LONDON — It’s the Energy Bill, Rishi, but not as we knew it.
On Tuesday, 14 months after it was first introduced to the British parliament, the government’s mammoth Energy Bill finally returns to the House of Commons for what is likely to be the last major set of votes before it becomes law.
The bill contains reams of technical provisions that will underpin the management and regulation of the U.K.’s energy sector in the age of net zero.
But it’s also become a lightning rod for internal Tory divisions over green issues — piling pressure on Prime Minister Rishi Sunak from both sides of the debate.
In several key fights, Sunak and his ministers have yielded (or given the impression of yielding) by making substantial amendments to the bill, in a bid to head off damaging backbench rebellions.
Here are five key issues the government has given ground on.
Onshore wind
New onshore wind turbines have effectively been banned in England since 2015, because of planning rules that mean a single local objection could derail a development.
Britain’s short-serving Prime Minister Liz Truss — as part of a wider bonfire of regulations — tried to lift the ban, only for Sunak to say the rules would remain. But under pressure from green-leaning MPs he pledged to review the matter, with a consultation launched in December.
Months later, with no government decision forthcoming, backbenchers took matters into their own hands, with Alok Sharma, an ex-Tory Cabinet minister who served as president of the COP26 climate summit, putting down an amendment to the Energy Bill that would do away with the worst of the planning restrictions.
He had widespread support, uniting deregulators like Truss and champions of the U.K.’s bid to cut carbon emissions like Chris Skidmore. There was a good chance it would pass — so the government signaled on Tuesday it will finally set out some long-promised changes to planning rules to get turbines built again.
As a result, MPs backing the Sharma amendment, like former Leveling Up Secretary Simon Clarke, sound very much like they’ll be rowing in behind the government Tuesday night. Still, the opposition Labour Party and many in the wind sector say the concessions still won’t go far enough.
Sustainable aviation fuels
Airlines have a dream called “jet zero” — the idea that we can continue flying without emitting carbon, thanks to a range of clean alternatives known as sustainable aviation fuels (SAFs).
The U.S. government has started pumping money into SAFs via tax incentives — and the U.K. industry wants to get in on the act.
Extensive lobbying by the aviation sector saw former Transport Secretary Chris Grayling tack a last-minute amendment to the Energy Bill back in July, calling for government support for SAFs. The issue is far removed from what this bill is actually about, but hey, when there’s a weak prime minister there for the taking, who cares?
It attracted significant support from Tory backbenchers — and has now been adopted, only slightly tweaked, in a government amendment that commits to a “revenue certainty mechanism” for SAFs.
Precisely what form it will take — and who pays — will be subject to consultation, but an aide to Robert Courts, the former aviation minister and one of the key SAFs rebels, confirmed MPs won’t be pushing the amendment to a vote and will back the government.
Hydrogen levy
Earlier this year, the hydrogen levy looked like the big issue that might blow up the Energy Bill.
Hydrogen is seen by some as a potential, cleaner alternative to fossil gas in the U.K.’s energy mix. To prop up the nascent industry, ministers proposed a levy on energy suppliers that would be redirected into hydrogen projects. But energy suppliers get their cash from ordinary billpayers — and the fact the levy could potentially amount to a £120 annual hike in energy bills was anathema to many backbench Tories, determined that net zero should not add to the cost of living crisis.
Green-minded MPs are also skeptical that hydrogen is the right bet for decarbonizing the U.K heating system — so opposition was overwhelming.
Yielding to pressure, the government has tweaked the bill so that the levy is now placed on gas shippers — those who move gas around the country. This was widely reported as the levy being scrapped and the rebellion appears to have gone quiet. But industry experts say the costs have simply been pushed up the supply chain — and could ultimately still be passed on consumers. One to watch.
Oil boilers
Ministers plan to ban installations of new oil boilers by 2026. These are often used by properties that are off the gas grid — usually rural homes in places that (you guessed it) vote Conservative.
Former Environment Secretary George Eustice seized on the Energy Bill to try and soften the impact of the ban — calling it a “rural ULEZ,” a reference to a clean air plan that’s proven divisive in London. He called for people to be allowed to carry on using the boilers — rather than installing a heat pump — if they run on clean fuels like vegetable oil.
To head off a rebellion, the government has amended the bill putting an obligation on energy suppliers to encourage the production of such fuels — and will continue to consult on the 2026 ban. Eustice is rowing in behind.
Energy Charter Treaty
The U.K. is behind the curve on the Energy Charter Treaty, a controversial international agreement designed to protect energy investments, but which has been used by fossil fuel companies to sue governments over green policies.
Former Tory net zero adviser Chris Skidmore has an amendment on the Energy Bill calling for a U.K withdrawal — following France, Germany and others who have announced that they’re leaving.
Days before the bill’s return to parliament, Energy Minister Graham Stuart told POLITICO that the U.K. was reviewing membership and would decide on withdrawal by November.
Skidmore is pressing ahead with his amendment — but it remains to be seen if it will be selected for a vote.
