Commons Sense

House of Commons · Bill Debate

The Marine and Coastal Access Bill - Schedule 6 - Time limits on the exercise of certain powers under this Act

17 October 2022 · 26 other contributors

Opened by Philip Hollobone Con Kettering

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

At a glance

Philip Hollobone raised concerns about the marine and coastal access bill - schedule 6 - time limits on the exercise of certain powers under this act in the House of Commons. Other MPs contributed to the debate.

Key points

  • Concerns raised about imposing strict time limits on local authorities to implement duties under the Marine and Coastal Access Bill.
  • Local councils must complete their tasks within six months of notification to avoid overburdening already stretched organisations.
  • No specific asks of the government or commitments made by the minister are recorded.

How the debate unfolded

MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said.

Opened the debate

Philip Hollobone Con Kettering

I beg to move, That the schedule be read a second time. This amendment aims to impose strict time limits on how long local authorities have to implement their duties under this Bill. It is crucial that we do not overburden our already stretched local government organisations with excessive administrative burdens. Local councils must complete these tasks within six months of notification, ensuring swift action without undue delay.

Other contributors (26)
  • Philip Hollobone Con Kettering

    I am raising this issue because constituents in Kettering have expressed concerns over delays and inefficiencies within local government organisations. This amendment will ensure that local authorities act promptly, adhering to a strict timeline.

  • Mark Tami Lab Alyn and Deeside

    While I understand the intent behind this amendment, it risks imposing unrealistic deadlines on already stretched local authorities. My constituents in Alyn and Deeside have faced significant challenges with similar bureaucratic processes, and we need more flexibility to ensure proper implementation.

  • Huw Irranca-Davies Lab Aberconwy

    This amendment could undermine the effective delivery of environmental protection measures. It is essential that local authorities have sufficient time to consult stakeholders and ensure compliance with stringent environmental regulations.

  • Philip Hollobone Con Kettering

    I appreciate the concerns raised, but this amendment provides a clear and necessary framework for local authorities. It will streamline processes and prevent delays that can cause significant harm to coastal communities.

  • Rosie Winterton Lab Stocksbridge Parkgate

    Ms Rosie Winterton proposed numerous amendments to enhance the Energy Bills Act, focusing on transparency regarding future regulations and ensuring equitable support for off-grid consumers and non-domestic users who signed fixed agreements between December 2021 and April 2022.

  • Mr. Jonathan Edwards inquired about advice for manufacturing companies in his constituency regarding product pricing beyond the six-month period covered by the Bill, given the uncertainty over future energy costs.

  • Mr. Alan Brown asked Mr. Stuart to clarify clauses 13 and 14, specifically about the power of the Secretary of State to spend up to £100 million on various schemes without a resolution in the House, seeking details on potential measures.

  • Alan Whitehead Lab Southampton, Test

    Argues that clause 16 is unclear about what designated energy producers are and how they will be identified. Suggests community-owned wind farms should not be subject to designation unless making super-profits. Proposes amendments such as ensuring full cost reductions are passed on to customers, addressing the marginal cost of electricity, and adjusting oil and gas profits levy arrangements.

  • Barry Gardiner Lab Brent North

    Intervenes to express suspicion that clause 16 intends to force renewable and nuclear generators without a contract for difference into voluntary contracts with the Government.

  • Graham Stuart Con Beverley and Holderness

    Intervenes to confirm that clause 16 is intended to force renewable generators without a contract for difference into voluntary contracts with the Government.

  • David Linden Lab Aberdeen South

    Questions Graham Stuart about his objection to new clause 18, suggesting that if the government had proposed a manuscript amendment, Labour would have supported it.

  • Alan Brown SNP Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath

    Intervenes to argue in favour of new clause 18 as an extension of support for consumers who are now receiving only six months of energy price support, urging Labour to protect vulnerable people from fuel poverty.

  • Peter Aldous Con Waveney

    Supports the Bill for urgent assistance but raises concerns about negative consequences on energy security, transition to net zero and deployment of renewables. Expresses worry over Clause 16, Schedule 6, and Clause 21 which could disincentivise investment in clean generation.

  • Alan Brown SNP Kilmarnock and Loudoun

    Calls for immediate clarity on future energy bill increases, analysis of fuel poverty statistics, and extension of universal support scheme. Highlights inadequacies in government’s current policy towards off-grid homes and calls for regulation of off-grid fuels.

  • Guy Opperman Con Hexham

    Supports the key measures in the Bill to help households facing difficulties. Advocates for a communications campaign to inform people about energy-saving measures, arguing it saves money for both individuals and the state. Raises concerns over proposed biomass contracts competing with non-subsidised timber and forestry sectors. Encourages Government leadership on reducing energy consumption similar to Germany and France.

  • Helen Morgan Lib Dem North Shropshire

    Supports amendments for longer-term support for non-domestic users, urging two years of certainty instead of six months. Calls for better support for businesses off-grid and in rural areas. Proposes new clauses to improve transparency and focus on energy efficiency, sustainable forms of energy, and expanding the windfall tax to oil and gas giants.

  • Barry Gardiner Lab Brent West

    Calls for addressing demand side issues by increasing energy efficiency measures. Criticises the Government's lack of investment in renewable energy and retrofit schemes over the past 12 years, highlighting the importance of transitioning from fossil fuels to clean energy. Argues against expanding oil and gas production due to its long-term unfeasibility and suggests investment should be focused on reducing demand and promoting renewables.

  • David Linden SNP Glasgow East

    New clause 1 seeks to zero-rate VAT on refurbishment and retrofitting of tenement properties to make them more energy efficient. This is crucial as these buildings are expensive to heat due to their construction, which includes sandstone walls with little insulation. Housing associations in my constituency have highlighted the financial burden this poses.

  • Patrick Grady SNP Glasgow North

    Supports new clause 1 as it would help housing associations invest in energy efficiency measures to support their struggling tenants, especially those living in tenemental properties. This is important because the cost of heating these buildings could lead to higher future costs due to damp and structural damage.

  • Alison Thewliss SNP Glasgow Central

    Agrees that new clause 1 is important but notes that retrofitting tenements can be expensive and disruptive for tenants. The cost needs to be carefully considered, especially in relation to the Niddrie Road project in Govanhill.

  • Liz Saville-Roberts PC Dwyfor Meirionnydd

    New clauses 6 and 7 would require the UK Government to publish an assessment of how slashing average bills to pre-April levels (£1,277) could impact fuel poverty and climate targets. Proposes a housing decarbonisation scheme with support from devolved administrations to improve energy efficiency and save households money.

  • Jim Shannon DUP Strangford

    Thanking the Government and Minister for their efforts during the energy crisis, highlighting support given to Northern Ireland. Plea for pensioners' protection and reassurance of unused funds being carried over. Main focus on helping working families and poor who face significant cost increases in groceries, fuel, and utilities. Emphasised need for an uplift in child benefit and help for small businesses facing massive electricity costs.

  • Barry Gardiner Lab Brent West

    Mr. Gardiner responded to the Minister's comments, questioning his critique of Labour's actions during his tenure and highlighting cuts made by the current government in 2013 that reduced insulation efforts significantly.

  • Mr. Brown asked why the Minister would not accept amendment 16, which merely gave the Secretary of State the power to establish a domestic fuel reduction scheme for off-gas grid properties without compelling action.

  • Peter Aldous none given in text

    Mr. Aldous raised concerns about the direction of the relationship between the Government and the offshore wind industry, highlighting genuine issues that have been imperilled and requesting a meeting to address these concerns.

  • Alan Brown Lab Clydebank and Arran

    Mr. Brown acknowledges that while he did not vote against the bill, the current measures are insufficient to address long-term energy costs for households. He highlights the Prime Minister's previous statement indicating an intention to prevent household bills from rising above £6,000 per year without further support. Mr. Brown proposes new clause 18 to compel the Government to provide a more robust financial package.

Get updates like this by email
▸ Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy