North Sea oil and gas is a test of leadership for Labour and they’re already failing
Oil rigs moored in Cromarty Firth, Scotland (Alamy)
4 min read
This summer we reached an inflection point. From now on, people living in the UK will only become more familiar with the real-world consequences of a warming planet.
Deadly heatwaves, droughts, and the threat of food shortages are just the start. We need a government that will be upfront with the public, and a prime minister who will confidently defend decisions that protect our national security and long-term prosperity.
Why then is Andy Burnham doing the opposite when it comes to drilling in the North Sea? Parroting fossil-fuel talking points to make the case for an approach that risks homes, livelihoods, and lives? The latest argument from Labour politicians over the airwaves is that the government should approve more drilling to help us reach net zero faster. Primarily, they claim, because of the potential for tax receipts and the employment opportunities.
Apart from pointing out the obvious – that deliberately releasing over 200m tonnes of planet-warming gases into the atmosphere could never reduce our output of planet-warming gases – even their technical arguments simply do not stand up to scrutiny.
For starters, Adura, a joint venture between Shell and Equinor, would operate both Rosebank and Jackdaw. Its corporate structuring has been criticised for potentially allowing Shell to write off £1.3bn in UK tax. Shell has also faced criticism from campaigners who argue that it paid little or no tax in this country over several years while reporting substantial global profits.
If the government really wants to get its hands on the tax from oil and gas production to invest in the transition, it doesn’t need new fields. Instead, it needs to ensure that the existing tax instruments, like the windfall tax, actually bring in the revenue that was promised and end the near-infinite subsidies that multinational oil and gas companies have received at UK taxpayers' expense.
When it comes to job opportunities, it is doubtless true that oil and gas workers will be important in the energy transition. But as they themselves have outlined, what they actually need is proper support to help them make the move away from an industry in terminal decline, into high-skilled, high-paid jobs in the industries of the future. Jobs that will exist for decades to come. By approving this drilling, the government would be siding with oil and gas executives, not workers, giving false promises of job security, instead of investing the real cash that could make that a reality.
These arguments can be added to the long list of specious industry talking points that are repeated by the kinds of politicians who listen more to lobbyists than to their constituents. Talking points include saying that Rosebank and Jackdaw are good for lowering energy bills (they will not reduce prices) and that more North Sea drilling is crucial for UK energy security. In fact, the best estimates show that Jackdaw would reduce our dependence on foreign gas by a piddling two per cent, and Rosebank by one per cent.
What saying yes to more drilling would certainly do is cause irrevocable damage to the public’s already battered trust in leaders to do what is best for them and their children. It would let down millions of voters in Labour constituencies and beyond who want to see more action. And it would cement this government's reputation for refusing to acknowledge the impacts its decisions have beyond our own borders.
If Burnham is serious about prioritising the most vulnerable in society, protecting our national security and future generations, his first big decision on climate must be to cement trust and demonstrate leadership. That means saying no to Rosebank and Jackdaw. He was right to listen to Zack Polanski and call an emergency COBRA meeting this summer while wildfires ravaged homes and wildlife, and our emergency services were at breaking point. But he was wrong to think that that was all people want when they demand ‘action’ on climate.
Strong leadership on climate would mean having the confidence to make the arguments. Yes, this transition will cost money, but these upfront costs come from taking a positive step to safeguard our planet and are nothing compared to what we are already paying, and will continue to have to pay as a result of inaction. The June heatwave this summer alone is estimated to have cost the UK economy more than £1bn in lost productivity.
Every day that real action is delayed, we risk reaching an invisible but calamitous planetary tipping point from which we will never recover. The domino effects of that tipping point will hurt the already-disadvantaged the most – those already in poverty, insecure housing or without community support.
It is rare in politics to have a clear problem, existing and scalable solutions, and the political will to act on them. What we need now is a prime minister with the courage to lead.
Carla Denyer is the Green Party MP for Bristol Central and former co-leader of the Green Party
