Ed Miliband opens the door to more drilling in North Sea despite previously branding plans 'climate vandalism'
The government has issued new guidance that will allow applications to be resubmitted for the Rosebank oil field and Jackdaw gas field.
However, environmental groups are still urging the Net Zero Secretary to reject the schemes.
The move comes after the Court of Session in Edinburgh upheld a legal challenge to the projects in January, ruling that processes had not been followed in granting consent.
The UK Government and North Sea Transition Authority (NSTA) were found to have acted unlawfully by not taking into account emissions resulting from the burning of the extracted fuels.
The Tories were in power when clearance was given for Shell's proposals to develop the Jackdaw field in 2022, and Equinor and Ithaca Energy's Rosebank plans in September 2023.
In the judgement, Lord Ericht said the consent should be 'reduced' - quashed - and reconsidered.
Mr Miliband's Department for Net Zero has now issued guidance on how the environmental impacts of oil and gas drilling should be assessed.
That is expected to see the projects revived - despite Mr Miliband pledging not to approve any new licences in the North Sea basin. He previously described the Rosebank plans as 'climate vandalism'.
Mr Miliband will assess the environmental project's environmental impact, while 'taking into account and balancing relevant factors on a case-by-case basis - such as the potential economic impact and other implications of the project'.
No decisions are expected to be made under the new guidance until Autumn at the earliest.
Energy Minister Michael Shanks said: 'This new guidance offers clarity on the way forward for the North Sea oil and gas industry, following last year's Supreme Court ruling.
'It marks a step forward in ensuring the full implications of oil and gas extraction are considered for potential projects and that we ensure a managed, prosperous, and orderly transition to the North Sea's clean energy future, in line with the science.
'We are working with industry, trade unions, local communities and environmental groups to ensure the North Sea and its workers are at the heart of Britain's clean energy future for decades to come – supporting well-paid, skilled jobs, driving growth and boosting our energy security.'
Labour's attitude has been in stark contrast to the US, where new president Donald Trump has been vowing a 'drill baby drill' policy to exploit natural resources.
Tessa Khan, executive director of Uplift, said: 'The new rules mean that oil and gas companies will finally be forced to come clean over the enormous harm they are causing to the climate.'
She argued Rosebank would not lower fuel bills or boost energy independence as most of the oil would be exported, and tax breaks would mean the public would cover most of the costs of development.
She also said the extreme weather the UK is experiencing 'must be a wake-up call for this Government to stand up to the oil and gas firms'.
Greenpeace UK head of climate Mel Evans said: 'It's only right for the Government to take into account the emissions from burning oil and gas when deciding whether to approve fossil fuel projects currently pending.
'Since Rosebank and other drilling sites will pump out a lot of carbon while providing little benefit to the economy and no help to bill payers, they should fail the criteria ministers have just set out.
She said approving the projects would be a 'political sleight of hand' that would benefit oil giants while leaving the UK hooked on fossil fuels.
'Real energy security and future-proofed jobs for energy workers can only come through homegrown, cheap renewable energy, and that's what ministers should focus on,' she urged.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
25 minutes ago
- The Independent
Man United fans say ‘enough is enough' ahead of new protest
A Manchester United supporters' group, The 1958, has announced a new protest against the Glazer family and Sir Jim Ratcliffe. The protest will take place on 17 August, marching to Old Trafford before the Premier League opener against Arsenal, with banners reading 'Jim Can't Fix This'. The group criticises the Glazers' two decades of ownership and their 'debt mountain', stating that 'enough is enough'. They accuse Sir Jim Ratcliffe, who acquired a 28.94 per cent stake and operational control in February, of being 'complicit' in the club's ongoing issues by aligning with the Glazers. Ratcliffe previously indicated in March that he would consider leaving if he faced the same level of abuse directed at the Glazer family.
Daily Record
25 minutes ago
- Daily Record
Stirling hotel manager voices support for tourist tax if funds are used wisely
Stirling Council is currently seeking feedback on the draft Visitor Levy scheme for the area, after it launched a public consultation on the issue last month. The manager of one of Stirling's most popular hotels has suggested that the city's proposed ' tourist tax ' on overnight stays could be beneficial, provided the funds raised are used appropriately. Stirling Council is currently seeking public opinion on the draft Visitor Levy scheme for the area, following a public consultation launched last month. Under new powers granted by the Visitor Levy (Scotland) Act 2024, the draft scheme proposes a five per cent levy on overnight stays across all forms of paid visitor accommodation within the Stirling Council area. The scheme would include several exemptions specific to Stirling, including residents of Stirling Council, those receiving carers' allowance and visitors staying more than seven nights (through reimbursement), as well as a site exemption scheme for charitable and educational organisations, where the trip's primary purpose is charitable or educational. Barry Makin, the general manager of Sir Andy Murray's Cromlix Hotel, in Kinbuck, believes the move could be positive – provided the money is "well spent" and used locally. Speaking to the Stirling Observer, Mr Makin said: "I think the theory behind the levy is good in principle, if the money is spent well locally to improve things for visitors and also for local people." He further commented: "I've seen how it can work successfully in other European countries. In my opinion it's essential that the levy charge is clear to bookers at the point of booking and not just on the final bill so it's clear that this isn't a cost added by the hotel, but is something all travellers to Stirling would encounter." Local residents and other interested parties are invited to share their thoughts on the draft scheme via an online survey, with paper versions also available in Stirling Council libraries, until October 12. Businesses, accommodation providers, locals and tourists alike are also encouraged to provide feedback on the proposals at drop-in sessions scheduled across Stirling in September. The sessions include: Stirling's Albert Halls on September 9, from 11am-6pm; The John McLintock Hall, Balfron, on September 11, from 10am–6pm; Drymen Village hall on September 17, from 10am-6pm; Killin's McLaren Hall on September 23, from 10am-6pm; and Callander Youth Project Trust on September 29, from 10am-6pm. Last month, Stirling Council Leader, Cllr Gerry McGarvey, urged everyone, from accommodation providers to residents and visitors, to provide feedback on the scheme to ensure it reflects the needs of all of Stirling. If approved, the 'tourist tax' would come into effect from June 1, 2027, and would apply to bookings made on or after January 1, 2027. In May, we reported that a hospitality trade body had warned that the proposed 'tourist tax' could potentially damage tourism in the region. Leon Thompson, Executive Director of UK Hospitality Scotland, said: "Hospitality and tourism is so important to Stirling, as a major employer and driver of the local economy. "That economic and social contribution to our communities must be protected and we fundamentally believe that introducing a visitor levy could harm tourism in Stirling. "That's why Stirling Council should carry out a detailed impact assessment to understand the potential impact on visitors, tourism and the economy, before it embarks further on potentially introducing a levy." That came after the Association of Scotland's Self-Caterers (ASSC) said last December that the introduction of a visitor levy scheme on tourists in Stirling would mean that small businesses could become "de-facto unpaid tax collectors". Fiona Campbell, ASSC chief executive, said the implementation of the tax must "be done right". In April, a campaign group against the proposals warned the move could see the city's hospitality sector left with high levels of cancellations. The Back British Holidays campaign has issued a warning that up to 21% of potential holidaymakers might cancel their trips due to the extra tariff. They also stated that another 21% would cut back on their spending during their holiday. The council previously estimated that a five per cent levy could generate as much as £7.5million.
Telegraph
26 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Labour's decision to close the Fleming Fund is a false economy that puts our national security at risk
Health emergencies rarely respect borders or budgets. As I write, the world is facing an antibiotic emergency, with bacteria rapidly evolving resistance to the treatments we depend on to counter infectious diseases. Without effective antibiotic treatments, global health and the global economy are defenceless against the likes of pneumonia and sepsis. Antibiotics are the infrastructure of modern medicine, making chemotherapy, caesarean sections and hip replacements possible. More than 1.1million people die across the world every year because of antibiotic resistance, including 35,000 in the UK alone. These trends are increasing and inter-generational, with deaths in children tripling in the last three years. For the last decade, the UK has been at the forefront of global efforts to tackle the wider threat posed by antimicrobial resistance (AMR). While antibiotic resistance poses the single biggest threat to modern medicine, AMR points to a serious problem for all types of antimicrobial agents – antifungals, antivirals, and antiparasitics – threatening to reverse all the significant gains we've made against HIV, malaria, and tuberculosis. The UK's Fleming Fund has been a bulwark against such threats: building laboratory capacity in 25 low- and-middle-countries to detect emerging AMR outbreaks, allowing for proactive, data-driven responses before they escalate into global crises. Among many other things, the Fleming Fund has tripled the genomic sequencing capacity across the entire African continent – which even pivoted to detect Covid-19 variants. The UK government's decision to shut down the Fleming Fund is a false economy and directly puts our national security at risk. It will cost lives, as well as precious GDP that could be spent on frontline NHS services. If we are to learn any lessons at all from Covid-19, it should be that we cannot afford to cut corners when it comes to preventing and preparing for inevitable pathogenic threats. Bold investment to protect against AMR Decisions made today will directly impact our ability to counter and contain AMR pandemics in the very near future. When I was Chancellor in 2023, the Treasury recognised the economic health ramifications of AMR, and the UK government commissioned economic studies to better understand the risks and opportunities. The Institute of Health Metrics and Evaluation found that if AMR resistance accelerates in line with poorer-performing countries, the world faces an additional seven million deaths globally by 2050. The Center for Global Development then estimated that economically, this would wipe $1.7 trillion annually off global GDP by 2050 and it will cost $175 billion extra a year for health systems to treat people. Country-level estimates released recently estimate that the British economy would be $59 billion smaller in this scenario and the UK would spend an additional $2.8 billion a year treating superbugs. $296 billion and $188 billion would be wiped off the US and EU economies respectively. In contrast, this research shows that there would be large economic benefits to the UK and elsewhere if we invest in improving the treatment of infections. With the UK economy facing significant challenges and the NHS workforce facing rising pressures, now is the time to act boldly and invest proactively to protect against AMR. Whilst the UK alone cannot solve AMR, the UK can and should leverage its world-leading technical expertise and diplomatic leadership through the Fleming Fund, its Special Envoy on AMR, Dame Sally Davies, and other global investments in AMR. Even in a world where only 0.3 per cent of gross national income (GNI) is earmarked for international aid funding, there must be a budget line for AMR. If we are to drive economic growth and build resilience against health threats at home and abroad, we need decisive action with investments that put health security first. With an evolved Fleming Fund, we can mitigate against the worst effects of AMR by supporting research and development of new antibiotics, increasing access to treatments in countries where lack of access accelerates resistance, embedding large-scale education and training programmes to ensure the sustainable and responsible use of existing antibiotics, and harnessing AI for diagnostic tests and surveillance for the UK and the countries most severely impacted by AMR. A world without the Fleming Fund puts even greater pressure on UK government and the life sciences sector to find new ways to prepare for the pandemics we already detect and those we are yet to detect, to safeguard UK health and economic security. Now is the time for the government to step up.
