Energy Bill

The Bill has some good points. The smart meter provisions are a step forward. I hope the roll-out will happen very quickly, but it is more important that we get it right than that we do it quickly, and the Government approach is to be commended. I have concerns about other parts of the Bill. I agree with the comments of the hon. Member for Northampton, South (Mr. Binley) on carbon capture and storage. The Bill now lays down a joint approach to this, and the Minister said that we are a world leader in CCS but, as has been pointed out, there has been a huge missed opportunity in the pre-combustion market. The Government have gone down the post-combustion route, basically, I think, because they see it as an exportable technology as it can be fitted to coal-fired power stations, but pre-combustion CCS could have given us a world lead in a technology that would have been of huge value to this country. That is a missed opportunity, and I am sad that that has happened. Earlier this afternoon, I spoke to my amendment No. 1 to clause 36, relating to the renewables obligation certificates banding and the interaction with grants. Although I did not press my amendment to a vote, the issue still gives me great concern. I understood the Minister's comments about state aid and the need not to give double help to projects, but he seemed to be saying that he was converting what was a grant into a loan. A company going for the high-end market and the high-end developments may receive a grant, but then it would receive fewer ROCs in the future or it would repay some of the grant. What was previously a grant for these developments is becoming a loan, and that will have an impact on cutting-edge emerging technologies and renewables; I am thinking of such things as deep water, offshore wind, and wave and tidal power. The Minister may come to regret that, but I hope that, even at this late stage, he will at least keep the matter under review to see whether it is having an effect on those technologies and whether we need to consider making a change. There was a great deal of discussion about transmission charges this afternoon, but as that issue is not covered in the Bill, I shall not say too much about it. I merely point out that it must be dealt with. The Minister again said that a review was ongoing, and I know that Scotland's First Minister has held discussions with Ofgem about the matter. I hope that something will come of all that, and that we will finally be given a solution to a long-running problem, which I seem to have been talking about for years. As the hon. Member for Rutland and Melton (Alan Duncan) said, much of the Bill deals with nuclear power. Fortunately, Scotland is not to have new nuclear power stations, because the Scottish Executive are much more sensible about these matters, but I remain concerned about parts of the Bill relating to the costs of nuclear power and the disposal of nuclear waste. Given what has happened, it seems that a massive bill is building up, and I suspect that it will affect all United Kingdom taxpayers. It is noticeable that the costs of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority have mushroomed almost out of control from the original estimate. If I remember correctly, when it was first proposed in this House the estimate was £20 billion, but the figure has now reached a probable £90 billion. I understand that the NDA is taking up 50 per cent. of the whole budget of the Department at present. I fear that the whole issue constitutes a blank cheque, and that all taxpayers will face a huge bill for nuclear power. My concerns in that regard therefore remain. Question put and agreed to. Bill accordingly read the Third time, and passed.