Prime Minister backs fracking again

171025 PMQ slider

For the second week in a row, Theresa May backed shale gas in a reply during Prime Minister’s Questions.

This morning she said the government would introduce measures on fracking during the parliament – but it was not clear what they would be on.

Mrs May was responding to a question about yesterday’s vote on a fracking moratorium in Scotland from the SNP’s Tommy Sheppard (Edinburgh East).

171025 Tommy Sheppard

Tommy Sheppard

He said:

“Yesterday the Scottish parliament voted by 91 votes to 28 to ban fracking in Scotland. I’d like to ask the Prime Minister why she wouldn’t consider following Scotland’s lead and introducing a moratorium in the rest of the United Kingdom in order for there to be a full evaluation of the health and environmental consequences of this controversial technology and in order so that the public can be consulted.”

171025 Theresa May

Theresa May

Mrs May replied:

“I have to say to the honourable gentleman that this is an issue on which we are simply going to have to disagree because I think shale gas does have the potential to power economic growth in this country.

“I think it will support thousands of jobs in the oil and gas industries and in other sectors and it will provide a new domestic energy source and we have more than 50 years of drilling experience in the UK and one of the best records in the world for economic development while protecting our environment.

“The shale wealth fund is going to provide up to one million pounds of additional resources to local communities. Local councils are going to be able to retain 100% of the business rates they collect from shale gas developments.

“We will be bringing further proposals in relation to this during this parliament because this is an important source of new energy and I think it is right that we ensure that we use this and take the benefits of it for our economy, for jobs and for people’s futures.”

Last week, Mrs May responded to a question by Dennis Skinner, Labour MP for Bolsover, on water problems in an area where INEOS had been carrying out seismic testing. DrillOrDrop report


50 replies »

  1. The lobbyists will be pleased that the Theresa May stuck to their scripts – just adding ‘I think’ here and there.

  2. Anybody read the article in the Telegraph? How the Government chooses to brush the truth under the carpet. Also why are those who are pro-frackers attacking us anti-frackers, using the nuclear industry as if we would prefer that, I don’t never said I did. Another point used is do we want to harm our economy by not producing ourselves instead of importing, neither we want fossil fuels in the ground and stick to our responsibilities and commitment to climate agreements. Sad to say Teresa May doesn’t.

  3. Paula-if we don’t have nuclear then we can bin wind and solar, certainly for many years to come. You posted you wanted wind and solar. They come with nuclear attached. Alternatively (excuse the pun) we could follow Germany and replace the nuclear with coal.

    Perhaps you should re-visit which countries are meeting climate change commitments? (Those that we could trust measurements from.)

    • Sigh. We have been around this loop so many times Martin. With Fukoshima being a huge shock to the nuclear industry globally (the cores are still providing headaches) Germany, for better or worse, decided to decommission several nuclear generators ahead of schedule. Meanwhile France took a number of nuclear generators offline for extensive tests lead to a 1% upswing in the demand placed on existing coal generators … Germany sells baseload power across borders by the way. 1% is hardly more than a blip in the overall downward trend in the reliance on coal and definitely not part of the German strategic plan as you are trying to make out. It is typical pro fossil fuel mumbo jumbo to spin up false impressions like that.

      • Interesting article on R4 just now about tidal. A facility in Europe built in the 1960s now producing electricity cheaper than gas. Maximum delay on generation only 3 hours so no worries for the ‘lights will go out’ gang.

  4. Ahh, as long as they have a plan for the future PhilipP, it doesn’t matter what is being done today? Have to remember that one, although history suggests not a good argument. We will forget the 6 billion Euros compensation cost of the closure of the nuclear, and an increase in emissions because tomorrow will be great. No wonder she lost so many votes. Share of the vote less than Mrs.May. Good job she has a strong and stable government-one day.

Add a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s