Clause 36
Energy Bill
4:45 pm
Steve Webb (Chair of the Election Manifesto Group, Cross-Portfolio and Non-Portfolio Responsibilities; Northavon, Liberal Democrat)
I have been quiet so far this afternoon. I am just warming up. I have some sympathy with the amendment, although not for the reason that the hon. Gentleman has given. I have seen the briefing that he properly refers to. My understanding of what the clause would do is different from his, although that does not necessarily mean that it is right.
The proposed new section that the hon. Gentleman wants to remove allows the Government to require the energy companies to buy particular sorts of ROCs. It says:
“a specified number, or a specified proportion, of the renewables obligation certificates produced by”
the
“supplier...must be certificates in respect of electricity generated”
in various ways. As I understand it—I hope that the Minister will correct me if I am wrong—that gives the Government the power not simply to ban ROCs and let the market get on with it, but to superimpose on banded ROCs a further requirement. For example, let us suppose that we had ROCs from a particularly obscure renewable that the Government decided suddenly that they wanted to favour. Rather than just change the banding, they could require the energy companies to buy ROCs from that renewable source. That is how I read the provision. If that were right, it would bother me.
The whole principle of banding ROCs and picking technologies, for which I can see the case, makes me nervous. The idea that subsequent to having banded and picked technologies, and given them different rankings, the Bill would give power for indeterminate meddling—in specified ways, or other specified cases or circumstances—does not create the certainty that generators would want. That is what worries me about the lines that the amendment tabled by the hon. Member for Wealden would take out. They might create additional uncertainty and, given that we are talking about long-term investments in some cases, even having the banding reviewed, which we shall deal with under subsequent amendments, is a source of uncertainty. My worry is that the subsection is another source of uncertainty, and I hope that the Minister can clarify why the powers are needed, because I am not yet convinced that they are.