Labour should extract concessions from Big Oil if new fields are to go ahead

Speaking last year, Chris Stark, the then chief executive of advisory body the Climate Change Committee, said wearily that the “discussion of the oil and gas licences has basically mostly been a complete waste of time”. The UK’s reserves of fossil fuels appear to be running out just as we need to stop burning them, creating extra incentives to ensure the growth of a world-leading renewable energy industry.

The government finds itself in a position where it has something that the oil and gas industry wants – permission to drill – while at the same time hoping these giant multinationals will invest more in renewables.

On land, housing developers are often asked to build schools and other infrastructure as part of the deal. Labour should consider a similar quid pro quo, on the basis that the emissions resulting from burning the oil and gas from these new fields could be ‘offset’, to a degree at least, by new sources of low-emission energy.

If this also comes with the ‘offsetting’ of lost oil jobs by the creation of others in renewables, so much the better. The nightmare scenario for the UK, Scotland, and particularly the North East is if wealthy corporations drill until the last drop, then simply pull out, turning oil workers into the modern-day equivalent of miners in the 1980s.

Labour’s policy of not granting new licences, but honouring existing ones represents a useful halfway house between Donald Trump’s “drill baby, drill”, which sends a dangerous message to all countries with large reserves, and the unrealistic “just stop oil”.

Humanity’s efforts to prevent dangerous climate change are failing. Last month was the hottest January on record at 1.7C above pre-industrial levels, yet nearly 95 per cent of countries missed a recent United Nations deadline to submit climate pledges.

In this debate, everyone needs to get real about the need to both cut emissions and improve the health of our economy.