Hansard

No, I need to make some progress.

We should remember that there is nothing new about fracking for shale gas and extracting coal seam gas in Scotland. Back in the 1960s in Lanarkshire, and as recently as the 1980s within the boundaries of the city of Glasgow, fracking has taken place. Also, fracking takes place at the moment in the North Sea with none of the apocalyptic side effects that some in the environmental movement have predicted.

There are four key advantages to exploiting our unconventional gas reserves. The first of those relates to security of supply. We have gone from being a nation that is a net exporter of gas to being an importer. As we develop more and more renewable sources of energy—particularly those, such as wind, that have an intermittent output—our reliance on gas will actually increase over the medium term.

The question then is not whether we will require gas—because it is beyond doubt that we will be increasingly reliant upon it in the coming decades—but where that gas will come from. Will it be produced domestically or will we import it? In future decades, I do not want us to rely on Mr Putin’s Russia for our gas supplies. For that reason alone, it makes sense to develop a domestic source of gas to provide for our energy needs.

Secondly, there is the issue of the impact on energy bills. It is well known that, in the United States, the development of a shale gas industry has dramatically cut energy costs and led to the reindustrialisation of the US economy. Although no one reasonably predicts a similar impact here in the UK, increasing the domestic supply of gas is bound to have a beneficial impact on energy prices.

Thirdly, there is the issue of carbon emissions. The US has saved millions of tonnes in carbon by shifting from burning coal to burning gas. Gas is a fossil fuel, but it is cleaner than coal. As we develop low-carbon alternatives, gas must be a better option, at least in the medium term.

Fourthly, there is the economic opportunity that is presented. There is the potential for tens of thousands of jobs to be created in a new industry—an industry that will be of real benefit to Scotland and which will complement the development of more renewables.

Iain Gray reminded us that, last year, there was consensus among all Scottish political parties that the Ineos plant in Grangemouth should be saved. I am delighted that it was saved. The Scottish and UK Governments worked together and hundreds of jobs in central Scotland were safeguarded. The Ineos plant depends on shale gas as its raw material. The gas is shipped in a fleet of Chinese-built tankers across the Atlantic from Pennsylvania. It is not surprising that Ineos is keen to see a domestic supply of shale gas as a feeder product. On every level, that must make sense.

I do not recall the Green Party, in the course of the past year, distancing itself from the political consensus around the Ineos plan or calling for it to be shut down. However, if the Green Party’s opinion is to be consistent, that is what it should be doing. By opposing unconventional gas, it is opposing those many jobs in the Falkirk area.

I believe that unconventional gas presents a tremendous opportunity for Scotland, always provided that the appropriate environmental safeguards are put in place. I look forward to hearing the Scottish Government’s proposals following its expert review panel. I struggle, though, to understand the lack of enthusiasm from the Scottish Government—a Government that falls over itself to promote the offshore oil and gas industry but seems strangely reluctant to support the same industry onshore.

Like Iain Gray, I have a lot of sympathy for the Government’s amendment and, should the Conservatives’ amendment fall, I would be prepared to support it.

Having recognised the opportunities presented, the UK Government is right to have introduced incentives for the exploitation of unconventional gas. I hope that the Scottish Government follows suit and sees this as a new industry that can be of great benefit to Scotland for future generations.

I move amendment S4M-09927.2, to leave out from “the significant” to end and insert:

“that the Department of Energy and Climate Change’s public opinion tracker now shows that more people across the UK support the extraction of shale gas than oppose it; recognises the benefits for Scotland in exploiting unconventional gas reserves in terms of providing security of energy supply, creating jobs, reducing carbon emissions and potentially helping to reduce energy bills; believes that, with appropriate environmental safeguards in place, this natural resource can be extracted safely and to the benefit of communities; welcomes the UK Government’s support for the industry, and calls on the Scottish Government to show as much enthusiasm for onshore oil and gas as it currently demonstrates for offshore.