My Lords, Amendment No. 55 concerns Clause 15, relating to the principles established under Clause 14(1) on, "““the construction or extension of a generating station””."
The amendment refers to page 8, line 41, and proposes to leave out ““or Wales””; in other words, the powers of IPC would be restricted to England in this respect. We want legislation in Wales to cover generating stations of more than 50 megawatts; Clause 15(3) refers to 100 megawatts. This clearly restricts the ability of Wales to influence what the IPC does regarding the expansion of electricity generation in Wales.
We conclude that the Infrastructure Planning Commission and not the devolved Welsh Assembly will make recommendations and take decisions in Wales. As I have explained, Amendment No. 55 would remove mention of Wales from this clause, and responsibility would then lie within a much more democratically accountable system. The powers would be transferred to the Secretary of State for Wales, who would liaise with the elected Welsh Assembly to produce a fully accountable solution, as opposed to a decision being imposed by an unelected quango from outside Wales. I am sure that the House will recognise that many appointed quangos in Wales have already been abolished by the National Assembly for Wales, and we certainly do not want another one foisted upon us from outside. The National Assembly for Wales Sustainability Committee recently published a report on its scrutiny of the Planning Bill. It concluded: "““The Committee therefore recommends that the Welsh Assembly Government makes representations to the UK Government to exclude Wales from the remit of the Infrastructure Planning Commission, in order to retain democratic accountability in all parts of the planning process in Wales””,"
and not only what is referred to in the amendment. There is very strong feeling about this. We recently had not a public demonstration but a demonstration none the less about the gas pipeline which goes straight through the national park from Milford Haven to Gloucester. There was no appeal mechanism; that was the way it went and that was the beginning and end of it.
I do not wish to detain the House too long but I should like to explain the present situation with regard to electricity production in Wales. Briefly, there are 34 terawatt hours in total but electricity usage in Wales is only 24 terawatt hours. Therefore, there is a surplus of 10 terawatt hours, which is consumed over the border. Sources of electricity production in Wales are: gas and coal, 23 terawatt hours; nuclear, 7 terawatt hours; renewables, 1.5 terawatt hours; and pumped storage—mainly the Dinorwig scheme in Snowdonia—2.5 terawatt hours. Clearly, with 23 out of 34 terawatt hours originating from coal and gas, there is considerable scope for a reduction in carbon emissions. Indeed, with coal, that includes carbon capture, and there are still 300 million tonnes of coal under the surface in Wales.
From the point of view of the Assembly and the Government, Wales’s mission is for sustainable development to be mapped out in the Welsh Assembly Government’s policies. However, the Bill currently denies Wales decision-making in relation to a power-generating station of more than 50 megawatts. That just does not add up. The scale of potential renewable energy in Wales is enormous, and, frankly, denying the elected National Assembly for Wales the ability to legislate in this respect is unacceptable.
Potential production in Wales from hydroelectricity, wind and solar, as a replacement for aspects of gas and coal, is enormous. We want a low-carbon economy and, moreover, we want the transport infrastructure, including the rail system, to be run on renewable energy. Frankly, the north/south infrastructure in Wales is appalling, being akin to that of a third-world country. I have to tell the House that I can get to Scotland from where I live, just north of the south Wales coalfield, faster than I can get to Anglesey, and that is the situation for many of us in Wales. There is a need for enormous investment. The amendment would prevent the IPC taking a unilateral decision which should be made in Wales. It would give the Secretary of State for Wales, rather than the IPC, the power to make such decisions, which, I am sure the House will agree, is fair, correct and, in the context of climate change, very desirable.
Planning Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Livsey of Talgarth
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 10 November 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Planning Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
705 c451-3 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 22:56:01 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_508032
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_508032
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_508032