Stephen Flynn MP: speeches

Speeches

• 15 Oct 2024 · Great British Energy Bill (Fifth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the shadow Minister for that warm welcome. What a delight it is to be back in Committee Room 10 on a Tuesday morning to discuss the Great British Energy Bill. Last week, we all spoke at length about the massive opportunities in the renewable energy sector in the UK and particularly in Scotland. From fixed-bottom and floating offshore wind to green hydrogen, blue hydrogen, tidal and wave, pumped storage hydro, onshore wind and so forth, Scotland has a plethora of resources. I believe it was the chief executive officer of the Confederation of British Industry who said last week that Scotland’s renewables sector could unlock economic growth for the UK—imagine what it could do for Scotland’s economy. It is important to reflect on the fact that over the past 50 or 60 years or so of North sea oil and gas, £450 billion has flowed from Scotland’s waters down to Whitehall. Can anyone seriously and reasonably argue that Scotland’s society reflects the magnitude of that wealth in our public environment, our infrastructure or our energy projects, which are in their infancy? They should be much further on, using the wealth that we had accumulated over many decades. I do not want to see the same mistake repeated. I want to see the revenue generated from Scotland’s energy resources returned to Scotland so that we can ensure a society that is greener, more inclusive and fairer, and that delivers the continual economic growth that we so badly need. Scotland produces six times more gas than we consume, with some 28 to 36 GW of floating offshore wind coming down the pipeline—and that is before I get into all the other energies that are keen to come on stream should the Government finally put in the financial mechanisms to support them. That affords Scotland the ability to have a competitive advantage, not to repeat what Ireland has done on corporation tax—we cannot all chase the same reduction, which would be a race to the bottom—but to create a competitive advantage that attracts big business to Scotland based on the energy that we consume. The prize is so great that we surely cannot miss out on it. I appreciate that Members around this Committee Room in the United Kingdom Parliament may not share my enthusiasm for Scotland to have its resources returned, but it is an important point to engage with.

• 15 Oct 2024 · Great British Energy Bill (Fifth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  In fairness to Committee members who may not have been here, perhaps the shadow Minister will remind us why he chose to step down as the Minister with responsibility for the grid.

• 15 Oct 2024 · Great British Energy Bill (Fifth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Always.

• 15 Oct 2024 · Great British Energy Bill (Fifth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move amendment 3, in clause 6, page 3, line 38, at end insert— “(1A) The Secretary of State must, in particular, direct Great British Energy that any revenues generated from activities of Great British Energy in relation to resources located in Scotland must be invested back into projects located in Scotland.” Good morning.

• 15 Oct 2024 · Great British Energy Bill (Fifth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  If they had any desire to support Scotland’s cause, they would stand up against that and be truthful with the people of Scotland in that context. The Minister expresses dismay at that notion, but I am sure he was elected on a platform of fighting Tory austerity. Why is it different when it is Scotland? Amendment 3 would ensure that Scotland benefits from its resources. That should not be too much to ask in this place. If the Minister and hon. Members around this Committee Room believe in respecting Scotland, they should agree to it, because it is the right thing to do. Question put, That the amendment be made.

• 14 Oct 2024 · Points of Order · Hansard source

  More

  On a point of order, Mr Speaker. In the wee hours of 9 June 2017, I watched on as the most talented, formidable and consequential politician of his generation—a man who had represented the people of Banff and Buchan, Aberdeenshire East and Gordon; a man who had served for two terms as the First Minister of Scotland—lost his parliamentary seat for the first time in 30 years. It is a moment I will never forget, not because of the nature of his defeat but for what happened next, because within just a few moments, Alex Salmond took to the podium and gave a speech that, despite all the despair that those of us in the SNP felt in the room that night, made us feel 10 feet tall. He gave us back the hope that things would get better, and would get better quickly. Rabbie Burns once wrote: “The heart ay’s the part ay That makes us right or wrang.” Alex gave all of us in the SNP the belief that what we felt in our hearts was worth fighting for—the belief that we could one day become an independent nation. Alex Salmond took us so very close to making that belief a reality. At this time of profound shock and sorrow, I send my heartfelt personal condolences to Alex’s wife Moira, his wider family, his friends and his legion of fans across the nationalist movement and within the Alba party itself. It is of great personal sorrow to me that Alex Salmond will not live to see Scotland become an independent nation. The challenge for all of us now in the nationalist movement is to make sure that we put good his legacy and deliver the future he so badly fought for throughout his distinguished parliamentary career.

• 10 Oct 2024 · Great British Energy Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move amendment 5, in clause 5, page 3, line 12, leave out “consult” and insert “seek and gain consent of”.

• 10 Oct 2024 · Great British Energy Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move amendment 4, in clause 5, page 3, line 10, leave out subsection (3) and insert— “(3) A statement under subsection (1) or a revised or replacement statement under subsection (2) will not take effect unless a draft has been laid before and approved by a resolution of each House of Parliament.” Before I begin my remarks, it is probably best that I correct the record on behalf of the shadow Minister. It is not just in relation to Great British Energy that I have expressed some positivity; I did once watch “The Great British Bake Off” as well. That aside, it was put to me by some members of the Labour party back in Scotland that I was not supportive of GB Energy, because I did not go through the Lobby with the Government some weeks ago, as I think the Minister referred to in his remarks today. The reason I did not go through the Lobby with the Government that day was that I was not entirely sure what GB Energy was going to do. In fact, based on the information before us in this Bill, I am still not entirely sure what GB Energy is going to do in practice; it seems to be all things to all people. In principle, perhaps that is not a bad thing, and those who gave evidence to us put forward a number of positive arguments of the necessity for that to be the case, whether in relation to production, generation, the supply of energy or the community projects that Members have spoken about at length. The purpose of my amendment is to ensure that the House of Commons is fully apprised of exactly what the Secretary of State intends GB Energy to achieve. That will be hugely important, particularly in the context of Scotland, because much of what has been discussed in relation to GB Energy, and the opportunities that may or may not exist, will ultimately be intrinsically linked to the success of projects in Scotland, where the majority of the UK’s renewable energy resource sits. Indeed, I think the director of the Confederation of British Industry said that it is a “golden ticket” to economic growth for the entire UK. Imagine what an independent Scotland could achieve in that context. The point of the amendment is to ensure that the House of Commons is able to fully appraise the direction that the Secretary of State wishes to take. That might cause Labour Members some consternation, because they have just been elected with a massive majority and may well be able to set out their strategic vision, but they need to remember that they will not be in government forever. They will at some point be replaced—I am not entirely sure who will replace them; there is a decent suggestion that it will probably be by the Lib Dems rather than by the Conservatives, based on the leadership candidates. However, the amendment would ensure that future parliamentarians and future groups of politicians will be able to apply the same scrutiny that I expect of Government today. I think it is good practice. In years to come, should the Conservative party, the Lib Dems or perhaps some other nefarious party come to control the UK state, they should not be able to do anything contrary to the wishes of Parliament without its having the ability to shape the future of what will hopefully be a successful intervention into the energy market, albeit one with very small amounts of money to drive forward the multiple goals that it seeks to achieve.

• 10 Oct 2024 · Great British Energy Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Aye.

• 10 Oct 2024 · Great British Energy Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Forgive me, Sir Roger; I think the Minister and I were in agreement there. The point I was making was that a future Secretary of State may seek to change the framework of GB Energy, and that would cause me concern in that regard. However, as it stands, I am content with the Minister’s comments and will not seek to press the amendment to a vote. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

• 10 Oct 2024 · Great British Energy Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention, although I am a bit disappointed that he regards seeking the consent of Scotland’s nationally elected Parliament as a blocking amendment. That is quite a Westminster mentality that he has adopted already in the few short weeks that he has been here—perhaps that is an indication of where his party intends to go in the months and years to come. Notwithstanding that, because I do not believe it was a necessary or helpful intervention in that context, I would be very keen to hear from the Minister on why he does not believe he should seek the consent of Scotland’s Parliament.

• 10 Oct 2024 · Great British Energy Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Governments.

• 10 Oct 2024 · Great British Energy Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  These amendments are hopefully self-explanatory to Members. I am extremely keen to hear the Minister’s thoughts on them. As I referred to in my initial remarks, much of the success of the UK’s energy sector will be derived from the success of renewables projects in Scotland, whether that is the continuation of onshore wind, further development of fixed-bottom offshore wind, floating offshore wind, pumped storage hydro, green hydrogen, blue hydrogen, tidal, wave, and so on. The sun sometimes shines as well, so we might get some solar panels in there too—perhaps just in Na h-Eileanan an Iar, though, as opposed to Aberdeen. I know that the Minister has been engaging proactively with my colleagues in Scotland, that there have been a lot of positive discussions, and that Mr Maier was up with the First Minister in recent weeks to discuss the future outlook for GB Energy. If the respect agenda that the new Labour Government appear to have put in place is to mean something, it is important that they are willing and confident enough in their arguments to seek the fulsome consent of the Scottish Parliament—not just the Scottish National party, because I am conscious, as I said earlier, that it may not always be the Scottish National party that is there.

• 10 Oct 2024 · Great British Energy Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for his reply. I gently suggest that, if he were still sitting on the Opposition Benches, his view would be slightly different. I simply remind him in that context that he will not always be sitting on the Government side. If a future Secretary of State decides to change the strategic priorities of Great British Energy, then I am sure, at that point, he and his colleagues would like to have the ability to review, revise and discuss that within the democratic structures that we have. On that basis, I will press the amendment to a vote. Question put, That the amendment be made.

• 10 Oct 2024 · Great British Energy Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I do not know whether I misheard the Minister’s last point, but I am not sure that we should view consulting the Scottish Parliament as burdensome. In fact, with both the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Senedd, and indeed with the Northern Ireland Assembly, there is a benefit for the United Kingdom in being proactive in its positive engagement with the devolved Governments and Administrations on these isles. Notwithstanding that, I am pleased that I have been able to get this matter on the record. It is not unusual for this sort of provision to appear in legislation that applies across the UK that may carry implications for the devolved areas. In that regard, I will not press the amendment to a vote. However, I say to the Minister that my colleagues and I will hold him to account on this. As he knows, the delivery of projects relies on the Scottish Government and the UK Government working in practice on planning, consenting, the Crown Estate Scotland and the associated infrastructure. I would hate to see a situation where the strategic priorities of GB Energy, and the whole of the UK Government, change and they seek to impose their will on the Scottish Parliament in the way the previous Government did, which is why we did not have positive relations.

• 10 Oct 2024 · Great British Energy Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The Minister has tempted me to have a look at what Juergen Maier said. I asked him very clearly how many jobs would be in Aberdeen. His response was quite clear: “It will be in the hundreds; it may eventually be 1,000 or more in the HQ.” –– [ Official Report, Great British Energy Public Bill Committee, 8 October 2024; c. 6, Q4.] The HQ is, of course, Aberdeen. That would run contrary to what the Minister has just said.

• 10 Oct 2024 · Great British Energy Bill (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Lady misunderstands my point. I do not disagree with that; in fact, I would like to see the Government go further and separate the price of electricity from the price of gas as they promised. That is one of the reasons why the Tories allowed people’s energy costs to soar, irrespective of their narrative about extenuating circumstances far outwith all our control. The point that the hon. Member for Sheffield Hallam made, quite clearly, was that GB Energy would reduce costs. Juergen Maier, the chair, said that that was not the scope of GB Energy. Which is it? The two things cannot be true at exactly the same time. We cannot say that something is going to happen and then say that GB Energy is not going to do it. The crux of all this is that the public have expectations that GB Energy will reduce their energy bills by £300. Government Members can argue that that was not the promise; if that was not the promise, they were very quiet about it when they let the public believe that during the election campaign. If the public believe that, the Government need to deliver on the commitment that they made, and they should learn a lesson. The Conservatives made promise after promise after promise, and they failed to deliver when it came to energy. [ Interruption. ] Does the Minister wish to intervene?

• 10 Oct 2024 · Great British Energy Bill (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The Minister is being generous with his time, as always. It is a scandal that people are in cold homes. Why is he supportive of the Government taking away the winter fuel allowance?

• 10 Oct 2024 · Great British Energy Bill (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I do not think that my Commons colleagues and I would suggest that the Government should have reduced energy bills within 100 days, but, my goodness, they have just gone up by 10%. The Minister says that it will not happen within a year or two years, so I would be keen, as would the public, to know broadly when he expects energy bills to come down. I do not say that from an angry position; I want the public to have a bit of clarity about his objectives.

• 10 Oct 2024 · Great British Energy Bill (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I rise to support amendment 24, which is broadly similar to the shadow Minister’s amendment 11. I am intrigued by the discussion that we have had, various aspects of which appeared to disagree with evidence we have heard. First, the hon. Member for Sheffield Hallam, if I picked her up correctly, made great play of the fact that GB Energy will reduce costs. Yet just a couple of days ago, each and every one of us was in the room with the chair of GB Energy, who was very clear that reducing bills “is not the scope of Great British Energy”. –– [ Official Report, Great British Energy Public Bill Committee, 8 October 2024; c. 6, Q5.] We can all watch the footage online, and we can all read Hansard. Secondly, the hon. Member for Na h-Eileanan an Iar made the argument that the £300 promise was not actually a promise. Which is it? Will it or will it not reduce costs?

• 10 Oct 2024 · Great British Energy Bill (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I admire the Minister’s attempt to compare GB Energy, as supposedly a producer and generator of energy, with an organisation that could have sold electricity—

• 10 Oct 2024 · Great British Energy Bill (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I rise to speak briefly to new clause 1, which is grouped with amendment 8 and clause 1. It is very straightforward. It will be for Government Members to consider whether it is appropriate for the House of Commons to be in full knowledge and understanding of what the Government seek to do on energy efficiency. They must also consider whether the steps that the Government take in that regard should be reported to this House to ensure that we are fully abreast of the progress that the Government hope to make and how that meets the promises that they as individuals made to their constituents prior to the election. We as parliamentarians can collectively hold the Government to account on those promises and ambitions. In discussions on further amendments, we will talk in more detail about the promises that were made, and hopefully the Government might be minded to agree to include some of those promises in the Bill. For now, though, I think it worth while for Members to consider the role that this Parliament plays in scrutinising this Government in a constructive fashion.

• 10 Oct 2024 · Great British Energy Bill (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I am sure that the Minister, as an esteemed and well-versed parliamentarian, will understand that the voting system in this House means that should a Member choose not to vote in favour of something, that does not mean that they are against it, as he is outlining. I would hate for him to inadvertently suggest to the public that something is the case when it is not the case. As he knows, I of course welcome the set-up of GB Energy, but what I want to see is the scrutiny that the new clause would obviously provide.

• 10 Oct 2024 · Great British Energy Bill (Third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Of course it did not do anything, because the capital was not there to do that. If it had existed under the price shock that the Tories brought in for all of us, it would not have been able to function, in the same way that so many others in the private sector were not able to function. The Minister is trying to equate two things that are not comparable. When he rises to his feet, as he seems very keen to, perhaps he will confirm, first, when bills will fall by £300, and secondly—as he failed to do the other day—when they will come down at all. Before the Minister interrupted so pleasantly, I was pointing out to Government Members that the Conservatives made promises on energy that they failed to deliver. The public have high expectations—so get on and deliver.

• 8 Oct 2024 · Great British Energy Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It was about the quantum that is available. You referred to IRA and the EU’s corresponding investment. The quantum for GB Energy is £8.3 billion over the course of five years, or £1.6 billion per year. Do you think that is sufficient to meet the objectives laid out in the Bill? Andy Prendergast: I think it is sufficient to make some of them and sufficient to make a difference; it is not sufficient to make as much of a difference as we would like it to, but compared with what we had beforehand, it is light years ahead of where we have been.