Following much anticipation for a fairly radical energy review and specifically speculation concerning a whole-hearted endorsement of nuclear energy, Industry Secretary Alastair Darling gave an extremely safe and predictable speech to a sparsely populated Commons Chamber that left MP's looking at each other in a mix of disbelief and resignation.
Prior to the statement, the Prime Minister had been featured regularly on
news bulletins visiting the offshore wind farm at Whitstable, saying that
now is the time for some radical decisions and we are no longer in an 'either/or'
situation. "We're about to move to a situation of importing energy. We
have to at least replace our nuclear power stations. These decisions have
to be taken now". It was against this background that Mr Darling's speech
was billed, which perhaps made the afternoon even more surprising.
Listening closely to the speech, it appeared that the Minister had decided
to take a step back from a ringing endorsement of nuclear power, and stated
both during the speech and the subsequent questions that it was up to government
to provide a framework within which the power generators could plan and work.
"Governments don't build power stations. It is for generators to come
forward with their proposals".
That's not to say that the speech had nothing to commend it: indeed the opening
statements were the Enersol mantra in that the first thing we need to do is
use the energy we using right now far more efficiently. In an echo of the
speech made by the new Environment Minister Ian Anderson at the EIC Annual
Reception last week, Mr Darling said that "the starting point must be
to save energy". During this promising start, he pointed out that the
UK's stand-by buttons are estimated to use 7% of all the electricity we generate
and that massive savings could be effected by encouraging energy efficiency
across the board. "Energy companies are incentivised to sell us as much
energy as possible. We have to switch the emphasis". Quite how that could
be done was left for another time, except to say that they could be encouraged
to sell insulation and energy saving products.
When he said we needed a radically different approach, it appeared we were
getting to the meat of the matter. However, what followed was a series of
sentences ranging from the stupefyingly obvious ("we need to reduce CO2
emissions") through to the inevitable soundbite ("we need to spark a
revolution in energy"). In truth, the writer is perhaps being a little unfair,
but this arises from a real sense of being let down. We were led to expect
a landmark announcement; one which would create the cast in which future energy
policy would be moulded. Instead, we were promised yet more review and consultation.
One had a tangible sense of our esteemed leaders fiddling whilst the planet
burns.
Shadow Trade & Industry Secretary Alan Duncan was scathing in his reply,
describing the statement as "not carbon free - but content free"
and said that the review "amounted to nothing. Three years ago, we were
promised some final decisions. Is this it?" Quite. The Lib Dem's Ed Davey,
whilst being a little more conciliatory than his Conservative counterpart,
said that the minister had "destroyed the possibility of cross-party consensus
by caving into the nuclear industry lobby".
In the end, it seemed that the speech had managed to achieve something quite
rare, in that it didn't really please anyone at all.
