Energy Security and Net Zero Committee
Wednesday 21st October 2026
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
(began 1 day, 13 hours ago)
Watch LiveSkip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
10:00
Bill Esterson
-
-
Bill Esterson
From the department. Minister, you have a big announcement today, and we will undoubtedly you have a statement to give in the House later, but we will undoubtedly be pursuing it given today's announcement. Welcome to Minister Michael Shanks and to Dan Micklethwaite here. Because of the topic being absolutely relevant to what you've announced. Can you tell us to start with how today's announcement to approve jackdaw will contribute to the UK's energy resilience?
10:00
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Well, good morning, chair. It's good to be with you again on a really important topic. What we're announcing today is that the Energy Secretary has given her agreement, and the Nsta has given its consent to the jackdaw project to proceed. It is a gas project in the North Sea, which is an already licensed field and, members will recall was consented previously by the previous government that ended up in the courts. And we have then been responding to, to to that sense and have come to the decision today. It is important for a number of reasons.
Firstly, it does strengthen our energy security. It's important for me to say we have a diverse range of supplies of gas at the moment, from the continental shelf on our own side from Norway and from from other imports. But undoubtedly a project like this helps strengthen that energy security. And of course, because the court allowed the project to continue its development while awaiting consent, it will be able to bring that gas onto the system in the UK this winter, which is important, and we estimate it will make up 6% of our gas at its peak.
So it's important from that point of view. But we've also.
Firstly, it does strengthen our energy security. It's important for me to say we have a diverse range of supplies of gas at the moment, from the continental shelf on our own side from Norway and from from other imports. But undoubtedly a project like this helps strengthen that energy security. And of course, because the court allowed the project to continue its development while awaiting consent, it will be able to bring that gas onto the system in the UK this winter, which is important, and we estimate it will make up 6% of our gas at its peak.
So it's important from that point of view. But we've also.
10:01
10:01
10:02
10:02
10:02
10:02
10:02
10:02
10:03
10:03
10:03
10:03
10:03
10:03
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Yeah. Look, partly that is about recognising we're really clear that the long term future of this country does not lie in oil and gas. And so although gas remains important in the short term, we have to start building much more quickly the infrastructure that gets us away from fossil fuels. That is absolutely central to our long term resilience as a country. And so what we've announced today is that we will set up an energy wealth fund, which is about funding the transition. It will be capitalised initially with £2 billion upfront and will be added to with revenues from the jackdaw field as those come in.
But it is about funding the infrastructure that we need to get us off fossil fuels. So what we've already been doing as a government to date, bringing in private investment alongside public investment through the National Wealth Fund and Great British Energy. This is about increasing that and making sure that we are in a position where, although we need gas in the short term, we're building our way out of that need for gas in the long term.
But it is about funding the infrastructure that we need to get us off fossil fuels. So what we've already been doing as a government to date, bringing in private investment alongside public investment through the National Wealth Fund and Great British Energy. This is about increasing that and making sure that we are in a position where, although we need gas in the short term, we're building our way out of that need for gas in the long term.
10:04
10:05
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I think we're doing two things on that. We have always said the transition has to bring the communities with us, the workers who are powering the country right now in the North Sea and have done for 60 years, do an incredibly important job, but they are also the workers that will help us build the projects of the future. So it's in our own interest to make sure the transition puts them right at the heart of it. We're doing that through the North Sea Future plan, and I think I've spoken to this committee before about the North Sea Jobs Service, which will be in place early next year to support workers into new careers.
But this is also a really important part of that. The more we invest in the infrastructure here in Britain, the more we can keep the jobs and , crucially, the supply chain, which is where most of the jobs in oil and gas are. We can keep those in the UK, keep workers employed, keep investment in communities, but also build the infrastructure we need for the future.
But this is also a really important part of that. The more we invest in the infrastructure here in Britain, the more we can keep the jobs and , crucially, the supply chain, which is where most of the jobs in oil and gas are. We can keep those in the UK, keep workers employed, keep investment in communities, but also build the infrastructure we need for the future.
10:05
10:06
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Look, I think I want to say, first of all, that clearly domestic production from the UK continental shelf is important in an uncertain world. If we can get it from the North Sea, that does provide benefits to us. But I also want to be really clear that in the long term picture, it is relatively marginal in terms of the overall picture. We will not stop being a net importer of fossil fuels because of this decision. And I think this is the argument I've made previously. Our long term trend for more than two decades now has been to import more.
That's not going to change. And our answer long term to that security and and resilience point is to break away from fossil fuels so that we do have energy sovereignty here in the UK that's going to come from renewables and from nuclear. It's not going to come from oil and gas.
That's not going to change. And our answer long term to that security and and resilience point is to break away from fossil fuels so that we do have energy sovereignty here in the UK that's going to come from renewables and from nuclear. It's not going to come from oil and gas.
10:07
10:07
Melanie Onn
-
-
Melanie Onn
Morning, Minister. I was listening intently to the Secretary of State on the today programme. The first thing that she said in response to Nick Robinson's question was, this will not bring down bills. I wonder why, when cost of living is such a critical issue for this government, why constituents up and down the country should support this decision if it doesn't help them, nor does it help towards decarbonisation?
10:07
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Well, look, we have been very clear new oil and gas does not take a penny off bills in any argument that suggests it does is simply wrong. We trade as an international commodity what comes off the North Sea and we pay the price. We're always going to be a price taker. That's why we're saying our long term future doesn't lie in oil and gas, but it does do other things. And I think we need to be really clear. The vast majority of British homes are heated by gas. And so while we have to electrify the economy and move away from gas as home heating, that's not going to happen overnight.
And so our supply does matter. And if we can get it from the continental shelf, that is important. That's the judgment the Energy Secretary has made on this particular project. It also is important for jobs, and it also is important for a source of revenue, which we're going to fund into the transition. I'm not going to cut across anything the Chancellor might say in terms of wider support for consumers, but I would just say it is important we invest now in building the things that get us off fossil fuels in the long term, and people's bills have gone up because of our exposure to fossil fuels.
So we have to do that piece that breaks us from this. But this is really important for our short term energy security. Thank you.
And so our supply does matter. And if we can get it from the continental shelf, that is important. That's the judgment the Energy Secretary has made on this particular project. It also is important for jobs, and it also is important for a source of revenue, which we're going to fund into the transition. I'm not going to cut across anything the Chancellor might say in terms of wider support for consumers, but I would just say it is important we invest now in building the things that get us off fossil fuels in the long term, and people's bills have gone up because of our exposure to fossil fuels.
So we have to do that piece that breaks us from this. But this is really important for our short term energy security. Thank you.
10:08
Bill Esterson
-
-
Bill Esterson
Thanks very much. Just a question or two. On on on energy security. We've heard reports of recent attacks on the UK's or potential attacks on UK's energy infrastructure. What steps have you been taking as a department to increase awareness and resilience within the system? Following the reports of what we've seen from Russian submarines and indeed cyber cyber threats as well?
10:09
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Look, we take this. I mean, this is the most important responsibility I have as energy minister is the resilience and security of the system. I'll ask Dan maybe to to add to some of this. But the steps that we've been taking is, first of all, to continue to look at the government's risk assessment to make sure we have those risks fully up to date. There is a public version of that risk register. There is a version kept at a classified level to make sure we are really considering each of those risks. In turn, we'll be bringing forward an energy resilience strategy later this year, which picks up on many of the points that have been raised by this committee and others to make sure that we continue to have as as robust a a system as possible.
There is legislation going through Parliament at the moment in terms of cyber security, which continues to be a really important risk that we're looking at. But and across government, in each department that has a responsibility of security, there is a very active conversation about making sure we are as resilient as possible. And we're also preparing the public for, for the public having resilience in, in this situation as well. But Dan might want to add some more.
There is legislation going through Parliament at the moment in terms of cyber security, which continues to be a really important risk that we're looking at. But and across government, in each department that has a responsibility of security, there is a very active conversation about making sure we are as resilient as possible. And we're also preparing the public for, for the public having resilience in, in this situation as well. But Dan might want to add some more.
10:10
Graeme Downie
-
-
Graeme Downie
Yeah, sure. Yeah, that's absolutely right. We do ongoing monitoring of risks as well as this structural cyclical approach to that through the national security risk assessment. We do that on a tactical basis as well with our security partners, industry and the energy partners as well. There's already a strong framework in place, regulatory framework for cyber resilience that's going to be strengthened through the Cybersecurity and Resilience bill. And we have an energy cyber security strategy about going further and faster on that as well. And again, we talk tactically to the industry about that on on specific information.
When, as and when we have it, we've got quite strong resilience plans already for a wide range of disruption scenarios that are, if you like, cause agnostic, which we have already. And as the minister said on energy resilience strategy, we will take that further and think about how we can set clear energy resilience policy statements across a range of areas consistent with our cybersecurity plans, our critical undersea plans and our physical plans.
When, as and when we have it, we've got quite strong resilience plans already for a wide range of disruption scenarios that are, if you like, cause agnostic, which we have already. And as the minister said on energy resilience strategy, we will take that further and think about how we can set clear energy resilience policy statements across a range of areas consistent with our cybersecurity plans, our critical undersea plans and our physical plans.
10:11
10:11
Torcuil Crichton
-
-
Torcuil Crichton
Thanks, chair. Thanks very much. I know the session is meant to be about energy resilience, but part of that , obviously, is this jacket of decision today, which I welcome as a practical step in energy security. But it also is a a signal that we're in the North Sea today, tomorrow, and for many years to come as as that basin is worn down, which and I think, as the chair said, part of the most important part of this announcement today is this £2 billion fund to help transition from one industry to another. Can you give us any more clarity on that and how you will be engaging with, with, with the Scottish Government, for example, and whether this fund will be restricted to the North East.
We know the jobs and supply chains aren't just in Aberdeen, they're all across the UK. So how will this how will this £2 billion be felt in communities like mine and in others?
We know the jobs and supply chains aren't just in Aberdeen, they're all across the UK. So how will this how will this £2 billion be felt in communities like mine and in others?
10:12
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
It's really important. The first thing I'd just say is we shouldn't think about this as just £2 billion for the transition. This is on top of what we've capitalised into Great British energy, which is entirely about driving forward the transition. But of the government owning a stake in those projects and the National Wealth Fund, which has clean energy as one of its driving missions. So there's a 2 billion on top of that existing investment, and it is to make sure that we catalyse investment into clean energy projects that are creating jobs, but actually retaining jobs and retaining the supply chain.
The vast majority of the oil and gas jobs are in the supply chain. We need those jobs for for the clean energy sectors we have to build, and decisions about what that will be spent on will be on the basis of individual projects. But it is fair to assume that, given the number of projects that are already in Scotland and the potential of additional projects, the pipeline of of offshore wind and other technologies is much greater in Scotland, the vast majority of this will probably end up being spent in Scotland, and the supply chains are in Scotland.
But the benefits of this, and I think you've made this point before, are in every single postcode across the country in supply chain jobs, in manufacturing, and it ties into the wider strategy of the government around reindustrialisation, not just investing in projects, but making sure those projects are built in Britain with the jobs that go with it.
The vast majority of the oil and gas jobs are in the supply chain. We need those jobs for for the clean energy sectors we have to build, and decisions about what that will be spent on will be on the basis of individual projects. But it is fair to assume that, given the number of projects that are already in Scotland and the potential of additional projects, the pipeline of of offshore wind and other technologies is much greater in Scotland, the vast majority of this will probably end up being spent in Scotland, and the supply chains are in Scotland.
But the benefits of this, and I think you've made this point before, are in every single postcode across the country in supply chain jobs, in manufacturing, and it ties into the wider strategy of the government around reindustrialisation, not just investing in projects, but making sure those projects are built in Britain with the jobs that go with it.
10:13
Torcuil Crichton
-
-
Torcuil Crichton
10:14
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I haven't specifically yet as we've only announced it today. I mean, certainty is one thing I could not say for the SNP's energy strategy. I have no idea from one day to the next whether they're in favour of oil and gas or not. And I don't think we've seen very much clarity on that. But I will say on on delivering on the clean energy future that we need a very good collaboration with the Scottish Government. Energy Minister, it's important that we work together where we can on things, but we do need to move at pace on things like consenting, which is the responsibility of the Scottish Government to make sure we're delivering the projects that people of Scotland expect us to build together.
10:14
Torcuil Crichton
-
-
Torcuil Crichton
Let's move on to the kind of the wider theme of this, this session, which is meant to be about resilience and and how the energy infrastructure of the country is, is protected. What, what apart from what you've said to the chair, what further steps do you need to take to to future proof the energy system from cyber attacks and physical attacks?
10:15
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I think there's a number of things. I mean, one of the things I didn't say before that I think is important is I'm now chairing a group of senior chief executives in industry, because government, of course, operates none of this infrastructure directly is is in the hands of individual organisations. And we've got to make sure that resilience, particularly cyber resilience, actually is taken seriously in every single part of every single organisation. One of the things we've been driving that forward on is making sure that we've got the industry led technical knowledge that's necessary, that people have got sufficient training at all levels of organisations.
We are looking at whether we need to review legislation, whether we've got the right powers to be able to do more in that space, and we're also looking at all sorts of national emergency planning, cyber resilience planning. All of these things are live processes we're working through, but building resilience at every single level of the energy system is what we see is absolutely crucial. It's one thing for a company boards to say it's important. It's another thing for the person operating the terminal to see it as their absolute priority. And we're driving that forward at the moment as well.
We are looking at whether we need to review legislation, whether we've got the right powers to be able to do more in that space, and we're also looking at all sorts of national emergency planning, cyber resilience planning. All of these things are live processes we're working through, but building resilience at every single level of the energy system is what we see is absolutely crucial. It's one thing for a company boards to say it's important. It's another thing for the person operating the terminal to see it as their absolute priority. And we're driving that forward at the moment as well.
10:16
Graeme Downie
-
-
Graeme Downie
Just to add to that, the industry and the department work really closely with the National Protective Services Authority and the National Cyber Security Centre as well, who regularly brief and work quite closely with the industry on the steps they need to take. And just bringing it back to something the minister said before about the energy transition. That, of course, is it's a once in a generation opportunity to ensure that what we're building is resilient in school by design, which is far more efficient than retrofitting or trying to patch up the system. The system that may may be in place right now.
So there's just a big opportunity with the transition to, to strengthen things as we build them.
So there's just a big opportunity with the transition to, to strengthen things as we build them.
10:16
10:17
Graeme Downie
-
-
Graeme Downie
I would say very well. It's something that government takes incredibly seriously, not just because of the the wider external environment, but also because of how important the energy system is to households, but to the rest of the critical national infrastructure of the country as well. So it's it's understood very well, and we work quite closely with the rest of the department to make sure, as they're developing their policies, that they take security and resilience as as a sort of as a fundamental requirement of that.
10:17
Torcuil Crichton
-
-
Torcuil Crichton
Okay. Just just one last question in passing that we've had reports, not the concerns about cyber security, but also physical security. And we've heard reports of unidentified lights, possibly drones around North Sea structures and infrastructure without given well, with giving something away, what practical steps are we taking to make sure the physical infrastructure is protected?
10:17
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Look, again, the physical resilience and security is hugely important. I would say, although we take these threats very seriously and they are developing at all times, we actually have a very good success rate in protecting that infrastructure. But clearly the threat landscape is is always changing. And so we have to stay on top of that. On drones in particular, we've been working with industry to make sure they have appropriate guidance on what steps they can take is drones are obviously becoming much more prevalent than ever before, and people can get their hands on drones in a way that they couldn't before.
We're exploring whether we do need to go further in that, in terms of looking at the National Security Act to take any additional powers on that, including, you know, looking at whether we need more restrictions on flying and other aspects. But we keep all of this under review. And again, it goes back to the point around bringing industry with us on this. Ofgem has taken very seriously security and resilience to make sure that companies that are regulated by Ofgem are investing in their physical and and cyber resilience to make sure it is as robust as it needs to be.
And just on the previous point, I think this is something that's taken seriously right across government. Dan Jarvis, as the security minister, is chairing a number of ministerial groups to make sure every single bit of government is focused on critical national infrastructure. But also, as I said before, domestic resilience, making sure as a country we are prepared. We are a bit of an outlier as a country in how much we bring the people with us in their own personal resilience. That is going to be important not just for security, but actually in responding to storms and other events so that people have a bit of personal resilience as well.
We're exploring whether we do need to go further in that, in terms of looking at the National Security Act to take any additional powers on that, including, you know, looking at whether we need more restrictions on flying and other aspects. But we keep all of this under review. And again, it goes back to the point around bringing industry with us on this. Ofgem has taken very seriously security and resilience to make sure that companies that are regulated by Ofgem are investing in their physical and and cyber resilience to make sure it is as robust as it needs to be.
And just on the previous point, I think this is something that's taken seriously right across government. Dan Jarvis, as the security minister, is chairing a number of ministerial groups to make sure every single bit of government is focused on critical national infrastructure. But also, as I said before, domestic resilience, making sure as a country we are prepared. We are a bit of an outlier as a country in how much we bring the people with us in their own personal resilience. That is going to be important not just for security, but actually in responding to storms and other events so that people have a bit of personal resilience as well.
10:19
10:19
10:19
10:19
10:19
Wera Hobhouse
-
-
Wera Hobhouse
Thank you. So following on on physical attacks, I was at a breakfast meeting bringing together the industry around flex. So and the argument is very clear. It's much easier to sort of attack one big central power station, for example, or installation, rather than having hundreds and thousands of little installations. So in the forthcoming Energy Independence Bill, will that actually will there be a reflection on how we should increase, you know, the flexibility markets, recognising that lots of energy is now going to be created decentralised and that in many ways that is the best way of physically protecting.
How is the government thinking about this?
How is the government thinking about this?
10:20
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Well, I completely agree with you. You tempt me to to reveal what is in the Energy Independence Bill, which I will I will not do at this stage, but but we will see it soon. But you're right about about both decentralisation of, of energy infrastructure and flexibility. And we see that as critical. And that's partly why we're investing in, in the first long duration energy storage in 40 years. It's why we're seeing more battery and, and shorter duration storage deployment so that we've got that flexibility in the system. But we also want to see much more deployment of the ability of consumers to be able to make use of flexibility in terms of times of use tariffs that benefits the system as well as consumers.
The broader point from a resilience point of view, I think is absolutely clear, though. This is something Dan said earlier. We have a once in a generation chance in the system we're building to build a decentralized system that reduces the the risk of individual parts of the system because it is decentralised right across the country in tens of thousands of pieces of infrastructure. There are complexities in doing that. But I would look to Ukraine as a really good example, actually, which is building back from a tax on energy infrastructure by building the exact kind of decentralised energy that we're building, partly to decarbonize, but partly because it is much more difficult to to attack individual parts and have a wider impact on the system.
So it is a strength by design, and it's another reason why we see it as a hugely important future to what the energy system looks like.
The broader point from a resilience point of view, I think is absolutely clear, though. This is something Dan said earlier. We have a once in a generation chance in the system we're building to build a decentralized system that reduces the the risk of individual parts of the system because it is decentralised right across the country in tens of thousands of pieces of infrastructure. There are complexities in doing that. But I would look to Ukraine as a really good example, actually, which is building back from a tax on energy infrastructure by building the exact kind of decentralised energy that we're building, partly to decarbonize, but partly because it is much more difficult to to attack individual parts and have a wider impact on the system.
So it is a strength by design, and it's another reason why we see it as a hugely important future to what the energy system looks like.
10:21
10:21
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
We want it to be a partnership. And look, it is at the moment, resilience absolutely has to sit with central government and local government in partnership, because the levers that we both have, the local knowledge and also local levels of trust and responding to incidents, has to sit with both. I think it's one of the things the Prime Minister has been very clear on around strengthening the devolution agenda and that partnership with local government at all levels. It's also some of the work we've been doing in Storm Arwen, and the report that came after that was partly around how government responds to to major incidents, a storm in that case, but it would apply to other things.
Rehearsing some of this and building the the training and the the support that local resilience forums have is a really important part of this as well. But it's got to be about both.
Rehearsing some of this and building the the training and the the support that local resilience forums have is a really important part of this as well. But it's got to be about both.
10:22
10:23
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I can't go into the detail on something we haven't published yet, but it is about our general sense of resilience in the energy system, which is responding to a whole series of things. Storms and extreme weather events are going to become much more frequent. We saw in the summer heatwaves having a real impact on gas generators being able to generate, for example, there are widespread impacts that we have to take into consideration that will all be part of it. But our response, and I suppose what the strategy is about doing, is focusing on the overall resilience of the system and the further steps we've got to take, and that's whether it is to respond to storms or or threat actors.
10:23
Wera Hobhouse
-
-
Wera Hobhouse
I mean, okay, I'm asking the next question about the strategy, and you might tell me, I can't tell you because the strategy is not published, but I'm trying anyway. It should it should the UK be prioritising domestic manufacturing of components with then subsequent increased cost to reduce supply chain dependencies?
10:24
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Look, I think this is really important. I mean, I can say that, well, the government's position on this is because we've been clear on it for two and a half years. We have to build supply chains much more in the UK. That is a security and an economic imperative. And it is a view shared across Europe as well about domestic supply chains in Europe. It's really important because in an uncertain world, relying on supply chains from from other parts of the world makes it more difficult for us to maintain our resilience. Obviously, the more we manufacture in the UK, the more economic benefit we're getting from that.
But also the transition to clean power is not just happening in Britain, it's happening right across the globe, and there is competition for supply chains. And if we can build and manufacture more of this in Britain, we've got more of a chance of getting it quickly onto the system and helping us deliver the outcomes we want to see. So from a security point of view, it's important. But actually it's the economic opportunity of the clean power transition.
But also the transition to clean power is not just happening in Britain, it's happening right across the globe, and there is competition for supply chains. And if we can build and manufacture more of this in Britain, we've got more of a chance of getting it quickly onto the system and helping us deliver the outcomes we want to see. So from a security point of view, it's important. But actually it's the economic opportunity of the clean power transition.
10:24
Graeme Downie
-
-
Graeme Downie
And just to build on that, if I may, we've got very good information on the supply chain, the critical inputs to energy, national critical national infrastructure, working with the Department for business, Innovation, Science and Technology, and as the minister said, having clear policies in place to boost domestic supply chains is really important. I draw attention to the Clean Energy Supply Chain Fund, which was £1 billion to support companies with high growth potential to develop those domestic supply chains and the clean industry bonus as well, which was also to reward the supply chain development of investment projects in the UK.
Clearly, there's only so far you can go, and we work very closely with industry on what stockpiles and reserves they have of critical components and are talking to them about standardisation of components as well, to make it easier to move components around should we need to do that.
Clearly, there's only so far you can go, and we work very closely with industry on what stockpiles and reserves they have of critical components and are talking to them about standardisation of components as well, to make it easier to move components around should we need to do that.
10:25
Wera Hobhouse
-
-
Wera Hobhouse
But just slightly moving away from that, the industry will always tell us that the problem is that energy is too expensive. So the first thing, obviously for business needs to be that our energy price, our electricity price in particular will have to come down. So there is still no clear evidence that the government is really working hardest on making sure that energy prices are coming down, because otherwise we can talk about wanting to bring manufacturing back into this country, but it won't happen if energy is too expensive.
10:26
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Well, you're not going to get any argument from me or anyone else in government that energy prices are too high. We've been very clear on that, that it's far too high. The Prime Minister has set out the ambition that we will equalise with the European average of energy prices to deal with that competitive issue that you raise, but it's not going to happen overnight. And the challenge for this is the government is investing significant amounts of money to bring down the costs of crucial industries, but we have to fundamentally break the link with gas if we're going to bring down prices to be for everyone and in the long term.
And so we're doing in parallel investments to support targeted industries with electricity costs. But meanwhile, building the clean power system that breaks that link and gets bills down for everyone and in the long run is the thing that helps deliver domestic manufacturing. I would just say, though, on the cost point, there is always a trade off here. And, you know, we've been really clear about this that we want to see domestic supply chains wherever possible. And we're we're doing everything we can to support those domestic supply chains. But we also have to tackle affordability. And that is attention, clearly, because it is more expensive to build things here than elsewhere.
But there is a social benefit that governments for far too long have not calculated about domestic procurement that we have to shift. If we manufacture things in Britain, we have a more resilient supply chain, first of all. But we create jobs which creates additional tax receipts, and we deal with some of the fundamental issues in this country about us just being agnostic about industrial policy for far too long. So there are social benefits of saying we want to build things here in Britain, and there are energy security arguments for why those supply chains being here leads to a more resilient system.
And so we're doing in parallel investments to support targeted industries with electricity costs. But meanwhile, building the clean power system that breaks that link and gets bills down for everyone and in the long run is the thing that helps deliver domestic manufacturing. I would just say, though, on the cost point, there is always a trade off here. And, you know, we've been really clear about this that we want to see domestic supply chains wherever possible. And we're we're doing everything we can to support those domestic supply chains. But we also have to tackle affordability. And that is attention, clearly, because it is more expensive to build things here than elsewhere.
But there is a social benefit that governments for far too long have not calculated about domestic procurement that we have to shift. If we manufacture things in Britain, we have a more resilient supply chain, first of all. But we create jobs which creates additional tax receipts, and we deal with some of the fundamental issues in this country about us just being agnostic about industrial policy for far too long. So there are social benefits of saying we want to build things here in Britain, and there are energy security arguments for why those supply chains being here leads to a more resilient system.
10:27
10:28
10:28
Christopher Chope
-
-
Christopher Chope
You've said on several occasions that gas will remain part of the energy mix up to and beyond 2050. So can I ask you a few questions about gas security? National the national energy system operator, Miso, has said that they have identified an emerging risk to gas supply security in the. In the unlikely event of the loss of the single largest piece of gas infrastructure in the system. What is the single largest piece of gas infrastructure in the system and what is the threat to it?
10:28
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
So we each year do an assessment, something called N1, which is essentially an assessment of can the gas system cope if the biggest single piece of infrastructure was not in an extremely unlikely scenario, I should say, involving if that was no longer available. So, for example, an LNG terminal, Milford Haven would be an example of an LNG terminal. But the second part of the test is it has to be a 1 in 20 demand day, as the coldest winter day in the UK could expect in 20 years. So a combination of things have to have to occur at the same time.
That is the resilience test. We have the system. It never has to, in all likelihood, ever reach that point. But the whole point is that it should be resilient. We should be able to we should have sufficient redundancy in the system to meet that test every single year. And the Secretary of State has to be able to to be assured that that is the case every year.
That is the resilience test. We have the system. It never has to, in all likelihood, ever reach that point. But the whole point is that it should be resilient. We should be able to we should have sufficient redundancy in the system to meet that test every single year. And the Secretary of State has to be able to to be assured that that is the case every year.
10:29
10:30
10:30
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
It it will remain important until the last customer has been disconnected. And we are working to on a domestic level and an industrial level to move customers away from gas. But that's not going to happen overnight. So the network itself, the transmission network, and the distribution network that goes into streets and homes will remain important. We do have a challenge, which we're working through at the moment, in which we need to work with industry on, around how we continue to invest in that gas grid. While we will see customers disconnecting and we'll and that will be quite piecemeal, customers will disconnect as they choose to take on other technologies.
That is a real challenge for us as a country. But the gas network is hugely resilient. It has been invested and upgraded in much more recently than the electricity network, for example, and we need to maintain that while moving people off it as quickly as we can.
That is a real challenge for us as a country. But the gas network is hugely resilient. It has been invested and upgraded in much more recently than the electricity network, for example, and we need to maintain that while moving people off it as quickly as we can.
10:31
Christopher Chope
-
-
Christopher Chope
I ask you quickly about the LNG network, because there are a lot of people off grid homes dependent upon LNG, and there seems to be some confusion in the government as to what the policy is towards LNG. Do you support the promotion of liquid gas as an alternative fuel for housing into the indefinite future?
10:31
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
We've been agnostic around exactly what choices individual consumers should make. We're not legislating to to ban people from making their own choices, but we do want to make it affordable and accessible for people to choose technologies that help us decarbonise. That's really important, and we will continue to do that. I would say off off grid households are not off the electricity grid. So yes, they're off the gas grid, but they do have access to electricity. And so some of the electrification technologies, be it solar and batteries or heat pumps are available. And we I don't think I've got the exact number in front of me, but we can share it with the committee.
We have seen a real uptick in investment in that from off grid households. Since the situation in the Middle East has developed, because the economics of it have become much clearer for people.
We have seen a real uptick in investment in that from off grid households. Since the situation in the Middle East has developed, because the economics of it have become much clearer for people.
10:32
Christopher Chope
-
-
Christopher Chope
Electricity still remains, as you accept, far, far too expensive. But if there is going to be investment by the liquid gas industry in LNG for households, then it needs to have a clear signal from the government that the government recognises in the long term that this is a worthwhile investment, including investment in biogas. At the moment that's that hasn't been forthcoming, which is causing the stuttering in in the that industry, unlike what's happening on the continent. So can you can you clearly say today that there is a strong long term future in the government's eyes for the LNG industry?
10:32
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Look, I can say what I've said already, which is, you know, households will make choices about the technologies that they want to use in their own home and their own individual circumstances. We said in the Warm Homes plan, for example, we would not choose individual technologies that the government would would say households should choose, but we would incentivize be it heat pumps, solar panels, batteries and others. And I am interested in developments in biogas and other things. But the government obviously has to weigh up the investment cost of doing that versus the long term trajectory we want to be on as a country.
And so I'm not for or against these things, but there is often a sense that one individual thing will solve the whole issue. The truth is we're going to need a whole range of things, and they will be different in every part of the country. And the last thing I'd just say is back to the devolution agenda. That's why the government's commitment to devolve the entirety of the Warm Homes plan is so important, because choices will be made in individual parts of the country that will be different, and it's right and proper that those are made by local decision makers.
And so I'm not for or against these things, but there is often a sense that one individual thing will solve the whole issue. The truth is we're going to need a whole range of things, and they will be different in every part of the country. And the last thing I'd just say is back to the devolution agenda. That's why the government's commitment to devolve the entirety of the Warm Homes plan is so important, because choices will be made in individual parts of the country that will be different, and it's right and proper that those are made by local decision makers.
10:34
Christopher Chope
-
-
Christopher Chope
In decision by government is really inhibiting investment. A whole lot of different areas, including, as I mentioned, I think last time we we had a session which was on the rough system, the storage facility, and there's been no clear decision on that. There's been no clear decision on the future of of LNG. You've brought forward today what I think is a very welcome decision in relation to the the new gas gas field, but that's been delayed far too long. What are you doing to bring different parts of your department together to deliver a strong lead in these in all these areas, and stop the indecision?
10:34
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Well, I'm not aware that there's a specific decision we haven't made on biogas in front of me. If there is something I'm not aware of, then then I will go back and look at it. I get the general point is about steers from government. I hear that regularly from industry. I can't always give a kind of running steer on things, but I don't think there's any specific decisions in that that are in front of me. But we did . We did respond to consultation on the gas system in transition, which asked a number of searching questions that, in all honesty, we should have been looking at a decade ago or more in terms of what the gas system, which has been in transition for a long time, looks like, and how we maintain that investment now and build for the future.
On the storage point, I'd just say, you know, as a commercial decision for Centrica, they have asked the government for a particular mechanism and we'll respond to that. But storage plays a much smaller role in the British system than it does for our European neighbours, for example, because we have a diverse range of suppliers, not least pipeline from Norway and our own continental shelf, as well as the LNG import terminals. So storage just plays a fundamentally different role.
On the storage point, I'd just say, you know, as a commercial decision for Centrica, they have asked the government for a particular mechanism and we'll respond to that. But storage plays a much smaller role in the British system than it does for our European neighbours, for example, because we have a diverse range of suppliers, not least pipeline from Norway and our own continental shelf, as well as the LNG import terminals. So storage just plays a fundamentally different role.
10:35
Bill Esterson
-
-
Bill Esterson
Thank you. We'll move on. Before we move on to to Matt Weston, you you were talking here about customers who are off the gas grid, but on the electricity grid. Does that suggest that there will be special support for those customers to enable them to, to electrify their homes in heat and, and as well as in power?
10:36
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Not specifically at the moment, but I think one of the things around the devolving the warm homes plan is that we will then look at how that funding could be used in specific parts of the country that have a significantly higher number of off gas grid households, but we have already provided increased support for the deployment of heat pumps and solar panels and other technologies already, so that those households can take that up. And we have seen a real uptake uptake in that already.
10:36
10:36
10:36
10:37
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
I just want to touch really on offshore security and interested to know in terms of the cables, the power, electricity, power generation, cables coming ashore, typically, how many cables have we got coming in as a risk of vulnerability and how what percentage of our electricity is coming, typically either winter or summer or average from those cables, whether they be from other countries or from our arrays?
10:37
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I don't have the exact numbers to hand, forgive me, but I can. I can absolutely send them to you. The interconnectors are are hugely important between the continent and ourselves. I would say we use the interconnectors and have done for a long time to, to ensure that we're able to balance electricity between the import and export across helps both Europe and the UK. So that remains hugely important. But equally, we have the we have the generation capacity in the UK to meet that demand as well.
But the interconnect is clearly very important to.
But the interconnect is clearly very important to.
10:38
10:38
10:38
10:38
10:38
10:38
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I would say, firstly, we haven't had an attack directly on that infrastructure. We obviously continue to monitor this closely. The Defence Secretary now, the Chancellor, made a very clear statement recently around Russian activity on top of subsea infrastructure. So we are aware that there is a level of interest in this, but we obviously take as many proactive steps as we can to mitigate that risk. Partly what I was saying earlier on around bringing industry around the table is that the interconnector is a really good example of where it's private industry that manages the sites, but we obviously have an interest in making sure that the security arrangements are as robust as possible.
So we continue to keep all of that under review. And the cyber security risk comes into that as well.
So we continue to keep all of that under review. And the cyber security risk comes into that as well.
10:39
10:39
10:40
10:40
10:40
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Dan might want to come in on this. I'm always sort of cautious about going too far into hypotheticals, in particular pieces of infrastructure. But clearly we know from examples. In the Baltic Sea, for example, there have been incidents involving cables. And as I said earlier, we've obviously seen some interest in our subsea infrastructure. We recognise it is a risk and it is on the risk register on that basis. But equally, we think we have sufficient measures in place to tackle it. And importantly, even if we were to lose a single interconnector, we would have redundancy built into the system.
10:41
Graeme Downie
-
-
Graeme Downie
Yeah. So it comes back to those security of supply standards that are built in for electricity and gas. Do you take account of loss of assets? We just talked about gas a moment ago, and it's the same for electricity as well. And because we have that distribution, as you all our committee member colleague mentioned earlier on, we can absorb the the loss of some of these things which do occasionally go on outage for maintenance reasons.
Anyway.
Anyway.
10:41
10:41
10:41
10:41
10:41
10:42
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I think it is well developed, but we want it to go further. The Hamburg Declaration was an important moment. I've attended the Nsec, the group of North Sea countries, twice now. It is an important group of ministers who meet. But actually the official engagement between those countries on a on a much more regular basis is important. We're also doing much more exercising between countries to make sure we're prepared to respond to incidents. And Dan might want to say more about this, but I was in Lithuania more than a year ago now, I think to see some of the work that Dennis is doing there on sharing our expertise, but actually also learning from the Baltic states response to where there have been incidents as well.
So it is an ongoing piece of work, but we recognise even closer collaboration across the North Sea countries is absolutely crucial.
So it is an ongoing piece of work, but we recognise even closer collaboration across the North Sea countries is absolutely crucial.
10:43
10:43
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Yeah, we we're still working through some of the lessons from that. But it was a really important moment for us to recognize just how real the threat is. We explored in some detail that with the security task force that I. Chair, to make sure that companies are aware of the risks. One of the really key lessons I mentioned earlier in one of my other answers is that it has to be embedded throughout a whole organisation, because some of the real risks that were identified were actually from practices that were quite straightforward to resolve but weren't acted on.
Standardization of passwords is a is a is an example that we all know about. Some are probably still guilty of, of not taking passwords, security as serious as we could. So there are some sort of straightforward operational things that we learned that we should improve on. There are wider lessons which we're learning, and we've had good engagement with the Polish government on this. And there are obviously security conversations that we have as well, a more sort of classified level on detail as well.
Standardization of passwords is a is a is an example that we all know about. Some are probably still guilty of, of not taking passwords, security as serious as we could. So there are some sort of straightforward operational things that we learned that we should improve on. There are wider lessons which we're learning, and we've had good engagement with the Polish government on this. And there are obviously security conversations that we have as well, a more sort of classified level on detail as well.
10:44
Claire Young
-
-
Claire Young
Okay. You've mentioned the energy sector, cybersecurity strategy, the Cyber Security and Resilience bill, and we've also got Ofgem and Disney's consultation on reshaping cyber regulation. So how do these all interact with each other? Are we are we in danger of having sort of a mish mash of things happening. And and is it clear who's who's, who's ultimately in charge of each?
10:44
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Yeah. Look, Dan, Dan wants to come in on this, which which will be really useful. The one thing I just say is I think we are really aware of that, which is why the work that Dan Jarvis is leading in the Cabinet Office is about cross-government resilience and bringing all of these strategies together. And crucially, I always say this strategies are only useful if they're actually implemented. And that is the really important piece of work is not just about having risks and a risk register and mitigations on the risk register, but are those being implemented, and are we following up and making sure that that action is dealing with the risk?
And that is the kind of practical work that's going on right across government as well?
And that is the kind of practical work that's going on right across government as well?
10:45
Graeme Downie
-
-
Graeme Downie
Yeah. Just to come in on , on clarity. So we start with the cyber assessment framework under the Network Information Systems Regulations. That's basically the regulatory basis for cyber resilience in the UK. That's split into oil and upstream gas, for which the designates is the named competent authority, and downstream gas and electricity, which is shared between Designates and Ofgem. But Ofgem take out the regulatory role there, whereas we did the regulatory role for oil and upstream gas. Those are the things that set the basic profile that industry needs to reach. And if they reach the basic profile, they'll be resilient to quite a lot of some of the incidents that we are seeing.
Then also a timetable for them to get to the enhanced standard as well, which further strengthens them to more sophisticated, sophisticated levels of attack. What the Cyber Security and Resilience Bill does is it extends the scope of that regulation to a wider set of entities, including the supply chain, who provide critical services, including IT services to the to the energy sector, because you're only as strong as your weakest link in the in the supply chain. And it also increases the enforcement powers for, for government as well. So that's how they how they fit together. But we've got clear, clearly defined responsibilities for who is responsible for regulating what.
Then also a timetable for them to get to the enhanced standard as well, which further strengthens them to more sophisticated, sophisticated levels of attack. What the Cyber Security and Resilience Bill does is it extends the scope of that regulation to a wider set of entities, including the supply chain, who provide critical services, including IT services to the to the energy sector, because you're only as strong as your weakest link in the in the supply chain. And it also increases the enforcement powers for, for government as well. So that's how they how they fit together. But we've got clear, clearly defined responsibilities for who is responsible for regulating what.
10:46
Claire Young
-
-
Claire Young
Extending the responsibility to supply chain. And one of the issues that we've discussed before the committee is, is the the issue of overseas supply chain. So how does how does the how does the regulations apply to that? How how will the sorry, the bill apply apply to that ? If it's extending those responsibilities.
10:46
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
On supply chain. We obviously make decisions on a case by case basis. We've talked in the committee before about one particular decision that we made. It's important that those are on a on an individual basis, and those assessments are always made on on particular projects. The supply chain is really crucial to this. But equally, the balance we have to strike is about making sure resilience is everyone's responsibility. Security should be everyone's responsibility, but there are key actors who have a particular responsibility, which is what these strategies are really trying to get at. But collectively, the system has to work towards the same aims.
And that is the the general steer that we give across the energy sector.
And that is the the general steer that we give across the energy sector.
10:47
10:47
10:47
10:47
Claire Young
-
-
Claire Young
If I can come on to the increasing threat from a I. Can you explain what you're doing to prepare for for AI and cybersecurity attacks involving AI and how obviously it can be used defensively as well. So how are you doing that? And whether it matters that we we do not have any of the top AI models in the world. There's very it's very dominated by America and China, with France having Mistral as well. But yeah, so if you could explain how we're using what we're doing to prepare, what are we doing, how we're using it defensively and, and whether you're concerned about our ability to do that, given the way the AI market is going.
10:48
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
It's a hugely important question and a live discussion on, on the sovereign capability that we have in the UK that's going on right across government. I think Kanishka Narayan's appointment as a cabinet minister, looking at AI as an important statement of how crucial we see that across government. On AI in particular, I think you're absolutely right to recognise that there is an increased threat from the capabilities that people have by being able to use AI, but there is a real opportunity for the energy system there as well. Also for flexibility that we were talking about earlier, if we can can run a smarter system with AI, there's real benefits that come from that.
And I think there are a number of things we're doing. Ofgem published guidance in May around the the safe use of AI within the energy system. We do want to see much more innovation in this space. So we don't want energy companies to be resistant to the opportunities that might come from it, but it has to be deployed in a safe way. And then we're obviously looking much more at the security aspects around how we can make sure we're protecting infrastructure from the use of AI as a as a form of attack.
And I think there are a number of things we're doing. Ofgem published guidance in May around the the safe use of AI within the energy system. We do want to see much more innovation in this space. So we don't want energy companies to be resistant to the opportunities that might come from it, but it has to be deployed in a safe way. And then we're obviously looking much more at the security aspects around how we can make sure we're protecting infrastructure from the use of AI as a as a form of attack.
10:49
10:50
10:50
10:50
10:50
10:50
10:50
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I think probably don't want to be drawn on, on, on kind of individual incidents that do or don't occur. I mean, we the resilience of our system is such that any, any such attempts have not been successful. But I think I want to be careful not to go too far into it. But we recognise generally AI significantly increases capabilities of people who might not otherwise have that capability.
10:50
Claire Young
-
-
Claire Young
If I can ask one final question on this. So talked about the the use of AI in in both offensive and defensively when it comes to cyber attacks, but it also the data centres to run. It also create a great demand on the system. And I asked the Secretary of State last week about , about how we're making sure that we prioritise the things that we need. We're in a limited capacity to provide a certain limit of what we can provide in supply for electricity, how we ensure that the demand isn't being taken up with things that don't further our national interest.
So are you concerned that the demand demand that AI is creating is is a threat to our energy resilience?
So are you concerned that the demand demand that AI is creating is is a threat to our energy resilience?
10:51
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
No, I wouldn't characterize it as a threat, but I would say it's a serious issue that the sheer amount of demand is something we are we are really looking at. I think we shouldn't see data centres as as as not providing any benefit to the country. The having sovereign compute in the UK is hugely important for us.
10:51
10:51
10:51
10:51
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I totally I totally understand the point. And yeah, you're right. I mean, I've been at this committee before talking about the generation connections queue. The demand queue is becoming increasingly difficult because of the proliferation of data centres in that queue. We are going to have to manage that. And we've announced some measures to to do that. There's a balance to be struck. There is actually a real opportunity. If we deploy data centres strategically on the system, we soak up some of the excess electricity we're currently generating but can't use in the system. That's good for affordability for everyone because they become a customer for that electricity, and it can reduce constraints if done strategically.
We are working with the industry to look at whether our data centres could be much more flexible in their use of electricity. At the moment it's very much always on model, but actually, are there AI models that don't require that foreign power all the time? And so we could then make use of excess power at specific times of the day. So we're really open to that. But we also see AI as crucial for our economic growth. And therefore we will we will make sure we have got the electricity that's necessary and work through the processes to get those on the system where appropriate.
But of course, data centres go through the same connections processes as any other demand on the system.
We are working with the industry to look at whether our data centres could be much more flexible in their use of electricity. At the moment it's very much always on model, but actually, are there AI models that don't require that foreign power all the time? And so we could then make use of excess power at specific times of the day. So we're really open to that. But we also see AI as crucial for our economic growth. And therefore we will we will make sure we have got the electricity that's necessary and work through the processes to get those on the system where appropriate.
But of course, data centres go through the same connections processes as any other demand on the system.
10:53
10:53
Lizzi Collinge
-
-
Lizzi Collinge
Thank you chair. And I think my colleagues have covered quite a lot of the questions that I had about the jackdaw decision. So I'm going to move on to talk about the role of nuclear in energy resilience. So obviously nuclear energy gives us domestic baseload. But a lot of our nuclear generation is coming towards the end of its life. Are you confident, Minister, that nuclear regulators are are able to take into account strategic factors such as energy resilience, security of supply when they're discharging their functions, whether that's to do with new build nuclear or indeed the the end of life of existing power stations.
10:53
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
It's really important. I chaired the nuclear regulation delivery group last week, which is the implementation panel, which is moving forward on the Fingleton recommendations to make sure we're implementing those as as quickly as possible. One of those recommendations was about making sure nuclear regulation can take a basket of factors into consideration. Always, nuclear safety and security will be the overriding consideration for nuclear regulation. We're not suggesting at all we should move from that, but there are a number of other factors energy security being a crucial one that that we need to take into account. I'm not going to sit here and say that we are in the strongest places we should have been, because we are going to see now a significant amount of nuclear decommissioning before we have brought on the the fleet that we need for the future.
And that's because of decades of indecision on nuclear. I think the last time we took a decision on a nuclear power station that is currently generating, I wasn't even born. And that sort of demonstrates the fact that as a country, we have been asleep at the wheel on making the decisions we need. We're now making up for that. And the Nuclear Regulation Task Force is all about making sure we can build nuclear safely, but much more quickly.
And that's because of decades of indecision on nuclear. I think the last time we took a decision on a nuclear power station that is currently generating, I wasn't even born. And that sort of demonstrates the fact that as a country, we have been asleep at the wheel on making the decisions we need. We're now making up for that. And the Nuclear Regulation Task Force is all about making sure we can build nuclear safely, but much more quickly.
10:55
10:55
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I am, and I've given very specific steers on this one, is to make sure that we have the outcome in mind throughout it. I don't want us to become too wedded to individual ways of implementing things. If we can find faster ways of achieving the same outcome. And I've given that steer really clearly. We had Sizewell C presenting at the implementation panel, for example, about innovation they're doing to to make decisions faster that isn't in Fingleton, but actually is really important. So I think there are opportunities to go further. But we are also preparing to introduce the Nuclear Regulation Bill early next year to make sure that where we need to legislate, we will legislate, and our aim is to keep that bill as focused as possible so that we can get it through Parliament, hopefully as quickly as possible and into implementation.
But I've also been really clear we should be trying to do what we can without legislation to achieve the outcomes that we want to achieve.
But I've also been really clear we should be trying to do what we can without legislation to achieve the outcomes that we want to achieve.
10:56
10:56
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I think, look, there are always going to be arguments that we can go faster and things. I don't think it's just for the department. I think it's for regulators to work together. I am confident from the conversation I've had right across the regulatory landscape, that people are seized , of the ambitions that we have, that recognise how we're going to get there. That always requires people to move out of their comfort zones, and the proof will be in the pudding of it's one thing to say everyone is supportive of it. It's another thing when we get into implementation.
And that's partly why I've been very, very clear that people will have to move from what might be entrenched positions to get to the outcome, the shared outcome that we all want. That's for government and regulators, but it's also for industry as well to to be part of that conversation. I think the really crucial thing is to bring all of that together and how we deliver these projects. We've got a huge opportunity with the SMR programme at Gwyn Dodd, which I'm visiting tomorrow, to make sure that a government backed programme, the first of a kind fleet of SMRs, that we're building those in a different way, and that we're putting the principles into practice as we're building right now.
And that's partly why I've been very, very clear that people will have to move from what might be entrenched positions to get to the outcome, the shared outcome that we all want. That's for government and regulators, but it's also for industry as well to to be part of that conversation. I think the really crucial thing is to bring all of that together and how we deliver these projects. We've got a huge opportunity with the SMR programme at Gwyn Dodd, which I'm visiting tomorrow, to make sure that a government backed programme, the first of a kind fleet of SMRs, that we're building those in a different way, and that we're putting the principles into practice as we're building right now.
10:57
10:57
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I think there definitely is a shifting of culture, but there is a lot more to do. And I think culture is going to be key to this. It is one thing to implement new regulation or new guidance, but we all know it is the decision making itself, the culture of that decision making, that will actually shape whether we feel any difference at the end of it. And I think all of the regulators recognise that. But changing culture is difficult. So my kind of very clear view on this is we absolutely have to implement all the recommendations in as practical a way as possible so that they can get on with delivery.
But then I want to see real progress on culture shift as well, so that people are are meeting the spirit and the outcome that's intended from, from that review.
But then I want to see real progress on culture shift as well, so that people are are meeting the spirit and the outcome that's intended from, from that review.
10:58
10:58
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Yeah, it was one of the key things I asked is that we we always sort of assume we have to reinvent the wheel. And so it's true across the energy industry. And actually countries are struggling with the same thing, but they've also found ways through a lot of it, partly why we said we wanted to work more closely with the US on this is that we share very much the same safety standards. But if a project should be approved by a regulator in the States, it should be approved by regulator in the UK. If we believe in that and there's lessons to learn from that.
But France, you're absolutely right. And look, if there are if there is anyone in there are still people unconvinced by nuclear power. The last few months have demonstrated very much that France has weathered the impact of the closure of the Strait of Hormuz far better than we have. And it's because their nuclear fleet has responded and kept bills low. That is the opportunity we could have had if we'd been building nuclear over the past two or more decades.
But France, you're absolutely right. And look, if there are if there is anyone in there are still people unconvinced by nuclear power. The last few months have demonstrated very much that France has weathered the impact of the closure of the Strait of Hormuz far better than we have. And it's because their nuclear fleet has responded and kept bills low. That is the opportunity we could have had if we'd been building nuclear over the past two or more decades.
10:59
10:59
Melanie Onn
-
-
Melanie Onn
Thank you. To ensure the country's future resilience, we do have to continue to build out clean power system that works with a mix of energy. We've had a long consultation about that that has confirmed that that is the case. It was due to be included in the Energy Independence Bill that we expected to see earlier this year. That has been delayed. Again. Earlier in this session, you said that we would see it soon.
Will we see it before Christmas or after Rosebank?
Will we see it before Christmas or after Rosebank?
10:59
11:00
11:00
11:00
11:00
11:00
11:00
Melanie Onn
-
-
Melanie Onn
But you anticipate it'll be by the end of this year. And that's what you're working towards. And within that, I mean, to secure all of these projects delivering kind of greater, broader independence of our energy. Do you think that within that bill we will see, and are you working to ensure that it is included , that the reform national pricing policy will give some certainty to developers, especially ahead of R eight?
11:00
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Yeah. Look, we while I don't want to get into the details of the bill, we have already confirmed that the reform national pricing package will be legislated for where necessary. Some of it doesn't require legislation, but we will legislate on that. I think transmission charging is is the point that you're particularly focusing on. I think as part of that, we've said to industry we wanted to see if there was a more temporary solution we could implement to new US volatility before R eight. We've not been able to find what that mechanism would be. And Ofgem has worked to to see if that's possible.
But we've been really clear. We want to find an enduring solution before R9R8. The timeline is already under way. The bids will be going in in the coming coming weeks and months. So we've not been able to resolve it for then. But we are absolutely committed to dealing with the long term volatility and to new lows. I would just say the balance with this is the reform of national pricing requires two things. One is absolutely a reform to transmission charging, but still a recognition that we have to have a signal to where to build things most efficiently in the country so that we bring down the cost of transmission.
That is really important. And the second bit of that is the strategic spatial energy plan, which is about us setting out where future infrastructure should broadly be built to make sure that we are building the.
But we've been really clear. We want to find an enduring solution before R9R8. The timeline is already under way. The bids will be going in in the coming coming weeks and months. So we've not been able to resolve it for then. But we are absolutely committed to dealing with the long term volatility and to new lows. I would just say the balance with this is the reform of national pricing requires two things. One is absolutely a reform to transmission charging, but still a recognition that we have to have a signal to where to build things most efficiently in the country so that we bring down the cost of transmission.
That is really important. And the second bit of that is the strategic spatial energy plan, which is about us setting out where future infrastructure should broadly be built to make sure that we are building the.
11:02
11:02
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I am, if I'm candid with the committee, really worried about connections reform. It has been an extremely difficult and frustrating process and continues to be. I don't I don't backtrack at all from what I've said previously about how important it was. The queue was completely unmanageable and we have cleared out a lot, but I am acutely aware that it is having a real live impact on projects right now and that that risks investment confidence, and I just want to be really honest about that. It is a huge frustration for me, and much of what we've talked about today genuinely keeps me up at night, but the connections process is a genuine concern for me.
We are doing.
We are doing.
11:03
11:03
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Yes we can. And look, I completely agree with you. If we can't connect these projects and connect them in such a way that doesn't create additional constraints, then we are not benefiting consumers in the way that we should be doing. I don't think that means that the absence of that makes the system any less resilient. We are connecting a huge number of projects all of the time, just not as many as I would like. And look, this goes back a long way back to the approach we took to how projects could connect to the system.
And I would just say, even in the dying days of the last government, the the connections queue stood at 400GW at some. I got to more than 700GW before we came into government. It was a completely unmanageable but foreseeable problem that they should have done something about. We're now grappling with that, and I really regret that. It is as difficult as it is the strategic spatial energy plan. The Secretary of State now has the pathways, and we will consider it in detail, and then there'll be a consultation early next year from Nisa on it. But we've been really clear about that process is it's not about creating a Early next year from NSO on it, but we've been really clear about that process is it's not about creating a black and white plan of what projects can and can't go forward, but it is about us saying we need a more coherent way of building the transmission system for the.
And I would just say, even in the dying days of the last government, the the connections queue stood at 400GW at some. I got to more than 700GW before we came into government. It was a completely unmanageable but foreseeable problem that they should have done something about. We're now grappling with that, and I really regret that. It is as difficult as it is the strategic spatial energy plan. The Secretary of State now has the pathways, and we will consider it in detail, and then there'll be a consultation early next year from Nisa on it. But we've been really clear about that process is it's not about creating a Early next year from NSO on it, but we've been really clear about that process is it's not about creating a black and white plan of what projects can and can't go forward, but it is about us saying we need a more coherent way of building the transmission system for the.
11:04
11:04
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Instead of patching it up to ad hoc renewables. Projects were built over the past 20 years. We shouldn't have done that. We now have to build back a better system. But I just want to share the absolute concern and assure the committee that concern from me is translated into very firm action from the department, bringing Niso, Ofgem and the transmission owners together to find a way through this as quickly as possible. But it is not pain free and I'm I'll be really honest in saying it is not about to become any easier. It is a really difficult.
process and we're doing everything we can.
process and we're doing everything we can.
11:04
11:05