Climate Change and Sustainable Energy Bill

Brooks Newmark supports the Bill and especially the duty imposed on local authorities to consider energy measures when exercising local functions - and he highlights Braintree District Council's council tax rebate for installing cavity-wall insulation.

Mr. Brooks Newmark (Braintree) (Con): I, too, wish my right hon. Friend the Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) a speedy recovery.

I speak in support of the Bill because it represents another valuable attempt to focus our collective attention on the most important issue of our day, but it will also achieve practical results. I want to speak about just one of those results: the duty imposed on local authorities to have regard to information on energy measures when exercising local functions. That provision will help to ensure that public bodies are better at sharing best practice, co-ordinated by the energy measures report from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

Clauses 3 and 20 are not unduly onerous, and many public bodies are already making energy efficiency a priority of their own accord. My own district council in Braintree is a good example. I was delighted that my hon. Friend the Member for East Surrey (Mr. Ainsworth) visited us recently. Braintree district council has been participating in a pilot scheme that offers a council tax rebate in return for the installation of cavity-wall insulation, and 15 other councils have so far followed Braintree's example. I congratulate the council on that initiative.

As the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee heard in evidence from the director of corporate affairs at British Gas,

"it is that sort of compelling offer which begins to shift this market . . . Braintree do not seem to have to market this very hard for people to actually come forward and say, 'that's a very interesting proposition and I would like to know more about it,' because it is framed in a compelling way."

We must change the perception that the promotion of microgeneration and energy efficiency to tackle climate change is somehow radical, or even unusual. Instead, it must be compelling and practical, and it must also make good economic sense.

I congratulate the hon. Member for Edinburgh, North and Leith (Mark Lazarowicz) on introducing the Bill, and I am sorry that he is not here with us today. He has already succeeded in raising public awareness of these issues, and I have no doubt whatever that his success will continue once the Bill receives Royal Assent.

10.18 am

Ann McKechin (Glasgow, North) (Lab): I, too, extend my sympathies to my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh, North and Leith (Mark Lazarowicz) and condolences to his family.

I am delighted to support the Bill, which has received support not only in Parliament, but from hundreds of our constituents, who have written to us to express their hope that it gets through Parliament during the current Session. I commend my hon. Friend for his hard work and dedication to passing the Bill through the House of Commons. It marks an important step by Parliament in ensuring that energy efficiency and the increase in renewable sources remain high on our political agenda.

The reasons for that priority have been well stated, and they include the effects of climate change and the increase in energy costs in the past few years, particularly for oil and gas. I welcome the proposals as part of the important effort to ensure that the gains we have made in the past few years to eliminate fuel poverty are not lost. A recent report by Energy Action Scotland highlighted the scale and complexity of the task in future fuel poverty schemes. Scotland faces unique problems. In 2003, average earnings were 12 per cent. lower than in England. As a result of the difference in climate, it has a much longer heating season: a home in the north of Scotland may spend 68 per cent. more on fuel a year than an equivalent property in the south of England. In London we are basking in unusually high temperatures for May, but this weekend, temperatures in the north of Scotland are predicted to drop to minus 5° C at night, which demonstrates the difference in temperatures throughout the United Kingdom.

Scotland has many properties that are not on the main gas grid, and they are not likely to be connected. Although gas central heating is the most effective measure in removing a house from fuel poverty, 33 per cent. of homes in Scotland do not have any gas, because either they are located in remote rural locations or they are high-rise accommodation, where it is not appropriate to use gas. The nature, type and design of housing is different from housing in England. Although about 70 per cent. of houses in both countries have cavity walls, in Scotland, 23 per cent. are traditional sandstone or granite houses, with an additional 10 per cent. classified as non-traditional. All of those are hard to heat.

Energy Action Scotland has identified three main factors that contribute to fuel poverty, and we should not find any of them surprising. The first factor is domestic fuel prices; on average, a 5 per cent. rise in fuel prices results in a further 30,000 households being pushed back into fuel poverty. Secondly, disposable income is important. The third factor is energy efficiency.

Mr. Newmark: The hon. Lady is right. The problem of fuel poverty has been exacerbated by the increase in energy prices, which have risen by 37 per cent. in the past year alone. Does she share my distress that in the Budget the Chancellor did not extend the £200 council tax rebate, which was needed by many pensioners in fuel poverty?

Ann McKechin: I remind the hon. Gentleman that we have retained the winter fuel payment, which is specifically designed to tackle fuel poverty. We have also lowered the barrier for the additional hardship payment. When the Opposition were in government, the same guide temperature was used for Brighton as for the north of Scotland.

Mr. Newmark: The hon. Lady makes an extremely valid point. However, the winter fuel payment did not increase substantially, and this year pensioners lost the £200 that they received last year, even though fuel prices went up by 37 per cent. There was a double whammy-fuel prices went up, but pensioners' council tax rebate was £200 lower.

Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. The hon. Gentleman should not pursue that point too far.

...

OTHER INTERVENTIONS IN THE DEBATE

Mr. Brooks Newmark (Braintree) (Con): The hon. Gentleman makes an excellent point. In the Science and Technology Committee we have been doing a lot of work on carbon sequestration, which will play an important part in keeping a sustainable coal industry in this country in an environmentally friendly way, and I hope that the Government will consider that.

Mr. Anderson: I thank the hon. Gentleman. I agree entirely, and he has mentioned one of the things that I want to come to.

It is sad to reflect that in the Conservative party's drive to destroy the coal industry 20 years ago, as a way to destroy organised labour in this country, we also destroyed what was then the best and most modern clean-coal technology anywhere in the world. Thankfully, people are now starting to realise that that is something that we must grasp. We must develop the technology if we are to continue to have a decent energy supply. There is now a real acceptance that the reduction of CO 2 must be the key determinant in future coal-fired power stations.

Using well-placed investment, we can improve the performance of existing and new plants. Co-firing-blending coal with renewable biomass-is emerging as a credible way forward. As an extra, it will help the development of the UK energy crop market, enabling farmers to produce renewable energy crops that will help to reduce carbon emissions and provide employment in agriculture. Developments in boiler technology, using pre-heaters and fitting advanced supercritical boilers can increase thermal efficiency. If we introduce them properly, those measures could bring UK coal plants into line with the performance of today's gas plants. With the ongoing research, as has been said, we can promote carbon capture and storage, and coal can make a real contribution to our energy needs once again, but there is more to be done in terms of trade.

...

Mr. Newmark: Does my hon. Friend not agree that many microgeneration projects are becoming almost economically viable? However, the cost of planning permission is prohibitive. For example, planning permission for a wind turbine on a house costs £265. If we want to encourage microgeneration projects such as wind turbines on people's houses, surely we should encourage local councils not to have such prohibitively expensive charges for planning permission.

Mrs. Miller: My hon. Friend makes an excellent point, and perhaps I can illustrate why I support what he says with an example from another area. Not that long ago, unleaded fuel was not widely used. However, through the use of fiscal measures and cuts in taxation, we were able to promote its use. He suggests that we should consider measures such as cutting the cost of planning permission to promote microgeneration, and I agree that we need such tools to promote the behaviour that he described.

...

Mr. Newmark: Perhaps I can make a bold statement and encourage the new leader of my hon. Friend's council to visit the council of my hon. Friend the Member for Guildford (Anne Milton) to see their recycling initiative and to come to Braintree to see how we do insulation.

Mrs. Miller: I will, of course, bring that to the attention of the leader of the council. I am very pleased to be able to offer him the opportunity of visiting my hon. Friend's constituency and I am sure that he will consider that.

...

Mr. Newmark: I reflect again on the speech made by the hon. Member for Blaydon (Mr. Anderson). We have a huge supply of coal in this country, so we should not throw fossil fuels right out of our thinking. We should think about harnessing new technologies. The hon. Gentleman talked about carbon capture and carbon sequestration, which mean that no CO2 is released into the atmosphere. We must be creative in our thinking and ensure that the Government give the necessary economic stimulus to our fossil fuels, as long as those fuels do not chuck out loads of CO2 into the air.

Michael Gove: My hon. Friend makes an important point. I know that he has a long-term commitment to the north-east and therefore has the interests of mining communities and former mining communities very much to heart. We on the Opposition Benches would stress the vital importance of pluralism in energy supply. I do not think that any of us would contemplate the disappearance of fossil fuels in playing a part in the generation of energy tomorrow. I think that we all recognise that the imaginative use of fossil fuels in future, particularly in harness with new technology, can play a significant role. I pay tribute to some successful energy companies, not least BP and Shell, that have been pioneering new ways to ensure that fossil fuels can play an appropriate part in a balanced energy strategy.

Mr. Newmark: As Members may or may not be aware, there is the threat by UK Coal to shut down 70 to 75 per cent. of the mines that it has remaining. There is urgency in stimulating and doing what we can to harness new technologies to save the coal industry, which is a strategic resource and part of our debate, in terms of providing sustainable energy for our country.

Michael Gove: My hon. Friend makes an important point. The Minister with responsibilities for energy is in his place and I am sure that he will take into account in his deliberations the future of energy policy and my hon. Friend's passionate commitment to coal mining communities.