Extracts from NATTA's journal
Renew, issue 145Sept-Oct 2003

11. Energy Bill passes its first and second readings

The private members bill on Energy, which solidified the rather loose or non-existent targets in the Energy White Paper and requires regular reports on progress towards achieving them from the authorities concerned, has received widespread support from MP’s and from non-governmental organisations (including ACE, see next page, and AECB, see Renew 143).

In April, the Bill (see Box below for a summary) was presented to the House of Commons by it originator, Milton Keynes MP Brian White for its first reading- which it passed successfully. White commented during the debate "Some will say that, now that we have the White Paper, action will automatically follow. Experience under all governments, however, teaches us that words are one thing and changing the actions at the operations end of a department another."

Certainly it was clear that the White paper had not solved all the problems. Sydney Chapman (Chipping Barnet) commented "Several aspects of the White Paper disappoint me. Strangely, it does not provide an energy efficiency target. The government seems to provide a firm target for combined heat and power, but only an aspirational target for renewables and no target for energy efficiency. We have been talking about onshore or offshore wind power, solar power, tidal power, wind and wave power, geothermal, biomass and so forth. I realise that they have to be flexible, nevertheless, the government should provide much more specific advice and establish targets for the different forms of renewable energy"

Desmond Turner (Kemptown) was even more blunt "The White Paper is not worth the glossy paper on which it is printed, not because it does not contain much good factual material- it does- but facts are facts, and there is no particular disagreement about those. The crucial issue is that it is effectively a policy-free White Paper. It does not present any significant new policy; it does not commit to any significant new government expenditure; it does not propose any new legislation that is not already in the pipeline. The very notion of sustainable energy development in as ruthlessly liberalised an energy economy as we have is an oxymoron. If we go on as we are doing, we will never get anywhere near 60% CO2 reductions, and coming generations will simply fry. Anything less than 60% starts to move into the disaster area. Against such a compelling driver, the odd 0.5p on the wholesale price of electricity becomes trivial."

He went on "The government spends £60m investing in energy research and development and deployment. France spends seven times as much, Germany about four times, the US 30 times and Japan 40 times as much. Since the privatisation of the energy utilities, their research and development investment has plummeted, so the money is not there. The major impetus for R&D in renewables is coming from small and medium-sized enterprises, which do not have the levels of finance needed to drive that on a major scale."

Although clearly not too happy with some of this anti-liberalisation rhetoric, the Conservatives were also guardedly in favour of the Bill. Crispin Blunt (Reigate) said "The dilemma for the government is whether to go for a liberal market in energy or to have a regulated and directed set of policies. The Conservative party favours a liberal market solution, but that market must operate within a framework. The absence of such a framework means that the government cannot deliver what it has set out."

* Despite some battles, the Bill has been proceeding through the parliamentary process. In July it passed another House of Commons reading, after an attempt to include nuclear power was repulsed, and it now goes on to the Lords .

The Energy Bill at a glance

• Clause 1 of the Bill imposes reporting requirements on "the appropriate authority". It must report to Parliament within one year, and then annually, on the measures that it takes to move towards three medium-term targets (25% of electricity being generated from renewable sources by 2020; 10GW of electricity being generated by combined heat and power by 2010 and a further 10GW by 2020; and a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions by 20% by 2020 based on 1990 levels). There is also a requirement to include an assessment of the roles of various technologies and measures in achieving the objectives.

• Clause 2 relates to domestic energy efficiency. It requires "the appropriate authority" to take reasonable steps to achieve a specified increase in domestic energy efficiency by 2010, and a number of the steps that may be taken are specified. There is also a requirement on energy conservation authorities to take "reasonable steps" to implement measures and a power for the appropriate authority to set binding targets on energy conservation authorities to achieve specified increases in domestic energy efficiency.

• Clause 3 amends the Electricity Act 1989, removing combined heat and power from the renewables obligation set under that Act.

• Clause 4 amends the Utilities Act 2000, giving extra duties to the Gas and Electricity Markets Authority (the authority) in relation to sustainable energy policy and environmental impact assessments.

• Clause 5 further amends the Electricity Act 1989, enabling "the appropriate authority" to specify how the authority shall distribute moneys paid to it.

• Clause 6 amends the Home Energy Conservation Act 1995 (the 1995 Act), by requiring energy conservation authorities to contribute to the ending of fuel poverty.

As relayed by Earthed.

For the complete Bill see:

www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200203/cmbills/020/2003020.htm