The new prime minister has said he will deliver on the promises in the 2019 Conservative election manifesto.
The manifesto included a moratorium on fracking in England, lifted by the previous prime minister, Liz Truss, on her fourth day in office.
Rishi Sunak, speaking in Downing Street this morning, said the party’s 2019 election mandate belonged and united “all of us”. He said:
“The heart of that mandate is our manifesto. I will deliver on its promise.”
He did not mention fracking in the brief speech. Nor did one of his key supporters, the former Home Office minister, Victoria Atkins, in broadcast interviews this morning.
But she told Sky News:
“Rishi said we will stick to the 2019 manifesto. It’s as simple as that,”
The moratorium in England was formally lifted on 22 September by the former prime minister’s business secretary, Jacob Rees-Mogg, prompting accusations of breaking the manifesto promises.
In a written ministerial statement (WMS) on shale gas, Mr Rees-Mogg said it was “in the national interest” for people living and working near fracking sites to “tolerate a higher degree of risk and disturbance.”
He is facing a legal challenge to the WMS from three campaign organisations and resigned soon after this morning’s speech.
Mr Sunak supported fracking during the leadership contest against Liz Truss. In a Talk TV/Sun leadership debate in July, he was asked “fracking yes or no?” He replied “Yes, if local communities support it”.
Last week, there were chaotic scenes in parliament when some Conservative MPs were reportedly “manhandled” into the voting lobbies to defeat a Labour motion calling for a vote on a fracking ban.
“Mistakes were made”
Mr Sunak paid tribute this morning to Liz Truss: her “restlessness to create change” and “the noble aim” for growth. But he said:
“Some mistakes were made”
He had been appointed as prime minister, in part, to fix them, he said.
“That work begins immediately”, he said.
Economic confidence and stability would be at the “heart of this government’s agenda”. “This will mean difficult decisions to come”, he said.
He promised he would bring compassion to today’s challenges. He said he would not leave the next generation with a debt that “we were too weak to pay ourselves”.
He also pledged to unite the country with actions, not words:
“This government will have integrity, professionalism and accountability at every level. Trust is earned and I will earn yours”.
DRILL OR DROP? 
Many will hope that the retreat of Rees-Mogg from government to the backbenches is a sign that this futile , dangerous and unpopular experiment in fracking is now over for good.
Great news about Rees-Mogg’s departure as the King of Fracking.
And many will not, Frank.
Perhaps those wanting some help with cost of energy, perhaps the NHS who require taxation within the UK to fund them?
Drove past a garage this am. Noticed diesel was 21p/liter more than petrol. What a great idea that one was. No need to produce diesel in UK, it can just be imported! Sound familiar?
His demise is little to do with Rees-Mogg’s enthusiasm for fracking. It is all to do with his behind the scenes manipulations, the eminence grise who has acted against the interests of the nation and indeed his own party by promoting strife from within. He has been a malign influence, an anti-Midas who has tainted everything he has promoted, and everyone he has supported for his own, rather incomprehensible, ends. I doubt whether many will regret his departure, the bad apple at the centre of government as he has been.
I agree that few will miss Rees-Mogg. Not sure though that he is the only ‘bad apple”. The entire barrel was rotten, I fear.
Perhaps, Martin, the help could come from those responsible for the situation we find ourselves in rather than sacrificing humanity’s future for tax revenue from that which is killing us.
How much will you donate then 1720? Not much I suspect as the arithmetic may be too difficult.
Is that Collyarithmetic? In which case, you’re right.
Martin you state ”…those wanting some some help with cost of energy”
But you are contradicted by your own saintly and wise Kwasi Kwarteng:
“ … even if we lifted the fracking moratorium tomorrow, it would take up to a decade to extract sufficient volumes – and it would come at a high cost for communities and our precious countryside.
“Second, no amount of shale gas from hundreds of wells dotted across rural England would be enough to lower the European price any time soon.
“And with the best will in the world, private companies are not going to sell the shale gas they produce to UK consumers below the market price.”
He is nothing to do with me, Frank.
He is talking nonsense. It has already been stated that private companies will sell shale gas to UK consumers below the market price. How many of them is the remaining question.
You know that, I know that, but you have to quote nonsense.
So, if and when. residents are receiving contact from operators with firm offers will that be your answer?
Martin, with respect, but please kindly consider the possibility that you are quoting nonsense: ”private companies will sell shale gas to UK consumers below the market price.”
With the best will in the world, private companies are not going to sell the shale gas they produce to general UK consumers below the market price.
I am a close resident in Lancashire and many of us have already decided that we will not ”receive contact (sic?) from operators with firm offers”
We have no wish to experience damage to our homes from fracking induced earthquakes, or to suffer from the documented adverse health impacts from living close to fracking sites. Nor would many of us accept such an offer (bribe) at the cost of adding to the climate emergency from fugitive methane emissions from fracking.
A failed expensive experiment in Lancashire, with zero gas production for consumers after 10 years.
You may be surprised, but even many of our local Tories now say ‘this fracking con is over.’
Well, Frank, no one will notice the sudden redefinition to general UK consumers. [Edited by moderator]
In any locality there will be those with enough wealth or certain beliefs to make certain choices whilst others will be in a different situation. That is not unusual. Hence private medical provision.
You may not realize that UK companies are not always able to dictate what their prices are to UK consumers. Sometimes UK Government control that. Oh no they don’t? Well, Frank, they currently are in the N.Sea. On land is no different-potentially. You know where they can’t do that? For imported gas and oil.
MARTIN
The NHS will financially be a lot better off without having to pick up the tab , treating thousands of people with health related problems from Fracking..
Fracking problems like this ,
https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/people-who-live-near-fracking-sites-suffer-higher-rates-of-heart-conditions-and-neurological-illnesses-says-research-10391339.html
Or this from the world famous ” Harvard University ” and the National Institutes Of Health
https://stateimpact.npr.org/pennsylvania/2022/02/01/study-finds-elderly-near-fracking-sites-at-higher-risk-of-dying-prematurely/
Or what about this study from the world famous ” Yale University School of Public Health ”
https://news.yale.edu/2022/08/17/proximity-fracking-sites-associated-risk-childhood-cancer
Your always keen on numbers MARTIN , how many £ BILLIONS of UK Taxpayers money can be saved not having to treat Fracking related illnesses ????????
I see Jack. The ones that die from the cold will not develop illness so will save the NHS money! So much better??!!
Well, Jack, as all travel will also need to be stopped to prevent people having accidents and ending up in hospital, and sex will be stopped to prevent complications in childbirth putting a burden on the NHS, what will all the health professionals do?
Please do explain Jack how USA links represent anything that might happen in UK. If that is the case, why does the UK continue with electricity distribution which is shown to cause forest fires, damage to property and deaths to wildlife and humans in USA.
If you want to hang your hat on USA links then there is the one that shows when gas was $7 per MMBtu on the US Henry Hub it was $47 per MMBtu on the Dutch TTF.
MARTIN , didn’t you know
Fracking companies are NOT charities
ANY GAS produced will be sold on the open market to the highest bidder .
Top marks for laughter content , I must say your idea to protect the NHS by stopping the British public traveling and having sex ……. I didn’t see that side splitter coming 🤣
Stop electricity distribution 🤣 , that really is a corker.
Is that the very best you can do to try and promote toxic Fracking ……. Your making this tooooo easy for me .
OH dear MARTIN ,
YOU ASK JACK , quote , ” how USA links represent anything that might happen in UK ”
ANSWER ……… Fracking is Fracking no matter where you do it …….. In fact the health problems associated with Fracking will be a lot worse in the UK , as we are a densely populated island
Nope, it isn’t Jack. You are simply extrapolating without evidence. That is no answer, it is an excuse.
Jack the lad is absolutely correct.
Martin, you state: ”Please do explain Jack how USA links represent anything that might happen in UK”
Your false benefit to hazard ratio is often regurgitated in the routine script of the pro-frackers: Implying that the adverse health impacts to close residents, or fracking induced earthquakes etc will not be occur in the UK, but only in the US ?
This is sophistry Martin, because it should also be argued that we may not have any of the so-called benefits of fracking in the UK.
We know that the adverse impacts are inevitable, because we have already experienced fracking induced earthquakes.
We also know that the adverse health impacts to close residents which result from the certain release of geogenic benzene, VOCs and microparticulate PM2.5 from on-site diesel compressors and heavy truck traffic are also inevitable.