Prime Minister Andy Burnham is facing demands to correct the parliamentary record after appearing to confuse a £1 billion investment in offshore wind projects off Norfolk with funding for Scotland.
The SNP has accused the Prime Minister of misleading MPs during Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday 11 November, following an exchange with Graham Leadbitter, the MP for Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey.
The dispute centres on an announcement by the National Wealth Fund confirming £1 billion in financing for two major offshore wind farms, Vanguard East and Vanguard West, off the Norfolk coast.
Official documents published by the fund confirm that the money comprises two £500 million commitments towards the projects being developed by energy companies RWE and KKR.
The investment forms part of a wider financing package worth approximately £12.8 billion, supporting offshore wind developments expected to generate enough electricity for the equivalent of around three million homes.
During PMQs, Leadbitter challenged the Prime Minister over Scotland’s oil and gas revenues, asking whether he would “commit to a Scottish Wealth fund to ringfence revenues from Scotland’s waters for Scotland’s renewables future, or is he content to continue Labour’s deindustrialisation of Scotland, just like Thatcher in the 80s?”
According to the SNP’s account of the exchange, Burnham responded by claiming the National Wealth Fund had committed funding “on the very day that the National Wealth Fund has committed a billion pounds of funding to support offshore wind off the east coast of Scotland”.
The Prime Minister reportedly added:
“I would’ve thought he would have stood up and welcomed that announcement today.”
However, the National Wealth Fund’s announcement identifies Norfolk, not Scotland, as the location of the two projects receiving the £1 billion financing.
The UK Government’s wider announcement also refers to developments in Scottish offshore wind, including progress on SSE’s Berwick Bank B project and employment opportunities in Glasgow and Montrose, but these are separate from the £1 billion Norfolk investment.
The SNP is now calling for the Prime Minister to return to the House of Commons, correct his statement and answer Leadbitter’s original question about retaining Scotland’s energy revenues.
Graham Leadbitter said:
“Not content with refusing to reinvest revenues from Scotland’s North Sea in Scotland, Burnham is now misleading people about the total lack of UK Government investment in Scotland.
“Burnham’s words in Parliament today had no relationship whatsoever with the truth.
“We all know geography isn’t Andy Burnham’s strong suit, given he thought Manchester was the north of the UK, but his apparent belief that Scotland’s territorial waters extend all the way down to Norfolk really takes the biscuit.
“This is yet another Burnham-blunder, from a man who has proved he just can’t keep on top of the detail.
“While 1,000 North Sea energy workers lose their jobs a month under the Labour Party’s watch, worried communities in Scotland deserve better than a Prime Minister fibbing about investment that doesn’t exist.
“Andy Burnham needs to do the right thing, come back to Parliament to correct the record and to tell the people of Scotland whether he believes that the revenue from Scotland’s North Sea should be reinvested in Scotland, or flow to the Treasury in London.
“Scotland’s interests will never be served by Westminster politicians in control of our resources.
“Only with the full powers of independence will the people of Scotland feel the benefits of our energy resources.”
The UK Government has separately announced a new Energy Wealth Fund, beginning with £2 billion and linked to future North Sea revenues, although it has not committed to ringfencing all revenues from Scottish waters for investment in Scotland.
For Leadbitter, that leaves his original question unanswered, while the discrepancy between the Prime Minister’s reported remarks and the National Wealth Fund’s published announcement has become the immediate source of political controversy.
