Question
I commend the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero for the decision to approve Jackdaw. It takes courage to lead, and the same logic applies to Rosebank. Does the Secretary of State agree that the £2 billion fund set up to transfer jobs from oil, gas and carbon into renewables sends a signal to workers that we are with them in the North sea, today and for years to come?100% vibes
Answer
My hon. Friend speaks with great authority because a number of North sea workers are based in the Western Isles. For many years, people have argued for the establishment of an energy wealth fund. Alas, we did not get much gratitude from the party in power in Edinburgh that failed to deliver a publicly owned energy company, and we have now delivered this energy wealth fund.25% point-scoring
Verdict: RED (15/100)
The question asked whether the Secretary of State agrees that a £2bn transition fund shows Government support for North Sea workers. The reply does not clearly say whether the Government agrees. It instead describes an 'energy wealth fund' and a publicly owned energy company, which appear to be different measures from the one in the question, and its opening remarks mainly thank the questioner. The asker would most likely need to ask again for a direct answer about the fund they raised.
How we got there
| Question item | Coverage | Specificity | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Secretary of State agrees that the £2 billion fund to transfer workers from oil, gas and carbon into renewables sends a signal to North Sea workers that the Government is with them, today and for years to come. | Partially Addressed | Hedged MISREADS QUESTION | The reply never states whether the Secretary of State agrees the fund signals Government support for North Sea workers. Statement 4 refers to an 'energy wealth fund' that the Government has delivered, but the item describes a £2bn transition fund for moving workers into renewables, and the reply's framing (wealth fund, publicly owned energy company) may be a different fund. Statement 1 only praises the questioner's authority. |