|
Energy Policy
A debate on motion
S2M-3543, in the name of Richard Lochhead,
on Energy Policy.
The
Deputy Presiding Officer (Trish Godman):
Good morning. The first item of business is a debate on motion S2M-3543, in
the name of Richard Lochhead, on energy policy. Mr Lochhead, you have 14
minutes.
Richard Lochhead (North East Scotland) (SNP):
As a result of the rise in global demand for energy, rocketing fuel prices,
the fact that the United Kingdom is becoming a net importer of gas,
international instability and global warming, energy issues increasingly
dominate the headlines in Scotland, in Europe and internationally. That is
because our standard of living depends on plentiful, accessible and
affordable energy. We produce energy to heat and feed ourselves, to travel
and to go about our daily lives. We know to our cost that countries will go
to extreme lengths to secure access to energy supplies — indeed, they will
go to war.
The last thing that we need is a haphazard, ad hoc series of energy
developments with no reference to any national energy strategy or policy.
Indeed, the Enterprise and Culture Committee called for such a strategy in a
recent report published under the convenership of my colleague Alasdair
Morgan.
Phil Gallie (South of Scotland) (Con):
Does the member agree that it was only because of Margaret Thatcher that
that company was established in Scotland with a major corporate presence?
Will he also take into consideration the fact that Scottish Nuclear has,
through British Energy, become the UK's voice?
Richard Lochhead:
No matter what the member's intervention is about, he always turns the
debate around to nuclear energy.
One thing is certain: the Government and the Parliament must fight to retain
Scottish Power's independence. We must make sure that we do all in our power
to resist any foreign takeover of such a major Scottish company.
It is not just Scottish Power's future that is uncertain, but Scotland's
energy future. Key decisions must be taken by the Scottish Parliament on our
future energy policy. If the Parliament is capable of taking decisions on
the future of our education and health policies, we are certainly capable of
taking decisions on the future of our energy policy. We have to make sure
that our energy resources work for the people of Scotland. That is why today
the SNP calls on the Parliament to support the formation and implementation
of a Scottish energy policy that will give us security and continuity of
energy supply and energy self-sufficiency, reduce carbon emissions so that
we can tackle global warming, eliminate fuel poverty and deliver
affordability and energy efficiency.
The Deputy Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning (Allan Wilson):
Will the member enlighten the Parliament on what the SNP means by
"self-sufficiency"? Is the SNP's policy that Scotland should continue to be
a net exporter of energy or does "self-sufficiency" mean that Scotland's
share of the electricity generating market should reduce?
Richard Lochhead:
The SNP's position is clear. Scotland's energy resources must benefit the
people of Scotland first and foremost. If there is potential to export
energy thereafter, that will be all very well, as long as certain conditions
are met.
As the SNP is explaining, the UK's energy policy is failing Scotland badly.
Let us consider the scandal of fuel poverty. This nation is rich in energy
resources, but tens of thousands of Scottish households cannot afford to
heat their homes in winter. That is a scandal in 21st century Scotland. Only
yesterday, we found out that there will be further increases in household
fuel bills from Scottish and Southern Energy.
Last week, my colleague Bruce Crawford received an answer to a parliamentary
question that confirmed that, today in 2005, 11 farms in Scotland are still
subject to restrictions as a result of the incident at Chernobyl in 1986.
Surely that speaks volumes about the price that Scotland would be required
to pay for nuclear power.
Alex Johnstone (North East Scotland) (Con):
Does the member accept that the accident that happened at the Chernobyl
nuclear plant was the result of technology that is in no way comparable to
that which has been used in this country and western Europe? Does he accept
that his argument about Chernobyl is a complete red herring?
Richard Lochhead:
I can tell the Tories that the only thing that our party accepts about
nuclear power is that it is dirty, dangerous and expensive. The Parliament
must reject it.
I move,
That the Parliament considers it unacceptable that in energy-rich Scotland
fuel poverty blights our society; notes with concern that, despite Scotland
possessing massive energy resources, urgent action is required to avoid an
energy gap in the next decade; calls for the development of an energy policy
for Scotland that will deliver security of supply, affordability,
self-sufficiency and energy efficiency; recognises that the transmission
charges for power generators, as permitted by the UK Government, will
undermine these objectives; rejects nuclear power in favour of an energy mix
that includes making Scotland the world leader in renewable energy and
carbon capture and storage technology; believes that such a policy will
boost our economy and meet our environmental obligations, and recognises
that the Scottish Parliament requires the necessary energy powers and
control over our oil and gas resources to deliver the nation's energy needs
in the 21st century.
The Deputy Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning (Allan Wilson):
I thank the nationalists for giving us yet another opportunity to debate
energy policy. Although I can agree with much of the nationalists' motion, I
suspect that, as ever, the principal dividing line between us is that the
nationalists want to turn our principal market for our electricity
generation — the rest of the UK — into a foreign country and thereby change
our position from being a net exporter of energy to the rest of the UK to
being a net importer.
Contrary to the nationalist position, we are committed to working with the
UK Government, regulators and energy companies to achieve a balanced energy
policy. Such a policy will deliver security of supply through diversity of
supply. It will deliver affordable energy for householders and businesses,
bring down the number of people who are in fuel poverty and — a critical
issue of which Richard Lochhead made no mention — reduce carbon emissions.
It will make the most of Scotland's natural and intellectual resources to
deliver a strong energy sector.
Phil Gallie:
Having heard the minister's words, I want to ask whether he realises that
the target that he has set for renewables is less than what is currently
achieved by Spain. Does he realise that recently Spain's system almost
collapsed and was saved only by France's nuclear industry?
Allan Wilson:
The renewables targets that we have set are certainly ambitious — Mr Gallie
is correct at least on that point—but they are also deliverable. The targets
are compatible with the energy policy that I outlined. Renewables have an
important part to play in delivering security of supply through diversity of
supply.
As time will inevitably be limited, I will mention only some of the
Executive's achievements to date and the ambitious targets that we have set.
On fuel poverty, a review of the first year of the central heating programme
showed that nine out of 10 people who were fuel poor were lifted out of fuel
poverty after receiving support from the programme. Over 2003-04, the
average annual savings on fuel bills under the central heating programme
were more than £376 for those aged 60 and over in private sector
accommodation and more than £324 for those in local authority or housing
association accommodation. By March 2007, all social sector housing tenants
who want central heating will have it. The Executive has spent £140 million
through the programme and we have provided central heating systems to more
than 56,000 homes.
On energy efficiency, the Executive has allocated a further £64 million to
the warm deal. Under the warm deal, more than a tenth of Scotland's housing
stock has been insulated—that is more than 218,000 homes. Over 2003-04, that
resulted in savings of £99 on the fuel bills of private tenants and £26 on
the bills of those in housing association accommodation. As Richard Lochhead
acknowledged, we are also developing Scotland's first energy efficiency
strategy. Last year, we invested an additional £20 million in improving
public sector energy efficiency.
On renewables, to which Mr Gallie referred, we have set a target—but not a
limit to our ambition—of generating 40 per cent of our energy supply from
renewables by 2020. That is a fourfold increase on current levels of
renewables generation. We have also invested £3 million in the Marine Energy
Centre in Orkney and we recently announced our intention—as Richard Lochhead
mentioned—to amend the renewables obligation certificates scheme to award
increased numbers of ROCs for wave and tidal output.
Richard Lochhead:
Does the minister accept that there is growing demand for a specific
Scottish energy policy that looks at where we should produce energy, how we
should produce it and how much energy we need? When will he produce that
kind of policy, even within the limits of devolution? Why has he not
responded positively to the request for such a policy by the Enterprise and
Culture Committee?
Allan Wilson:
We are producing an energy policy. The member acknowledged the forthcoming
strategy on energy efficiency. Later today, I will announce the expected
publication date for our independent review of Scotland's intermediate and
future energy needs. We have committed ourselves to developing the very
policy that the member seeks. However, it is critical that we do so in
association with the UK Government, rather than by turning the rest of the
UK into a foreign country or countries. It is fundamental that we have that
perspective on the overall British energy market.
Mr John Swinney (North Tayside) (SNP):
Will the minister give way?
Allan Wilson:
No. I want to make progress.
We anticipate announcing a biomass support scheme after the new year. I
believe that the thriving biomass and marine energy sectors in Scotland are
second to none. They present us with the potential for an additional 1.5GW
of installed capacity and up to 9,000 new jobs and they give us the
opportunity to establish Scotland as a global renewables powerhouse. In the
process, they would provide us not simply with security of supply, but with
a sustainable energy policy into the future.
Mr Swinney:
Will the minister give way on that point?
Allan Wilson:
I want to make an announcement, if the member does not mind.
I am pleased to announce that, as a crucial part of having a considered and
informed debate on energy policy—the point on which I was just challenged—we
will release the first two volumes of the Scottish energy study by the end
of the year. We commissioned the study to provide a factual overview of
energy supply and demand trends in Scotland.
We recognise that conventional fuel sources are integral to meeting
Scotland's energy needs. That is why we will continue to work with the UK
Government, not least on the forthcoming UK energy review that was announced
by the Prime Minister earlier this year. We will also work with regulators,
which is critical, and with those involved in the energy sector in Scotland
to ensure that demand is met and that we get the best possible deal for
consumers, within market constraints.
We are also represented on Pilot, the joint industry-Government group that
is tasked with creating a climate for the UK continental shelf to retain its
position as a pre-eminent active centre of oil and gas exploration. We have
that concern in common with the nationalists; we want to develop production
and to keep the UK contracting and supplies industry at the leading edge in
overall competitiveness.
We recognise the contribution to the energy mix that can be accrued from
development of clean-coal technologies, to which Richard Lochhead referred.
Scottish Enterprise commissioned a report, which was published in September
2005, on carbon capture and storage, to complement the Department of Trade
and Industry's carbon abatement technologies strategy, which was launched in
June this year. DTI commitments to invest in CCT research and development
projects amount to £13 million since 1999.
BP, Royal Dutch Shell, ConocoPhillips and Scottish and Southern Energy have
invested £330 million in developing a new 350MW station at Peterhead, which
is to come on stream in 2009. That is leading-edge, state-of-the-art
technology. BP suggests that it could extend the life of the Miller field by
15 to 20 years and increase oil recovery by up to 40 million tonnes.
Scotland is an energy-rich country that currently exports a sizeable chunk
of its electricity to England and Northern Ireland. I want that to continue.
Our current total generating capacity goes well beyond what Scotland
consumes. Our commitment, set out in our amendment, is to an energy supply
mix that strikes the right balance — an equilibrium between, on the one
hand, meeting demand in Scotland and making energy affordable to consumers
and, on the other, working for a sustainable future by employing strategies
to make energy savings, to meet a growing proportion of supply from
renewable sources and to encourage a change in culture among energy
consumers.
I move amendment S2M-3543.4, to leave out from "considers" to end and
insert:
"supports the Scottish Executive's continuing commitment to the development
of a wide range of renewable energy technologies in Scotland as a key
element of a balanced energy supply mix; supports the Executive's commitment
to achieving 40 per cent renewable electricity generation by 2020; supports
the Executive's attempts to eradicate fuel poverty by 2016; looks forward to
publication of the revised Scottish Climate Change Programme and the
consideration given to the contribution of energy efficiency and renewables
to reduce carbon dioxide emissions; recognises the Executive's commitment,
as set out in the Partnership Agreement, not to approve the construction of
any new nuclear power stations in Scotland until the issue of waste has been
addressed, and supports the Executive's commitment to continue to work with
the UK Government and energy supply industries to ensure that the immediate
and future energy supply needs of Scotland are met."
Phil Gallie:
We do not want to burn oil and gas, because that has an adverse effect on
climatic conditions. We want to use a source of energy that is friendly to
the climate change aims that we all argue about.
I agree with the first part of the SNP's motion. If Christine Grahame were
to look again, she would see that we accepted that. However, there are other
aspects of the debate that I would like to draw to the attention of
Parliament, and they concern the economic and social issues surrounding the
supply of energy. Energy is the foundation on which our modern society is
built; without secure energy, our homes, our streets, our industry and our
businesses are lost.
We are right to say that in our energy-rich Scotland there are oil and gas
resources that can be used in future, but we must recognise that they are
finite. In future, this nation will be entirely dependent on external
sources, especially for gas, as John Home Robertson said. That poses a
threat for whoever is looking after energy sources in this country. There is
a place for wind generation, but I differ from the minister in that I think
that the current renewables targets are far too ambitious. Wind generation
is basically the only known way of meeting those objectives.
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Mr Gallie, there is no time for you to continue. I cannot make the position
any clearer.
Allan Wilson
has a strict seven minutes.
Allan Wilson:
I share the common cause that has been displayed around the chamber with
much of what Phil Gallie and Richard Lochhead said and with much of what is
in the nationalists' motion.
The motion asks the right questions, but our problem with it is that it
gives us no answer; worse, it would probably give us the wrong answers if we
were to extrapolate from it. The motion also displays a paucity of ambition
for Scotland in the energy context. On the contrary, the Executive's
amendment reflects a commitment to a realistic balance, by tackling climate
change, addressing energy inefficiencies and at the same time working with
the United Kingdom Government, the industry regulators and generating
companies to ensure security of supply and affordable energy for Scots.
Mr Swinney:
On the scale of the Executive's ambition, from his discussions on issues
that I have drawn to his attention, is the minister satisfied of the need to
have imaginative and innovative renewable solutions, such as biomass
projects for major public sector works? Is the Government demonstrating
enough ambition to deliver those objectives? From where I am standing, that
is not obvious.
Allan Wilson:
John Swinney and I have discussed that issue on several occasions. I agree
that historically we could have done more, but I am pleased to be able to
tell him that in the near future we will make an important announcement on
biomass, which I suspect will go a long way towards meeting his demands.
As if we needed to be reminded, today of all days, energy markets in
Scotland are affected not only by UK markets but by what happens in global
markets. In that context, Frances Curran's cheap jibe at Charlie Gordon was
misplaced. Charlie Gordon is right to reflect his constituency interest with
regard to Scottish Power. I can tell the Parliament that the First Minister
has been approached to meet EON should a bid be realised. It is important to
put the situation in context. FirstGroup, Scottish & Newcastle and the Royal
Bank of Scotland have all benefited from foreign acquisitions; we cannot be
hypocritical about such matters. As John Home Robertson and Elaine Murray
said, we currently benefit from the market by exporting to those around us
who consume more than we do.
In contrast, the approach in the SNP motion would cut electricity generation
in Scotland by 30 to 40 per cent. The SNP's answer to the energy gap has
come out in the debate, but it is contrary to everything that Jim Mather
said about the sector leading economic growth in this country. The SNP says
that the gap is to be filled by cutting capacity, or by — or presumably in
concert with — burning more gas. It is interesting that the SNP would import
the extra gas from England, which by then would be a foreign country. If SNP
members cannot see the hypocrisy in that position, I am not sure what I can
do.
Richard Lochhead:
I am not sure whether the minister has listened to a word that SNP members
have said in the debate, because what he says bears no relation to what we
said. The SNP has laid out a clear route map to meeting Scotland's energy
needs without nuclear, but the minister says that he disagrees with that
approach. Does that mean that he thinks that we could achieve our energy
needs only with nuclear?
Allan Wilson:
I intervened on Patrick Harvie on the matter. At the moment in history when
global warming is the greatest challenge of the 21st century and energy
policy is, as never before, based on a recognition of that fact, does it
make sense to get rid of the one significant source of carbon-free
generation that exists?
Patrick Harvie:
Will the member give way?
Allan Wilson:
With respect, I will move on. If Patrick Harvie does not mind, I will not
get caught on that particular hook.
What is interesting is what is not in the SNP motion. Alex Johnstone raised
the tax regime in the North sea. At the SNP conference, Richard Lochhead
called for equal taxes and carbon taxes to be on the agenda, because he saw
Scotland not just as a world leader in the renewables sector but as the
world leader. It is hypocritical of him not to say the same to Parliament
and not to mention that while he talks about introducing new taxes, carbon
taxes and equal taxes to protect the environment, his colleague Fergus Ewing
stalks the country and in debates with Patrick Harvie and others calls for
cuts in fuel duties and in petrol prices. There is rank and apparent
hypocrisy in that position.
What serious political party other than the nationalists would talk about
Scotland being the energy capital of Europe and, in the next breath, would
recommend reducing energy output by 30 to 40 per cent, which would make us
dependent on energy imports? That is some policy; we would be some capital.
Intermittent generation cannot replace base-load, so to say that Scotland
can chop off the nuclear contribution and be self-sufficient with the power
that remains is a pretence on the part of the SNP. The reality is that the
SNP's policy must be based on Scotland — like the rest of the UK — importing
gas. In that context, Scotland would be no different from the rest of the
UK. The inescapable logic of the SNP's position is that it would convert
Scotland from being a net exporter of energy to England to being a net
importer from England, which it would turn into a foreign country.
[Laughter.] That is true. SNP members should deny it.
The nationalists talk a good game on renewables but, as many members have
said, they do so only to mask the opportunism of their actions at a local
level. They give no consistent support to projects that would turn targets
into reality. Why have the nationalists not taken the opportunity today to
support grid infrastructure?
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Please conclude now.
Allan Wilson:
On that point—
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
No, minister. I have to apply the same standards to you as I do to other
members.
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Murray Tosh):
There are up to five questions to be put as a result of today's business. In
relation to this morning's debate on energy policy, if the amendment in the
name of Allan Wilson is agreed to, the amendments in the names of Alex
Johnstone and Shiona Baird will fall.
The first question is, that amendment S2M-3543.4, in the name of Allan
Wilson, which seeks to amend motion S2M-3543, in the name of Richard
Lochhead, on energy policy, be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Members:
No.
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
There will be a division.
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
The result of the division is: For 63, Against 48, Abstentions 0. I
apologise for that frisson of excitement.
Amendment agreed to.
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
The amendments in the names of Alex Johnstone and Shiona Baird have been
pre-empted, so the next question is, that motion S2M-3543, in the name of
Richard Lochhead, on energy policy, as amended, be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Members:
No.
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
There will be a division.
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
The result of the division is: For 66, Against 47, Abstentions 0.
Motion, as amended, agreed to.
Resolved,
That the Parliament supports the Scottish Executive's continuing commitment
to the development of a wide range of renewable energy technologies in
Scotland as a key element of a balanced energy supply mix; supports the
Executive's commitment to achieving 40 per cent renewable electricity
generation by 2020; supports the Executive's attempts to eradicate fuel
poverty by 2016; looks forward to publication of the revised Scottish
Climate Change Programme and the consideration given to the contribution of
energy efficiency and renewables to reduce carbon dioxide emissions;
recognises the Executive's commitment, as set out in the Partnership
Agreement, not to approve the construction of any new nuclear power stations
in Scotland until the issue of waste has been addressed, and supports the
Executive's commitment to continue to work with the UK Government and energy
supply industries to ensure that the immediate and future energy supply
needs of Scotland are met.
To view the entire debate - Please
Click Here
|
