Meeting of the Parliament 20 February 2025
It is somewhat ironic to hold a debate on energy at this point on a Thursday afternoon, so let me try that witticism to begin with.
In some ways, Jackie Dunbar is absolutely right to articulate frustration. The burning imperative in front of us is that we have to make the just transition in energy work. However, there is some irony in being frustrated about what GB Energy should be delivering when we have not yet passed the bill. Notwithstanding the frustrations of the legislative process, what we are here to do is to agree to the LCM. Let us focus on the aim of the LCM. We need GB Energy to be up and running.
Let me deal head on with the assertions and the, frankly, slightly wild accusations made by Douglas Lumsden. Let us be clear. He treats the issue as though it is binary—that we have the option of either using oil and gas or turning to renewables. However, that is a false choice. Whether we like it or not, there needs to be a transition. Whether we listen to the North Sea Transition Authority or the Wood Group, it is clear that more than 90 per cent of the extractable resource of the North Sea has been extracted. Peak oil was in 1999. We need to transition our North Sea energy sector regardless of the net zero imperative. When people talk to representatives of the oil and gas sector, as I do, they will not hear them asking whether we should have GB Energy; they want to get on with it, because they recognise the need to transition.