In this Fracking Week in Parliament:
- Caroline Spelman on what the Church of England said about fracking
- Claudia Beamish asks why a fracking ban is not in Scotland’s draft climate change bill
Thanks to TheyWorkForYou.com for the transcripts
UK PARLIAMENT
19 January 2017
Oral questions to the Church Commissioners on low carbon economy
Question by Kerry McCarthy, Labour, Bristol East
How does commitment [by the Church of England] to a low-carbon future sit with reports today that the Church has given the go-ahead for fracking on Church land?
Reply by Caroline Spelman, The Second Church Estates Commissioner, Conservative, Meriden
It is not a question of a Church of England go-ahead. This is part of Government policy. On Tuesday, the Church released an updated briefing paper on shale gas and fracking. It does not endorse or reject the outright prospect of fracking, but fracking is acceptable to the Church only if it turns on three points: the place of the shale gas in the low-carbon economy, the adequacy and robustness of regulation, and the robustness of local planning. Of course the Church sympathises with the concerns of individuals and communities that are directly affected by it.
SCOTTISH PARLIAMENT
19 January 2017
Draft climate change plan
Extract of statement by Claudia Beamish, Labour, South Scotland
The SNP’s failure to ban fracking—or even to mention fracking—in the plan is a major let-down. If the Government is serious about tackling climate change, it will back my bill to ban fracking.
Reply by Roseanna Cunningham, Cabinet Secretary for Environment, Scottish National Party, Perthshire Slouth and Kinross-shire
Fracking is not mentioned in the draft plan because we are not doing it. Factoring in something that we are not doing is not something that we considered being of much use. We are taking a cautious and evidence-led approach. I am conscious that the Minister for Business, Innovation and Energy is sitting next to me, and I know that he is about to launch a full public consultation on the issue. In fact, in our pre-statement chitchat, he asked me about issues in respect of that consultation. Once responses have been independently analysed, the full range of evidence will be considered and recommendations will be made.
In the timescales that the draft plan covers, we will not be doing fracking; it is not going to be factored in in the immediate future. If anything were to change, we would have to look again at the plan but, at the moment, there is no need to do that.
Categories: Politics
DRILL OR DROP? 
How odd that the Church of England note on fracking would not receive headline billing on DrillorDrop but the note from 8 yr old Oliver would. Where did you say that your funding originates, Ruth?
I think the first Q&A (above) answers your point peeny. They’ve clearly been doing a bit more homework (thank God) … here come the caveats: “On Tuesday, the Church released an updated briefing paper on shale gas and fracking. It does not endorse or reject the outright prospect of fracking, but fracking is acceptable to the Church only if it turns on three points: the place of the shale gas in the low-carbon economy, the adequacy and robustness of regulation, and the robustness of local planning. Of course the Church sympathises with the concerns of individuals and communities that are directly affected by it.”
… looks like a no, no and a no then (by way of those three points). Sorry old chum.
Pretty sure they addressed it in the briefing actually, Phil. Just as the CCC did. All good my man! Green light and all systems go! Gotta love it! ;o) I’m going to send you that “i support fracking” sign for your front yard as soon as you provide your address!
Donald Trump would be keen to have that sign for the Whitehouse lawn. You must be overjoyed to see that he’s been instantly busy getting all remaining restrictions and water rights removed – that impede your favorite industry. Expect you’ll be losing interest in the UK scene any time soon?
Funny you should say that, Phil. I am actually losing interest in the UK scene gradually. The war has been won. There will be more battles certainly, but the gas companies are moving on to the real work. Not only have approvals been given (with more to come) but the anti-fracking crowd has been publicly exposed, their arguments have been shown to rely on lies and fake science. The public is ready to move on and proceed with fracking.
Fracking could still fail. It might not work as well as I hope. But now it is geology and economics which will determine its fate, not zealots making fraudulent arguments, and that is refreshing.
So, yes, it is a good time to take a victory lap and get down to business. Let’s hope for the best for the industry, because its success will benefit everyone in the UK.
Hehe… what could go wrong? Sweet dreams… but remember, one day ýou will wake up.
That’s not how I and around 50 million others viewed it, Phil. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jan/18/church-england-groups-praise-fracking-way-cut-carbon-emissions
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-fracking-kemp-idUSKBN1532LU
Good links. Thanks peeny … anyone who reads them will see that they’re highly nuanced and full of caveats and concerns… not reflecting your gung-ho position at all.
[Comment removed at request of contributor]
Yup. But doing a great disservice to the frackers with manners like that (and such transparent and predictable hype)… good to have around for that reason alone.
I wonder if the Archbishop was impressed to be used in Backing Fracking’s childish meme that caused such a furore Peeny?
Nobody is arguing that the Church shouldn’t be allowed to have a nuanced view and to present it. That’s what debate is about.
What really pollutes the debate is the deliberate misrepresentation of that view that we have seen here from you and elsewhere from Backing Fracking. I mean anyone who could suggest that that report could be read as ” Green light and all systems go! Gotta love it!” isn’t really trying to stay honest is he? What do you think Peeny?