not been able to get their certificate to allow them access to the renewables obligation because of the technical nature of decision making around planning gain and other such issues, that is simply wrong.
No. We will take Mr Chris Heaton-Harris and then come to the hon. Member for Southampton, Test (Dr Whitehead).
Thank you for calling me early in the debate, Mr Speaker.
I sat on the Energy Bill Committee, along with many right hon. and hon. Members present today, and I want to add a bit of balance to the Scottish National party’s contribution. We had this debate in Committee. The SNP would very much like the responsibility for the renewables obligation sent back to Scotland, and many people on the Government Benches would probably like the SNP to commit to paying for that, if it were to happen. However, only half of that is covered in the SNP proposal.
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for that. He will be aware that the Chancellor and the Prime Minister have looked carefully at the matter, so I hope that he will be pleased. I assure him that his interests and the interests of the UK continental shelf are being carefully considered. I hope that the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland will be content not to press the new clause to a vote.
Finally—hon. Members will be pleased to hear that—I turn to amendment 47, which was tabled by the hon. Member for Wigan and others. The amendment would oblige the OGA to consider the most advantageous use of North sea infrastructure for the overall benefit of oil and gas extraction prior to the decommissioning of such sites. I am delighted to note the support across the House for the measures to establish the OGA and give it the powers needed to maximise economic recovery. The impact of the fall in oil prices on industry makes that even more critical.
Although we are taking urgent steps to stimulate investment in exploration, it is equally important to the overall viability of the North sea that we make the best use of infrastructure in order to mitigate the risks of premature decommissioning. That requires a holistic approach in which operators, licence holders and infra- structure owners collaborate to ensure the maximum economic recovery of petroleum from the UK continental shelf. That is precisely provided by the OGA’s principal objective set out in section 9A of the Petroleum Act 1998.
The strategy to maximise economic recovery further addresses that issue. It includes duties to plan, commission and maintain infrastructure in a way that meets the optimum configuration for maximising the value of economically recoverable petroleum, taking into account the operational needs of others. The strategy and the measures in the Bill ensure that before commencing the decommissioning of any infrastructure in relevant UK waters, the owners of the infrastructure and the OGA must ensure that all viable options for its continued use have been suitably explored. The OGA is already working to support a stable and sustainable decommissioning framework focused on improving late-life management. The OGA will publish its decommissioning sector strategy early in the summer. I hope that hon. Members have found my explanation reassuring and will be content not to press the amendment to a vote.
indicated dissent.
Question put, That the clause be read a Second time.
Our consideration having been completed, I will now suspend the House for no more than five minutes in order to make a decision about certification. The Division bells will be rung two minutes before the House resumes. Following my certification, the Government will table the appropriate consent motion, copies of which will be made available in the Vote Office and distributed by the Doorkeepers.
I can now inform the House that I have completed certification of the Bill, as required by the Standing Order. I have confirmed the view expressed in my provisional certificate issued on 9 March. Copies of my final certificate will be made available in the Vote Office and on the parliamentary website.
Under Standing Order No. 83M, a consent motion is therefore required for the Bill to proceed. Copies of the motion are available in the Vote Office and on the parliamentary website, and have been made available to Members in the Chamber. Does the Minister intend to move the consent motion?
Under Standing Order 83M(4), the House must forthwith resolve itself into the Legislative Grand Committee (England and Wales).
The House forthwith resolved itself into the Legislative Grand Committee (England and Wales) (Standing Order No. 83M).
[Mrs Eleanor Laing in the Chair]