Andrew Bowie MP: speeches

Speeches

• 15 Sept 2026 · Saudi East-West Oil Pipeline · Hansard source

  More

  The ongoing events in the middle east have rightly brought the state of Britain’s energy security back to the forefront. We are witnessing growing geopolitical instability, and it is having, and will continue to have, a direct impact on our energy security, supplies and, of course, bills. The attack on the Saudi east-west pipeline will exacerbate this; 4% of global oil supply flows through that pipeline, which is not insignificant. Saudi Arabia is a key strategic friend and ally of this country. Our relationship is integral to the security of the region and our national interest. What discussions has the Minister, or the Secretary of State for Energy and Net Zero, had with their Saudi counterparts about security of supply, and have the UK Government offered any support in that regard? We do not know when the pipeline will once again be operational, and as we have already heard, Saudi oil stocks for export could be depleted within days. With the safety of navigation through the strait of Hormuz remaining uncertain, the continued squeeze on energy supplies will only become tighter. Brent crude reached $106 a barrel this morning, and that increase shows no sign of slowing. It is exactly because of this situation that I cannot understand the Government’s actions. Ironically, today should have been the day on which the Government announced that they were finally going to approve the Jackdaw gasfield, but they bottled it and put it on ice, because they are too scared of Zack Polanski and the Green party in the Holborn and St Pancras by-election. We are talking today about national security, and the Government are putting party before country. Great Britain has become increasingly and dangerously over-reliant on supplies of oil from overseas. We could be reducing some of that reliance right now by drilling and making use of our own resources, be it oil from Rosebank or gas from Jackdaw. This is a moment of great geopolitical uncertainty. It is a moment when all countries around the world are seeking to ensure and shore up their energy supplies. No other Government of any other nation would make such a brazenly craven decision to put chasing votes in a by-election ahead of their duty to defend their national and energy security. Given the seriousness of this moment—given the threats to our energy and, indeed, to our national security—will the Government change course, and change their position on the North sea?

• 3 Sept 2026 · Jackdaw and Rosebank Oil and Gas Fields · Hansard source

  More

  (Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero if she will make a statement on the future of the Jackdaw and Rosebank oil fields following the closure of the public consultation.

• 3 Sept 2026 · Jackdaw and Rosebank Oil and Gas Fields · Hansard source

  More

  I do not think the Conservative party will take any lectures from Labour on records in the north-east of Scotland, given the result in Aberdeen South only a few months ago, but I would like to thank the Minister for warmly welcoming me to my new position. The public consultation on Rosebank and Jackdaw has now closed, so the Department can no longer hide behind process, delay or consultation exercises. It has dithered, prevaricated and delayed for far too long. Industry and workers in and around Aberdeen, and indeed across the United Kingdom, need an answer now. We have a new Prime Minister and a new Secretary of State, so how about a new direction? That is what our oil and gas industry needs. That is what the thousands of workers in it, who do not know what lies ahead of them, need. I have a simple question for the Minister: will the Government finally approve Rosebank and Jackdaw—something we already did in government—or will they continue the previous Secretary of State’s campaign against Britain’s North sea oil and gas industry? It was the previous Secretary of State who refused to appeal the ruling against the decision over two years ago, the previous Secretary of State who refused to fast-track the consultation process, and the previous Secretary of State who refused to act in the national interest. This goes beyond Jackdaw and Rosebank alone; it is about whether Great Britain chooses to produce its own energy or become ever more dependent on imports from overseas—dirtier and more expensive foreign imports. Where does the Minister want the energy that we need to come from if the Government do not get on and approve Rosebank and Jackdaw? The question today is a simple one, but the answer could be transformative—for the North sea industry, for the north-east of Scotland and for the United Kingdom’s economic and energy security. When will the Government approve Jackdaw and Rosebank?

• 15 Jul 2026 · National Energy System Operator: Blackout Risk · Hansard source

  More

  Hear, hear.

• 7 Jul 2026 · Draft Contracts for Difference (Definition of Eligible Generator) (Amendment) Regulations 2026 · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Wishart, and not for the first time. It brings me back to those happy, heady days of the Scottish Affairs Committee 2021-22, when it was a joy to serve under your chairmanship. Using the powers designated under the Energy Act 2013 to amend the contracts for difference regulations, as the Minister eloquently set out, this instrument brings lifespan extension for nuclear power generators into scope for contracts for difference. Last year, France approved extending the lifespan of 20 nuclear reactors to 50 years. The UK, by contrast, extended the lifespans of advanced gas-cooled reactors Heysham 1 and Hartlepool until 2028, and Heysham 2 and Torness to 2030. That is welcome, but as our nuclear fleet ages, it will be necessary to extend the lifespan of existing nuclear power by considerably more. The stable baseload and clean power are essential to our energy mix, and we support extensions to keep this reliable generation on our system. The Department’s note on this instrument acknowledges that the existing nuclear fleet provides “a significant proportion of firm, low-carbon electricity generation, contributing to energy security and system resilience”. I could not agree more, which is why as the nuclear Minister in the last Conservative Government, I announced our intention to build a new nuclear power station at Wylfa—a project which this Government have effectively cancelled; in addition, their lack of commitment to new gigawatt-scale nuclear is disappointing. Our ambition was to generate 25% of British electricity, 24 GW, from nuclear by 2050, but that has been overshadowed by the current Department’s obsession with renewables over everything else. The Government know that nuclear generation is the right thing to do. I know the Minister knows this too, so why will they not give a commitment to new, large-scale nuclear in this country? The Conservatives have set out a clear plan for cheap energy in which new nuclear is a vital component. We would make it easier and cheaper to build new nuclear, removing habitat regulations and prohibitive environmental impact assessments. What is Labour’s ambition for nuclear? Given the importance of nuclear power to our energy security and stability, we absolutely welcome those limited measures to keep reliable power on the grid, but the Minister will have noted our serious concerns about the contracts for difference scheme—a fixed price, long-term, inflation-linked mechanism that locks consumers into higher prices for longer. We have already seen that in the eyewatering prices offered to offshore wind, in particular in allocation round 7. This amendment to the eligibility criteria facilitates future awards to nuclear generators, which is fine, but it does not oblige a CfD to be awarded to an individual plant. How can the Minister assure us that steps will be taken to keep costs as low as possible, and that we will not be locked into high prices just to keep these plants online? Will the Minister reconsider the attitude to new nuclear and signify to the industry that Great Britain is ambitious when it comes to gigawatt-scale generation? Will he commit to a third gigawatt-scale reactor on the completion of Sizewell C later in the next decade?

• 7 Jul 2026 · Nuclear Energy Sites: Scotland · Hansard source

  More

  Thirty-eight years ago yesterday, 167 men lost their lives off the coast of Aberdeen on board the Piper Alpha rig. The friends and families of those men still mourn their loss, many of them in my constituency. That is a reminder of the danger in which so many still put themselves to ensure that energy flows to our homes and businesses around the UK. This may be a first, but I welcome the Department’s work in exploring the possibility of new nuclear in Scotland. The majority of Scots support it, but because of the Luddite SNP’s ideological opposition to new jobs and investment, they will not benefit from it. What is the Department doing to ensure that no part of Great Britain is left behind as the rest of the UK leads the world into this new golden age of nuclear?

• 7 Jul 2026 · Nuclear Energy Sites: Scotland · Hansard source

  More

  So for once we agree—and, by the way, my colleagues and I also welcome the Government’s acceptance of the Fingleton review. However, it is sad that Labour’s ambition pales in comparison to ours when we were in government and committed ourselves to building a new gigawatt-scale reactor at Wylfa and generating 25% of British electricity from nuclear. From Labour, we have a third large-scale plant cancelled and no ambition for a quarter of our electricity to come from nuclear power. Will the Minister update us on the progress of delivering on Fingleton, and will he now revive our commitment to an ambitious British nuclear future?