Clause 5
Energy Bill
1:30 pm
Martin Horwood (Shadow Minister (Environment), Environment, Food & Rural Affairs; Cheltenham, Liberal Democrat)
I was asking questions, not setting out party policy—I should make that very clear. I was seeking a response from the Minister on the potential funds available in the energy companies for various purposes.
The issue that I wanted to address regarding this particular clause relates to the conditions that are attached to licences, particularly those relating to the environment. I was rather reassured by the Minister’s promise of full consultation on the conditions, which is a very positive commitment, and I hope that there will be engagement with many organisations that are concerned about the environment.
Earlier today, the Minister talked about the environmental impact being “paramount”—I think that that was the word that was used. Is he able to expand on that? Does that mean that environmental considerations will, in effect, supersede all commercial considerations? Will considerations be attached particularly to public health? The gases set out in the earlier part of this chapter of the Bill make a rather explosive list. Presumably public health considerations—in terms of leakage and so on—might be a major consideration. Will those be the kind of things that might attach to conditions?
What is the type of time scale over which these conditions might apply, and how flexible will they be if evidence of a public health risk or, indeed, environmental damage, emerges? As we have established, we are talking about time scales of possibly as long as 40 years for the operation of these licences. If such evidence emerges, will the conditions attached to the licences be flexible enough instruments to allow for action to be taken to mitigate or eliminate those risks?