---

Mr. Leigh: The Minister's speech sounds reasonable, but he must understand that local authorities suspect that they are wasting their time by turning down such applications, because the inspector's final decision is based not on local planning conditions, but meeting our obligations under the Kyoto protocol. Will he make a firm commitment to my local authority and the others represented here that his inspectors will decide those issues on what is best for the local environment, which is what the planning process is all about?

Mr. O'Brien: The planning process is all about ensuring that the right balance is struck. The Conservative party wants to give a local veto to local people on any planning application for an onshore wind farm, but the national interest must also be weighed in the balance, and I assure the hon. Gentleman that we updated the planning guidance in August to achieve the correct balance. We gave full weight to local people's interests and gave local people the right to have their say in the planning process. We also weighed the need to examine local people's interests as well as the wider
 
25 Oct 2004 : Column 1220
 
national interest in ensuring the development of renewables. Updating the planning system was all about getting the balance right.

Mr. David Heath (Somerton and Frome) (LD): The Minister has described a passive process, but some hon. Members feel that the need to develop some renewables is more urgent. Will he address smaller scale water turbine development, which is a runner in my constituency? It uses old mills, but the Government have provided very little encouragement.

Mr. O'Brien: We need to support small-scale hydro projects. I hope that some of the various grant schemes that we have introduced will enable such projects to find funding to provide the extra assistance that they need to develop. Some of those schemes—particularly micro-generation schemes—could well be the means by which many of us obtain our energy in 10 or 20 years' time. Local micro-generation will become much more important, and I want to see its development.

Mr. David Drew (Stroud) (Lab/Co-op): Does my hon. Friend agree that one of the problems of ruling out local initiatives or the nuclear option is that one must then examine other large renewable options? One such option, which is very close to my heart, is the Severn barrage, which I have always opposed because of the environmental damage that it would do to the Severn estuary. If we do not grasp that we need power from different sources, we will not argue about the Severn barrage, because it will be imposed on us. Will my hon. Friend say that we must examine local initiatives?

Mr. O'Brien: Yes; I am happy to say that we must examine a range of diverse energy sources. In the long term, I want to see the growth of local projects, micro-generation, solar schemes and windmill schemes. I recently examined a windmill project in which the windmills are no larger than satellite dishes and can be put on top of roofs, and we must be prepared to examine such schemes in order to deal with energy in the future.

Mr. Chris Mole (Ipswich) (Lab): Does my hon. Friend agree that businesses such as Your Energy, which is involved in 25 per cent. of applications for onshore wind farms, depend on certainty in the planning regime? Threats to withdraw PPS22 undermine the commercial decisions that such businesses must make to obtain the investment that will allow us to move forward as a leader in such technology.

Mr. O'Brien: My hon. Friend is right. What the Leader of the Opposition said the other day and what Conservative Members have said today has put doubt in the minds of many companies across this country on the question whether sufficient support for the development of alternatives and renewables will exist in the future. The Conservative party cannot be trusted on that issue, and its opportunistic policy will put doubts in the minds of many companies.

The Prime Minister made it clear that climate change is the world's greatest environmental challenge. Burning fossil fuels produces greenhouse gases and carbon emissions, which can raise the earth's temperature. That could lead to changes in temperature patterns, which
 
25 Oct 2004 : Column 1221
 
could mean an increase in droughts, which affect crop yields, tornadoes, flooding and the extinction of some vulnerable species of wildlife.

Energy demand in the UK and across the world is rising, while the availability of fossil fuels is expected to decline in the long term. The issues are serious, and all Governments must respond to them with long-term solutions. We must develop sustainable, secure and diverse supplies of energy for the future. The UK has set a target to reduce carbon emissions by 60 per cent. by 2050.

There is no single means of delivering that target. Better energy efficiency is crucial but insufficient in itself. Green energy—renewable generation—has a key role to play. It can contribute towards secure energy supplies, create new investment and bring new jobs. The UK has set a demanding target for 10 per cent. of our electricity generation to be supplied from renewable energy by 2010. In 1997, renewables contributed 0.7 per cent. of our electricity. That has been tripled by Labour, but there is still a long way to go to hit our target of 10 per cent.

Richard Ottaway (Croydon, South) (Con): Will the Minister give way?

Mr. O'Brien: No; I have been generous, and I will not give way again.

To achieve that target, we need to make use of all renewable sources. We expect 7 or 8 per cent. of the 10 per cent. generation to come from wind energy. Other technologies will be hard pushed to produce the rest. The suggestion that other energy sources can hit the target by themselves is plain fantasy. Roughly half the 7 to 8 per cent. will come from onshore wind generation and half from offshore wind generation. Today, renewable electricity, mainly from wind farms, supplies enough electricity to light up Manchester. In theory, up to 2 million homes could be lit from wind power. But the plain fact is that without a substantial increase in onshore wind developments, the 10 per cent. target is unachievable. The Conservatives profess support for renewables but seek to introduce policies that would prevent their use. Their proposal to give a local veto on all wind farm developments is simply not credible to anyone who is serious about our renewables targets.

We are not focused on onshore wind farms to the exclusion of other energy sources—the UK has a vast potential renewable source, and we want to take forward a wide range of renewable technologies—but wind energy currently offers the best, the most cost-effective and the only truly serious potential for expansion in the short to medium term.

Mr. Key: Only this month, the Government chief scientist said that if we are to combat climate change and meet Kyoto, decisions on future nuclear build must be made within five years. The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry has said that those decisions do not need to be made for 20 or 30 years. What is the Minister's position?

Mr. O'Brien: That is a very good and carefully modulated question—I like it. As I have managed to discuss the issue with both people, I suspect that the hon. Gentleman may want to reconsider his remarks.
 
25 Oct 2004 : Column 1222
 

We have not ruled out the nuclear option. Nuclear energy is not commercially attractive at the moment, and no companies are coming forward with propositions for such developments. If they did so in future, we would consider them. However, before going ahead with any nuclear programme we would have to produce a White Paper on nuclear energy and to consider all the issues, including those related to nuclear waste. We would also want to ensure full and widespread public consultation.

Mr. Blizzard: If we want to make progress towards a 60 per cent. reduction in CO ₂ emissions beyond what we will achieve through the 20 per cent. renewables target and energy saving policies, another alternative to the nuclear option is carbon sequestration. Will my hon. Friend assure the House that the Government are considering that as well as what the nuclear industry can offer?

Mr. O'Brien: Yes, I do want to consider carbon sequestration, which I have discussed with my hon. Friend before. I shall ask officials to provide me with full reports on that possibility, which we need to explore.

Our main mechanism to bring forward renewable generation is the renewables obligation. As a market-based measure, the obligation favours the more cost-effective forms of renewables, particularly wind. I am well aware that there are well-organised and vocal anti-wind farm campaigns. However, recent surveys have shown that 67 per cent. of people favour an expansion of renewables, including wind farms. What was particularly fascinating about those surveys was that people who lived near wind farms tended to be more supportive than those who did not. The figure for support went up to 80 per cent. for those who lived within 5 km of a wind farm. It remains to be seen whether those results are borne out by other surveys, but it does suggest that those who know the facts about living with wind farms do not accept the misconceptions. Those facing the prospect of wind farms in their area may well have concerns, and it is right to address them; it is not right, however, to stir them up for short-term political advantage.

---