I HEARD a spokesman for the group This Is Rigged which obstructed Sunday’s big cycle race and couldn’t help being reminded of The Life of Brian. Having boldly declared there to be no no-go areas for disruptive actions, such is the importance of their cause, he was asked what would make them go away.
He replied that they were seeking to “hold the Scottish Government to a higher standard” on the transition to renewables and “would probably pack up and go home” if this was acceded to. That sounded distinctly non-revolutionary though I still have no idea how lying down in front of bikes is intended to facilitate it. To be fair, I don’t think he did either.
I too want to hold both SNP and Tory governments to a higher standard on the “just transition” agenda, as well as those who seek to replace them. Without a far clearer route map on how to get there, the concept lacks credibility and gets bogged down in a series of divisive sub-plots – heat pumps is the most recent example – while the prize recedes into the distance.
The starting point should be pragmatism rather than dogmatism. Transition to a low carbon economy should have been promoted from the outset as an economic opportunity which involves manufacturing, infrastructure and services on a transformational scale for jobs and living standards. That is pretty much how the Biden administration is pitching it in the United States.
READ MORE: UCI Cycling World Championships road race halted by protesters
Last month, they announced a $20 billion competition to “capitalise a clean energy financing network that will massively expand investment in new projects that reduce pollution”. It was the latest stage in a crusade to “lower energy costs, bolster America’s energy security, create hundreds of thousands of good-paying jobs, advance environmental justice and strengthen community-driven climate resilience”.
It is all packaged under Biden’s Investing in America agenda which implies a degree of protectionism which we would turn up our noses at. Many who lobby for renewables, not least in Scotland, have shown little interest in anything which constrains their freedom to rely on imported manufacturing. The environmental imperative has remained unaligned to potential for the wider domestic economy.
There has been no shortage of lip-service but little evidence of a coherent philosophy capable of convincing the country that this is about economic opportunity as much as environmental needs. So far, the vast majority of manufacturing to support Scottish or UK renewables has gone overseas while infrastructure required to ‘re-wire Britain’ has proceeded far too slowly, bogged down in regulation.
Far from promoting the kind of “New Deal” mentality which Biden is trying to rally the US behind, we are descending into a rhetorical stand-off in which the Tories now smell advantage in presenting themselves as environmental sceptics rather than enablers in a process which offers huge opportunities to investors. Just as in the US, their confidence is needed to make the green agenda work.
READ MORE: Just why did our national bank blow £9m on DRS?
Rishi Sunak’s enthusiasm for granting new North Sea licences by the hundred is more about the theatre of politics than reality of outcomes. Even if licences are issued, each project will need to meet criteria which are as rigorous as an incoming government, probably as soon as next year, cares to make them. However, the signals Sunak sent out were confusing.
Putting “clear water” between the Tories and other parties on North Sea production is all very well, though it has already been blunted by Keir Starmer adopting a more sensible, nuanced stance than he appeared to have been bounced into a couple of months ago. More immediately, what is Sunak’s gung-ho support for oil and gas doing to investment in the transition to renewables?
According to the James Alexander, chief executive of the UK Sustainable Investment and Finance Association which represents a lot of very big players, it sends “entirely the wrong signals to investors on the credibility of the UK’s plans to reduce carbon emissions”. In other words, an unnecessary conflict has been created for political reasons between mutually compatible objectives – energy security and the just transition.
Starmer seems to have listened to those who advised that an absolutist position on the North Sea makes no sense, either politically or environmentally. As long as Britain relies to a significant extent on oil and gas, it will be difficult to persuade voters that it is morally superior to import rather than utilise our own resources. The emphasis should be on accelerating demand reduction rather than posturing over the source of supply.
READ MORE: Scotland has bigger problems than the 'translocation of beavers'
In an article yesterday, Starmer came close to adopting the Biden language: “If we want lower bills, good jobs and energy security then the path is obvious: a national mission to make Britain a clean energy superpower by 2030. It will require the government to lead. It will require planning changes. It will require doing things differently”. And, he added optimistically, “household energy bills will be cut by up to £1400”.
In Scotland, we have had 20 years of rhetoric about what the “Saudi Arabia of renewables” would offer in terms of jobs and manufacturing. As things stand, barely a single turbine which graces our landscape was made here and job numbers are a fraction of what was promised. On the evidence of that history, there is no reason for anyone to take at face value the promise of like-for-like transition.
The offshore wind programme is of such a scale that there are bound to be economic benefits but the extent will depend on deliverability of projects, the infrastructure being in place and commitments to a domestic supply chain. None of that can be taken for granted and plausible explanations of how they will be achieved are long overdue.
It is unlikely the bike-obstructors and I will form a consensus round the route map to a sustainable energy future but at least we agree there needs to be one. A crusade needs credibility, clarity and leadership. Until now, we have had none of the above in Scotland or the UK and Labour urgently needs to change that.
Brian Wilson is a former Labour Party politician and UK energy minister
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel