Chamber
Meeting of the Parliament 18 April 2012
18 Apr 2012 · S4 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Project Transmit
This is not the end of the process; that is Mary Scanlon’s point. Incidentally, I have deliberately not mentioned, nor have I addressed my remarks to, the United Kingdom Government. The process involves Ofgem, and I entirely accept that Ofgem is not at the end of the process.
However, we are at an important point in the process. The purpose of today’s debate is that Parliament can speak with one voice and deliver a clear message. That is why I sought and called for the debate; that is why I worked with all parties to broker a solution, as Tavish Scott knows from the meeting that I think Mr McArthur attended on 13 January in Inverness; that is why Robert Armour extended his services pro bono; that is why a compromise solution has been worked out; and that is why a huge raft of work has been carried out by people across the party divide in order to get a fair solution for the Western Isles and northern isles.
Sustained pressure from Parliament calling for a review of transmission charging in January 2010 in part has brought about the review. We therefore have the chance to press to see the matter through. Just before the debate, I spoke to Alistair Buchanan, who is the chief executive of Ofgem, and I once again reminded him of the need to find an equitable and enduring solution to the pressing issue of transmission charges. After a long and commendably transparent process—during which Ofgem commissioned a report from the University of Exeter that concluded that transmission charging is an effective and suitable means of encouraging renewables—Ofgem published final recommendations in December 2011.
Although the Scottish Government’s preferred option of a postage stamp charge was ruled out—I am not alone in disagreeing with Ofgem’s analysis that shows that the option would be too expensive for consumers—I welcomed in part the proposals for an improved and more cost-effective regime. The new proposals are not all bad; the costs for mainland renewable generators would fall from a staggering £28.53 per kilowatt to a much more realistic figure of less than £10, which is within the range that the First Minister called for in conversation and correspondence with Alistair Buchanan early on in the process.
However, we are at an important point in the process. The purpose of today’s debate is that Parliament can speak with one voice and deliver a clear message. That is why I sought and called for the debate; that is why I worked with all parties to broker a solution, as Tavish Scott knows from the meeting that I think Mr McArthur attended on 13 January in Inverness; that is why Robert Armour extended his services pro bono; that is why a compromise solution has been worked out; and that is why a huge raft of work has been carried out by people across the party divide in order to get a fair solution for the Western Isles and northern isles.
Sustained pressure from Parliament calling for a review of transmission charging in January 2010 in part has brought about the review. We therefore have the chance to press to see the matter through. Just before the debate, I spoke to Alistair Buchanan, who is the chief executive of Ofgem, and I once again reminded him of the need to find an equitable and enduring solution to the pressing issue of transmission charges. After a long and commendably transparent process—during which Ofgem commissioned a report from the University of Exeter that concluded that transmission charging is an effective and suitable means of encouraging renewables—Ofgem published final recommendations in December 2011.
Although the Scottish Government’s preferred option of a postage stamp charge was ruled out—I am not alone in disagreeing with Ofgem’s analysis that shows that the option would be too expensive for consumers—I welcomed in part the proposals for an improved and more cost-effective regime. The new proposals are not all bad; the costs for mainland renewable generators would fall from a staggering £28.53 per kilowatt to a much more realistic figure of less than £10, which is within the range that the First Minister called for in conversation and correspondence with Alistair Buchanan early on in the process.
In the same item of business
The Presiding Officer (Tricia Marwick)
NPA
The next item of business is a debate on motion S4M-02623, in the name of Fergus Ewing, on project transmit. Members who wish to take part in the debate shou...
The Minister for Energy, Enterprise and Tourism (Fergus Ewing)
SNP
This is a very important debate. Charging for access to the electricity transmission network is an area of energy policy that is rarely spoken about, but whi...
The Presiding Officer
NPA
Mr Scott, you do not have your card in your console.I will give you more time in compensation, minister.
Tavish Scott (Shetland Islands) (LD)
LD
Does the minister recognise that one of the deep concerns is that large renewables businesses in other parts of the United Kingdom are arguing against any re...
Fergus Ewing
SNP
Different companies will be affected in different ways. Today, with the support of Tavish Scott and all the other parties, I hope to argue that when the Ofge...
Mary Scanlon (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Con
Does the minister acknowledge that the proposals that will be announced on 4 May are just proposals? They will go out for further consultation and the consum...
Fergus Ewing
SNP
This is not the end of the process; that is Mary Scanlon’s point. Incidentally, I have deliberately not mentioned, nor have I addressed my remarks to, the Un...
Mary Scanlon
Con
I notice that the minister favours the flat-rate charge. I am shocked by that, because Ofgem’s briefing points out that such a measure would cost consumers i...
Fergus Ewing
SNP
I am not sure that I entirely understand that point. I apologise for that. The point that I was trying to make was that the Government has compromised. We th...
Ken Macintosh (Eastwood) (Lab)
Lab
I thank the Scottish Government for securing today’s debate on project transmit and the minister for his opening remarks. It is fair to say that my colleague...
Mary Scanlon (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Con
I declare an interest in the debate, as my son works in the renewable energy business.The Conservatives welcome the debate on project transmit as part of the...
Fergus Ewing
SNP
To address the point that Mary Scanlon makes, I say to her that we do not accept that the costings that Ofgem gave to justify the refusal to accept the posta...
Mary Scanlon
Con
As a Highlands and Islands MSP, I certainly will not be uniting to support putting an extra £30 on the bills of people in the north of Scotland but nothing e...
Chic Brodie (South Scotland) (SNP)
SNP
Will the member take an intervention?
Mary Scanlon
Con
No. I have taken a long intervention already.Project transmit ended its consultation in February. The responses have been considered, modelling analysis has ...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (John Scott)
Con
We move to the open debate, with speeches of four minutes.14:28
Rob Gibson (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP)
SNP
The problem that we have is that Scotland is caught in the trap of an organisation called Ofgem, which was created in circumstances that do not reflect the n...
John Pentland (Motherwell and Wishaw) (Lab)
Lab
I do not think that this debate will generate many headlines in tomorrow’s papers, although it should, because it is a high-voltage debate. Over £2 billion i...
Maureen Watt (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP)
SNP
Almost two years ago to the day, the Parliament backed a motion that highlighted the threat that locational transmission charging poses to developing greater...
Liam McArthur (Orkney Islands) (LD)
LD
I am pleased to have an opportunity to speak in this brief but welcome debate and I am delighted that a delegation from Orkney Islands Council and the renewa...
Chic Brodie (South Scotland) (SNP)
SNP
I hope that, at its meeting tomorrow, the Gas and Electricity Markets Authority—GEMA—which is the board of Ofgem, will make decisions or at least provide mor...
Mary Scanlon
Con
Will the member take an intervention?
Chic Brodie
SNP
No. I do not have enough time.I have the greatest respect and admiration for the Ofgem team in Scotland—oh that it were independent—but the notion that exist...
Anne McTaggart (Glasgow) (Lab)
Lab
I welcome the debate. I think that my fellow members will agree that the existing charging regimes are neither compatible with the needs and desires of ordin...
Stuart McMillan (West Scotland) (SNP)
SNP
We have heard how important energy transmission is and will continue to be for Scotland’s economy. It is clear that energy generation is an integral part of ...
Margaret McDougall (West Scotland) (Lab)
Lab
As other members have said, the Ofgem consultation—project transmit—has been widely welcomed, as in its current form the transmission network’s use of system...
Mike MacKenzie (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
SNP
I recently visited the European Marine Energy Centre in Orkney, which enabled me to gain a first-hand insight into the remarkable progress that it is making ...
Mary Scanlon
Con
Does the member acknowledge that the project transmit consultation ended at the end of February; that a decision will be made on 4 May; that that decision ha...
Mike MacKenzie
SNP
Sure, and I remain optimistic. I point out, however, that it is truly lamentable that it has taken this length of time to get anywhere near approaching the r...
Mary Scanlon
Con
Will the member give way?