Angus MacDonald MP: speeches

Speeches

• 1 Jul 2025 · Hospitality Sector · Hansard source

  More

  At the start, I declare an interest, as my children and I own a cinema, restaurant and big visitor centre in Fort William, employing more than 100 people. I was brought up in a rural inn and my brother has a brewery. I am steeped in the hospitality sector. At the autumn Budget, the Government increased the rate of NIC by 8.7%, which, added to other measures, resulted in an increase of 12.4% in payroll for hospitality businesses like mine. That is four times the rate of inflation. The hospitality sector in my constituency and other remote areas faces additional challenges, particularly the cost of energy. Businesses that cannot access mains gas often have to use electricity, which is four times the price of mains gas. A hotel in rural Britain, whether it be in Cornwall or the highlands, would need to pay £100,000 to heat itself using electricity; using mains gas, the cost would be £25,000, and if it were in America, heating would cost £10,000. Environmental tariffs are on the wrong energy source. They are on renewable energy and not on imported carbon fuel mains gas. That is just so wrong. The Government declared that they are a growth Government; we now know that they meant growth in costs rather than growth in revenue. The impact of the autumn Budget was a 2% increase in the cost of the public sector and a 2% reduction in the private sector. It seems that the hospitality sector is bearing the brunt of that. I would say that the hospitality sector in rural Britain has not struggled more in my lifetime. Both the last two Governments have plucked the golden goose of hospitality so often that it no longer has any feathers.

• 23 Jun 2025 · Geo-engineering and the Environment · Hansard source

  More

  I hope this is not too much of a diversion, but the Minister will know that mains gas is 6p per kWh, largely imported and certainly a carbon fuel, while renewable energy is selling at 24p per kWh. We cannot get the public behind us as long as the environmental tariffs are on the renewable energy and not on the carbon fuel. May I have her opinion on that?

• 18 Jun 2025 · Businesses in Rural Areas · Hansard source

  More

  Will the Minister acknowledge the disparity in energy price between rural areas and urban areas? Businesses in urban areas can access mains gas and pay 6p per kilowatt for their energy, whereas businesses in rural areas pay 24p per kilowatt for their energy. What a disadvantage that is for rural areas.

• 18 Jun 2025 · Businesses in Rural Areas · Hansard source

  More

  I wonder whether I can make the case for real support from the Government for community benefit from renewable energy. It is being proposed at a fairly modest level by the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, but it is one of the biggest opportunities for rural Britain to transform its economy.

• 29 Apr 2025 · National Wealth Fund: Opportunities for Industry · Hansard source

  More

  The domestic user of electricity pays 24p per kilowatt; the domestic user of mains gas pays 6p. People who live in urban Britain buy their energy for a quarter of the price paid by people in rural Britain. This is a massive problem, and I wonder whether the Minister could explain how the Government will address it.

• 23 Apr 2025 · Sewage · Hansard source

  More

  We have been hearing all about monitoring in one hour and the huge amounts of discharges. We do not have any of that information in Scotland as it is not a requirement for Scottish Water to release that and the SNP Government are not taking any steps to do so. We have no idea about the extent of the problem, but we know that it is substantial. Will my hon. Friend back me in supporting the cause for the Scottish Government to release the same information as there is England?

• 23 Apr 2025 · Sewage · Hansard source

  More

  Will the right hon. Lady give way?

• 24 Mar 2025 · Planning and Infrastructure Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the Deputy Prime Minister’s decision to introduce powers to create a bill discount scheme to help households closest to new electricity transmission infrastructure. However, to be clear, the scheme is nowhere near enough. It falls short as both a meaningful community benefit and a measure to address local opposition to new infrastructure projects. The proposed £250 annual discount for households within 500 metres of major transmission infrastructure equates to just 6.25% off bills in rural Britain each year. It does not even match the cancellation of the £300 winter fuel allowance. Even that modest £250 concession is limited to a decade. For families living beside towering pylons and substations, it is a poor trade-off for the lasting impact on their environment and quality of life. More fundamentally, why are rural communities, which already pay the highest energy prices in the country, expected to accept such a meagre offer? In our cities and major towns, such as Ashton-under-Lyne, households with access to mains gas pay around 6p per kWh for their energy. In contrast, those in rural areas, who are far more likely to be affected by these infrastructure developments, pay 24p per kWh for their electricity. How is it right that the very communities that live alongside renewable energy generation and face some of the highest rates of fuel poverty are expected to pay four times as much as those on mains gas? Renewable electricity is cheaper to produce, yet rural households are still being charged four times the price of largely imported carbon fuel mains gas. Where is the fairness in that? If the Government are serious about ensuring that communities benefit from new infrastructure, they must do better than the miserable £250 a year. Beyond energy costs, the Minister will know that transmission companies, such as Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks, anticipate being required to build temporary housing for their workers. They have offered to build legacy housing, which would remain for the rural communities, but the Bill does not cover that. Affordable housing is one of the greatest challenges facing rural Britain. Including legacy housing in the Bill could make a real difference to affordable housing in those areas. Will the Minister explain why such a provision has been omitted and commit to addressing the matter? If the Government want communities to accept new infrastructure, they must offer something meaningful in return: real, lasting benefits that acknowledge the burden placed on those who live alongside the developments. The energy bill discount scheme in its current form is a long way from that.

• 12 Mar 2025 · Rural Communities: Government Support · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend the Member for South Devon (Caroline Voaden) for securing the debate. My two main calls for Government support for rural communities are as follows. First, rural communities producing a substantial portion of our nation’s electricity should be paid 5% of revenue for all newly consented renewable energy generated onshore and offshore, as a community benefit. That would be transformational for the income of rural areas. Secondly, many homes in my constituency and throughout the country are forced to heat their homes with electricity, as they are not connected to mains gas. Electricity costs four times the price of mains gas per kilowatt. The reason is that environmental taxes, which make up a substantial part of electricity bills, are levied far more heavily on electricity than on gas. They should be equalised, because that is an unfair punishment for people whose homes are not connected to mains gas in Britain.

• 5 Mar 2025 · Renewables Obligation Certificate Scheme · Hansard source

  More

  In rural Britain, particularly rural Scotland, the cost per kilowatt to heat a house is about 24p, whereas those on mains gas in the city pay about 6p, so those using renewable electricity to heat their houses pay four times as much as those using mains gas. The renewables obligation certificate scheme is an important part of all this. Basically, rural Britain is getting absolutely stuffed on the cost of energy, so anything we can do to help those in rural areas is important. Does the hon. Gentleman agree?

• 5 Mar 2025 · Renewables Obligation Certificate Scheme · Hansard source

  More

  Does my hon. Friend recognise the fact that we have major issues with environmental tariffs being placed on renewable energy but not on the carbon fuel of mains gas? That is really hitting the renewable energy industry and the cost for consumers.

• 5 Mar 2025 · Renewables Obligation Certificate Scheme · Hansard source

  More

  I wonder if the Minister could put herself in the position of somebody from the island of Skye who wakes up in the morning, opens his windows, and sees beautiful mountains in the background —it is always sunny there and there are no midges. He sees the wind turbines, but then he goes and looks at his heating and realises he is paying four times as much to get energy from those turbines. Meanwhile, there is negligible community benefit coming to that area. Can she position herself in that person’s or that household’s shoes?

• 11 Feb 2025 · Cost of Energy · Hansard source

  More

  I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Bath (Wera Hobhouse) on securing this important debate. Much of what I was going to say has been mentioned, but I want to reiterate a few things. How can it be that households on renewable electricity pay four times as much as those who get fossil fuel gas? That is inappropriate, not least because the cost of electricity generation from onshore wind was one third of the cost of generating electricity from fossil fuels, yet electricity bills remain nearly four times the price of mains gas. To put that into perspective, my parliamentary flat in London, which runs on mains gas, costs 5.8p per kilowatt-hour to heat, while my home in the highlands costs 23.7p. That premium is paid not just in the highlands, but across the countryside and in rural Britain, and in high-rise properties throughout cities across Great Britain. It is an enormous and painful gap. We all believe that net zero is the way ahead—we all support that—but we do not think that the current pricing is just. In England, the level of fuel poverty is 13%, and as the hon. Member for Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey (Graham Leadbitter) said, it is much higher in the highlands at 47%. We have a dramatic problem with fuel poverty in the north of Scotland. In 2021, an estimated 16% of households that used gas for heating were classified as being in fuel poverty, and 41% of those who required electricity. There is a clear link between fuel poverty and lack of access to mains gas. That damages business as well: a hotel in rural Britain is paying £80,000 if it is using gas, but it would cost only £25,000 at most in a city for the same amount of heat. If the hotel was in the United States, the same amount of heat would cost only £10,000. We have touched on the coupling of renewable energy and gas, and I do not think anybody would disagree that they need to be decoupled. I am sure that the Minister will talk about that. We have also touched on the environmental surcharges that are put on the electricity price, so 20% or more of an electricity bill, but just a fraction of a gas bill, is an environmental tariff. Ironically, it is people using renewable energy who are shouldering those environmental charges, not those using fossil fuels—mains gas. I am glad that we have had this debate. I hope that the Minister will give an idea of how the enormous injustice of environmental charges, the standing charges and all the excess charges on renewables can be removed to balance things out with people who are relying on gas.

• 11 Feb 2025 · Cost of Energy · Hansard source

  More

  Would the Minister spare a minute to talk about community benefits?

• 11 Feb 2025 · Cost of Energy · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you very much.

• 30 Jan 2025 · Finance Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  LPG is not the issue; electricity, along with kerosene, is largely the issue. Very few people use LPG to heat their properties or businesses. It is electricity where the taxes are. I would be delighted to share information; I am doing a big thing about it shortly, so I have done a lot of research.

• 30 Jan 2025 · Finance Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  As always, I speak on behalf of the highland industries. In rural areas, only electricity and kerosene are available; mains gas is not. Electricity users pay four times more for their energy than mains gas users, so a hotel on the island of Skye may pay £80,000, whereas one in a city may pay £20,000. That causes enormous issues for people in the windiest, coldest, darkest part of Great Britain. The reason for the big disparity is that the tariffs and taxes are largely on electricity, rather than gas, and of course electricity is largely renewable. In my constituency, people can see wind farms out of their window, yet we still pay four times more for our energy than people in cities. Will the Minister elaborate on what could be done to make us more competitive?

• 7 Jan 2025 · Crown Estate Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  Funnily enough, as a Highland councillor, it is a subject that I have spent many years working on. Highland council—I know this does not relate to the Crown Estate in England and Wales—had £9.1 million of community benefits and Scotland as a whole had £23 million. This is an industry worth hundreds of billions of pounds across the whole of Britain, so we should have, say, 5% of that as community benefits, which would be transformational for Cornwall, Devon, Pembrokeshire and indeed Scotland. I encourage the House to consider how the Bill could establish a robust framework for community benefits that could serve as a model for renewable energy projects across the whole of the UK, working closely with the Scottish Crown Estate. The Bill represents a vital step forward in enabling the UK to meet its net zero targets and enhance energy security. However, it is equally vital that we legislate to include statutory powers for the Crown Estate in England and Wales, and indeed in Scotland, to ensure that these transformative projects see their fair share of community benefits for communities.

• 7 Jan 2025 · Crown Estate Bill [Lords] · Hansard source

  More

  I will speak about the Crown Estate’s borrowing powers and the broadening of its investment scope. These changes are intended to enhance the Crown Estate’s capacity to support our ambitious goals for renewable energy, nature recovery and economic growth. The Bill is undoubtedly a significant step forward in enabling the Crown Estate to play a greater role in the transition towards net zero. I fully support its efforts and ambitions. The partnership between the Crown Estate and Great British Energy to develop offshore wind projects is exciting. Many of us have been trying to get Great British Energy to include community benefits and community ownership within its reach, but we have failed to do so. [ Interruption. ] It does? Okay—we have tried hard. A measure is to be considered in the other House on 13 January to try to get it to do that, so perhaps Labour Members know something that I do not. Anyway, that is good news. I want to focus on a critical element that is close to my heart, and perhaps even more familiar to my colleagues, as I bang on about it. That subject is, of course, community benefits. Those of us in remote and rural Britain pay far more for energy than those who can access mains gas, and we also have a much higher level of poverty; especially fuel poverty. Communities hosting renewable energy projects, and particularly those overlooking offshore wind farms, deserve to see tangible benefits from those developments. The Bill presents an opportunity to ensure that offshore wind farm projects—indeed, all renewable energy projects—not only meet our national and global ambitions but provide meaningful real-world advantages to the people most impacted by them. There are numerous examples from overseas of where community benefits have become significant. One such example is from Germany, where in the North sea archipelago of Heligoland three offshore wind farms generated €22 million in 2016. These are massive amounts of money. While the Bill’s focus is on increasing borrowing powers and investment flexibility, there is no mention of how communities will benefit from these developments, although perhaps Labour Members know something that I do not.

• 6 Nov 2024 · Fuel Poverty · Hansard source

  More

  What is absolutely clear is that the electricity companies are not losing money. Their total profits add up to tens of billions of pounds, but the costs are being borne by the poorest people in our society.

• 6 Nov 2024 · Fuel Poverty · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you very much, Sir Roger, for allowing me to contribute to the debate. I thank my right hon. Friend the Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael) for securing it. The two big issues facing rural Scotland, and the highlands in particular, are the care sector and fuel poverty. I am sure hon. Members have not spent too much time worrying about this, but although the mean daily temperature in London is 16°C, it is 9°C on the island of Skye, where God comes from. On Skye we have longer nights, colder weather, windier conditions and older, draughtier houses. In June this year, the daily standing charge for electricity was 61.1p in the north of Scotland and 40.8p in London, so in the north of Scotland we pay 50% more to be connected to our electricity. That is shocking.

• 6 Nov 2024 · Fuel Poverty · Hansard source

  More

  That is also Liberal Democrat policy, so I am pleased to support that. Interestingly—I know you will find this interesting, Sir Roger—France, Italy, Ireland and others have an equalisation of standing charges. Ofgem’s reluctance to reform standing charges has been raised many times in Westminster Hall and in the main Chamber, so we need to get proper answers. Town gas is by far the most affordable way of heating a house, but 60% of houses in the highlands do not have access to it. As my right hon. Friend the Member for Orkney and Shetland says, kerosene, bottled gas, electricity, wood and coal are very much more expensive, but people in the highlands have no option but to use them. It is easy for us to have a go at the policy of stopping the winter fuel allowance. I do not understand why the figure was set at £13,000, rather than at the average household income of £34,000. That would have been a huge relief to many of the people who have been most affected, and it would probably have been much more popular for the Government. In the highlands, incomes are much lower than in the rest of Scotland and Britain as a whole, and we have a much older population. The cost of living is between 15% and 30% higher than in the rest of Scotland, according to the Scottish Affairs Committee in 2021. We have a substantial depopulation problem and the highest cost of living in the UK, to which fuel is a major contributor. I know the Energy Minister has heard this from me before, but community benefits from renewables are potentially the biggest saving grace from this. My No. 1 call is for fuel vouchers to be given to affected locals, and of course in the highlands we have lots of renewables. That would make a very big difference. The second thing the Minister could do is to get Ofgem to review standing charges. I estimate that if they were equalised, there would be a £75 a year saving at no cost to the Treasury. Thirdly, we should concentrate the winter fuel allowance on the most deserving people, who tend to be the older, the poorer and the more remote.

• 29 Oct 2024 · Great British Energy Bill · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Gentleman explain why the SNP Government have left community benefit at the same £5,000 level it was in 2014, even though prices have gone through the roof? Their advisory information could have been changed. They have been pressed on the issue many times because it has severely damaged the income of rural communities.

• 29 Oct 2024 · Great British Energy Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I invite hon. Members to refer to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for South Cambridgeshire (Pippa Heylings) for her commitment to our essential amendments, both in Committee and here today. I also thank the hon. Member for Na h-Eileanan an Iar (Torcuil Crichton), who has been incredibly supportive of our ambition for communities to benefit from renewable energy. I have one little correction: Tom Johnston, who invented the hydro boards, and the Labour Government did not actually put in place a proper system whereby local communities could benefit. They supplied a lot of power to the south and the cities, but it was of very little benefit to those of us living in the highlands, even then. The Government have argued that nothing in this Bill limits community ownership. That is almost certainly true, but as my colleagues and I have emphasised, amendment 5 would not restrict GB Energy; it would simply clarify that community-led energy is a priority. The Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, the hon. Member for Rutherglen (Michael Shanks), recently experienced a powerful story of community-driven energy on his visit to the island of Eigg. Just 25 years ago, Eigg’s residents, frustrated by years of poor management and a lack of investment, took matters into their hands and purchased their island. The Eigg buy-out succeeded in 1997, sparking what is now a beacon of self-sustained energy. Since then, Eigg has moved away from fossil fuels, becoming the world’s first island to generate 24-hour electricity from a variety of different renewables. This small community of just 110 people demonstrates the innovation and resilience that flourish when communities are empowered. Eigg’s journey is a true example of prioritising community ownership and how that drives forward sustainability and local resilience. To paraphrase the Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, the hon. Member for Rutherglen (Michael Shanks), community involvement is critical, not a mere “nice to have”. If we are to build the infrastructure of the future, we must ensure that communities benefit directly. Community-driven projects are key to making that a reality, so let us follow Eigg’s lead and put the Government’s own words into action. The current Government have an opportunity here to show their commitment to cross-party collaboration by embracing community energy. We are all aligned on the goals, so let us not get bogged down by technicalities or party politics. The Minister knows of the huge cross-party support for community energy ownership. If this goes to a vote, do this Government really want to vote against community energy ownership? Let us show the people of Britain that this Bill truly supports the right to own and benefit from our natural resources through Great British Energy.

• 15 Oct 2024 · Renewable Energy Projects: Community Benefits · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered community benefits from renewable energy projects. It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Huq. In all our careers, we have seen extraordinary changes, such as the advent of the internet, artificial intelligence and mobile phones. Going back 50 years, in the early stages of many of our lives, we had the North sea oil boom. The oil boom was extraordinary for many countries, not least Norway, which has saved US $1.7 trillion from it. Great Britain saved none of that money, however, and I am worried that we will save none of the money from the extraordinary renewables boom that is coming our way. One of the biggest systemic changes in our life is happening right now: the move from fossil fuels to renewables. Many billions of pounds are being made, a huge number of jobs are being created and cheap electricity is being generated, but it is overseas companies, with overseas ownership of renewables projects, that we are seeing all over the UK. Precious little of the money ends up in the hands of the people who are being impacted by those projects. The issue I have with these renewables projects, whether solar, wind, pumped storage or whatever, is that they are in rural areas. The locals suffer the visual impact, and we have all seen miles and miles of 200-metre-high wind turbines and field after field, sometimes of prime land, covered in solar panels. Villagers—people—have to face those industrial projects, and we really need to take them with us on this net zero journey.