| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Keith Simpson (Mid-Norfolk) (Con): Will my hon. Friend give way?
Mr. Yeo: No, I am sorry. I am reaching the end of my remarks.
I believe that most people recognise that we need more renewable energy in Britain. I believe also that there are some communities that will welcome wind farms in their area. However, I am convinced that the Government's present approach is the worst of all possible worlds. Unless there is an immediate change of policy, Britain's energy supplies will become less secure, not more secure, because of the Government's renewable energy strategy. Britain will throw away the chance to become a world leader in renewable energy technology other than onshore. Britain's farmers will be denied the chance to grow a valuable new crop. Our countryside will be littered with inappropriately sited wind farms. Instead of communities that are proud to play their part in the battle against climate change, we will have groups that resent the imposition by Ministers in Whitehall of damaging developments on their doorstep.
25 Oct 2004 : Column 1217
That prospect faces Britain under Labour, and because of it I commend the motion to the House.
7.46 pm
The Minister for Energy and E-Commerce (Mr. Mike O'Brien): I beg to move, To leave out from 'House' to the end of the Question, and to add instead thereof:
"recognises the passing of the Energy Act 2004 and the positive actions taken by the Government to increase the amount of energy supplied from renewable sources; welcomes the global leadership shown by the Government on climate change and commends actions taken to meet the UK's Kyoto targets; condemns the Official Opposition for opposing the development of renewables while claiming to support them in principle; notes the abject failure of the Official Opposition to provide coherent policy proposals to meet the climate change challenge and its continued opposition to the Climate Change Levy; praises the Government for providing significant resources and support to the development of wind energy, including £117 million for the development of offshore wind energy; further notes that a growing proportion of wind farm developments will occur offshore; supports steps taken by the Government to promote energy efficiency and notes with approval that the planning regime allows for wind farm proposals to be thoroughly considered in terms of their impacts on local communities and environments and their contributions to national energy needs and policies; commends the Government's commitment to diversifying the sources of the UK's energy supply and the related investment in a wide range of renewable technologies including energy crops, £60 million investment for biomass, £31 million towards photovoltaics and £50 million for wave and tidal; and further condemns the Official Opposition's energy policy that would drastically reduce the UK's investment in renewable technologies."
The Conservative attitude to the renewables debate is opportunist, incoherent and fundamentally dishonest. It is opportunist because it seeks to play on the fears of a small number of communities in marginal constituencies that have particular concerns about onshore wind farms. At one stage the hon. Member for South Suffolk (Mr. Yeo) listed threats to the country. It is incoherent because the Conservative attitude hints at support for emissions reductions and renewables and then refuses to support the difficult decisions that are required to achieve these things through onshore wind energy. The Conservative policy is dishonest because it claims to the public that investments in offshore wind farms and other renewables can deliver on renewables by 2010 when reputable scientists know that they will not.
Today, we witnessed the Conservative party in full pre-election mode, playing political games for votes and promising two mutually undeliverable things: the emissions and renewable targets will all be met and communities will have a complete veto over onshore wind farms. These energy issues, which are serious and relate to the future of our country and that of the wider world, should be treated with far more seriousness than the political knockabout that we saw from the Conservatives today. The politics of the short term, the cynical and the expedient that determines Conservative policy shows that the Conservatives are not a serious Opposition.
Gregory Barker:
Does the Minister realise that it is he who is living in cloud-cuckoo land when he thinks that it is just local communities that are worried about the proliferation of large-scale wind farms? The proposal for Romney Marsh, for example, near my constituency, has upset local residents and anyone who is concerned
25 Oct 2004 : Column 1218
with the preservation of wild birds, particularly those that have only a small amount of nesting ground. That is an issue that concerns far more people than just local residents. By ploughing ahead with the proposal, the Minister risks discrediting the whole renewable agenda.
Mr. O'Brien: On this business of Romney Marsh, it seems that national Conservative party policy has been decided by a local planning application in the Folkestone constituency of the Leader of the Opposition. Does that reflect concerns about the national interest? No. There are concerns about Romney Marsh, and I do not dispute that it is an important place, but the whole of Britain's energy policy should not be determined by one local area.
I shall now set out the seriousness of the problems facing us and the reasons why some difficult decisions need to be made and why this Government, unlike the Conservatives, are prepared to make them. The hon. Member for South Suffolk referred to specific projects, but the House will know that Ministers cannot comment on a specific project that may be in the planning process, and that Ministers may have to consider in the future.
Mr. O'Brien: I have given way once to the hon. Gentleman, but I shall do so again because I have mentioned an area near his constituency.
Gregory Barker: It is extraordinary that the Minister has castigated an Opposition Front Bencher for mentioning planning cases. He has just spoken very clearly about the Romney Marsh project, which is three weeks into a five-week public inquiry. How does he square that? Is not what the Minister has just said about Romney Marsh blatant political interference in a public planning inquiry?
Mr. O'Brien: Absolutely not; I have in no way prejudged anything to do with Romney Marsh—my point concerned the attitude of the Leader of the Opposition. It is in no one's interest to put wind farms in the wrong locations. That is why the Government insist that all renewable energy projects must be considered as part of a formal planning process that gives people the right to express their views and have them taken into consideration.
Mrs. Dunwoody: Can I take it that that also applies to offshore wind farms and the interests of the fishing community, particularly in Morecambe bay, where the lines that inshore fishermen would have to follow present real problems?
Mr. O'Brien: I want to ensure that the fishermen can make their views felt when an offshore application occurs. We have not only listened to the views expressed by fishermen on the general issue of offshore wind farms—some fishing communities oppose them—but set up studies to examine the problems raised by those fishermen to ensure that we address the serious points.
Paddy Tipping:
Will the Minister draw a clear distinction between the Government's policy of listening to people's views and the Opposition's policy,
25 Oct 2004 : Column 1219
which is clear, of rejecting either wind power or nuclear power if the opposition is vociferous? That is a crazy way in which to run energy policy.
Mr. O'Brien: My point is that the Conservative Opposition have not got a serious energy policy.
On planning inquiries, we want the impact on the environment, the local community, the landscape and the country's energy needs to be weighed fairly and fully in the balance. We should balance local and national interests, because everyone has a vested interest in reducing emissions that damage our environment and possibly our health, in improving the security of energy supplies and in examining the impact that blocking onshore wind farms may have on our prospects of dealing with energy problems. That is why local planning authorities handle all proposed developments that would generate less than 50 MW. Under section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989, which the Conservative party introduced, proposed developments generating more than 50 MW or 1 MW offshore are dealt with by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry.
Planning guidelines for local authorities are contained within PPS22, which was updated in August. It is wrong to say that PPS22 has made it harder for members of the public to have their say about new wind developments. Indeed, the objective of the exercise is to let local people have their say, while ensuring that decisions are made expeditiously and fairly bearing in mind the need to reduce energy emissions, which Conservative Members seem to recognise. PPS22 enables local people to have their rightful and democratic say within the checks and balances of the planning system. We also want to recognise the national element and ensure that the national planning inspectorate, which conducts inquiries, considers both local and national needs.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |