here - United Kingdom Parliament
here - United Kingdom Parliament
here - United Kingdom Parliament
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
903 National Policy Statements 1 DECEMBER 2010 National Policy Statements 904<br />
Tessa Munt: Thank you. Will that investigation examine<br />
the cost of under-sea infrastructure as well? I understand<br />
that the project will look at networks not just underground,<br />
but under-sea. Is that correct?<br />
Charles Hendry: That is my understanding of the<br />
report. We are all keen to have a fact-based scientific<br />
assessment of the relative costs. I know that in the hon.<br />
Lady’s constituency and many others t<strong>here</strong> has been<br />
great concern and a need to know the costs of different<br />
ways of dealing with the issues, so I hope the report will<br />
examine the under-sea aspects as well.<br />
Tessa Munt rose—<br />
Dr Thérèse Coffey (Suffolk Coastal) (Con) rose—<br />
Charles Hendry: I will give way to my hon. Friend,<br />
who has some issues in Suffolk.<br />
Dr Coffey: Thank you. We do indeed have issues in<br />
East Anglia, and in Suffolk in particular. We have an<br />
enormous number of offshore wind farms, yet the green<br />
impact of pylons across our countryside is hardly palatable.<br />
I welcome the changes being made, and hope that we<br />
will have more detailed calculations of the costs and the<br />
impact of the benefits.<br />
Charles Hendry: I shall give way again to the hon.<br />
Member for Wells and deal with both issues together.<br />
Tessa Munt: How can I and my constituents be<br />
assured that the study is wholly independent and is not<br />
in any way informed or directed by National Grid?<br />
Charles Hendry: I would hope that the nature of the<br />
Institute of Engineering and Technology, and its track<br />
record for independence and fact-based assessment,<br />
would be sufficient to assure everyone that a thorough<br />
approach will be taken. T<strong>here</strong> is no doubt in any of our<br />
minds that if anybody tried to steer its conclusions one<br />
way or the other it would publicly require them to go<br />
away. I am absolutely satisfied that the process will be<br />
independent and robust, but in due course the institute<br />
will publish the full report so that it can be peer-reviewed.<br />
Dr Alan Whitehead (Southampton, Test) (Lab): Before<br />
the hon. Gentleman leaves EN-5, will he reflect on the<br />
question that he raised previously about investment in<br />
new infrastructure through the electricity markets as<br />
they stood, and the extent to which that investment<br />
stayed in existing equipment to shore up the electricity<br />
market? In the new circumstances, w<strong>here</strong> investment in<br />
infrastructure will increasingly be required before the<br />
replacement of plant, will EN-5 reflect that change<br />
fully? If not, could the energy market reforms that he<br />
will undertake shortly inform a revision of EN-5 to take<br />
those new circumstances into account?<br />
Charles Hendry: We have to see the national policy<br />
statements as part of the process. They are an integral<br />
part of an improved planning process, but they are not<br />
the full package. Electricity market reform will also be a<br />
key element in incentivising people to invest. Let me<br />
give an example of how things are changing. I was<br />
recently with Ofgem launching the second round of<br />
offshore grid transmission infrastructure bids. More<br />
than 100 different organisations, most of which were<br />
new players in this area, were keen to take part in that<br />
process, which was started by the previous Administration.<br />
A number of new organisations—new financial<br />
institutions—want to invest in our energy infrastructure,<br />
which is extremely encouraging, but to see the full<br />
package of these measures it will be necessary to ensure<br />
that they see the planning changes and the funding<br />
mechanisms that will drive it forward.<br />
Andrew Percy rose—<br />
Charlie Elphicke rose—<br />
Charles Hendry: I shall take a couple of interventions<br />
and then seek to conclude my remarks.<br />
Andrew Percy: While we are on the subject of new<br />
players coming into our energy industry, I invite the<br />
Minister to visit north Lincolnshire and the site of the<br />
South Humber Gateway project, w<strong>here</strong> we hope to<br />
cluster a number of offshore wind farm manufacturers<br />
with the potential to create 5,000 jobs initially, possibly<br />
rising to 20,000. It will be incredibly important to our<br />
region, so I invite the Minister to join me and my hon.<br />
Friend the Member for Cleethorpes (Martin Vickers)<br />
on a visit some time soon.<br />
Charles Hendry: I know that both my hon. Friends<br />
have done sterling work in pushing the case for the<br />
South Humber Gateway. I would be delighted to see<br />
the planned work to get a clearer understanding of the<br />
ambition. It is typical of many of the ambitions of<br />
people who see a fantastic new opportunity emerging in<br />
the energy sector, and we are keen to encourage that. I<br />
imagine that my hon. Friend the Member for Dover<br />
(Charlie Elphicke) will make a similar plea for a visit.<br />
Charlie Elphicke: I do not wish to trouble the Minister<br />
to come down to east Kent, but for the benefit of the<br />
House will he say how many power stations were brought<br />
into operation during the last <strong>Parliament</strong>? The only one<br />
that we in Kent can recall is the dirty Kingsnorth power<br />
station. On the need for more funding and the need to<br />
build infrastructure and green infrastructure, I recall<br />
that during the last <strong>Parliament</strong> not many power stations<br />
were brought on line.<br />
Charles Hendry: A number of gas powered plants<br />
were brought on stream. The last nuclear power station<br />
was Sizewell in the 1990s. T<strong>here</strong> has not been a new<br />
clean coal plant yet because people need to know how<br />
the carbon abatement technology will move forward.<br />
Gas has been the fuel of choice: 60% of the consented<br />
plant—12 out of 20 GW—is gas. What people want to<br />
build remains to be seen, but t<strong>here</strong> is significant interest.<br />
We now need the policies to drive this forward.<br />
I want rapidly to conclude my remarks with a few<br />
additional points—<br />
Christopher Pincher (Tamworth) (Con) rose—<br />
Charles Hendry: An enormous number of colleagues<br />
are keen to speak in the debate, but with your forbearance,<br />
Mr. Deputy Speaker, I will allow my hon. Friend to<br />
intervene as he is a member of the Select Committee.