I support the Committee's report. I am delighted to see Mr Neeson, the Deputy Chairperson of the Committee, back with us. As the hon Members will know, another member of the Committee, Mrs Annie Courtney, is still recuperating. We wish her all the best. I am sure that she will be reading our contributions to this debate on the Internet tonight.

This was a long and difficult report to prepare. It started out as a stroll around the energy market and suddenly became a marathon that went on for many months. I am slightly disappointed that it has not engendered the degree of enthusiasm among Members that I had anticipated. It rather reminded me of my time with the National Trust, when I used to give talks at Women's Institutes. For 10 years, I was given a bog- standard request to talk about country houses, until one day I received an invitation to give a talk to a Women's Institute near Magherafelt on threats to the global environment. I thought that I had finally arrived, and that people had recognised my ability. Therefore, I prepared what I thought was a wonderful talk about chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), global warming and all the major issues of the day. I gave the talk, and thought that it was fantastic.

There was a competition after every Women's Institute meeting. On this occasion, the competition rewarded suggestions that would most improve the environment in Magherafelt. I thought that the winner would be a CFC recycling plant or a ban on hardwoods. There were 11 entries, and nine of those stated that what would most improve the environment of Magherafelt was the appointment of a traffic warden. My entire contribution had gone six feet over the heads of the ladies present.

In some respects, that is also my view on the report. The 98 Members who are not here have evidently concluded that there is such unanimity and agreement within the Committee that they do not need to come and contribute. That is regrettable. This is one of the most important issues that the Assembly will ever face. Energy is fundamental to everything that we do, not only for our industry and homes, but for our environment. However, it has not exactly been the hottest ticket in town.

The report is opportune; in fact, many developments in the energy field emerged while the report was being prepared. One major announcement was made after the report was completed - the proposal to have a 200-megawatt wind farm off the coast of north Londonderry, in Castlerock. That has major implications for the growth of renewables in the Province. It would be a welcome signal for the future if that proposal were to get off the ground.

I welcome the various promises made by the Minister that consultation papers will be issued. Indeed, one has already been issued by the director of OFREG on the issue of creating a level playing field for the sale of renewables. I understand that a major consultation paper is pending on the use of the bond to buy out the generation contracts. The Committee examined that on many occasions and ultimately could not decide whether we should commit ourselves to supporting the bond.

We approached the fundamental issue of how to finance generation contracts with a completely open mind. The Committee looks forward to engaging in the difficult and detailed debate that is required to decide what to do about that crucial issue. As the Member for South Belfast, Dr McDonnell, said, almost all of the argument on energy in Northern Ireland is based on the fact that the contracts given to the generators at privatisation were such that the Government did extremely well out of them. The consumer has been paying through the nose ever since. That issue must be tackled in the near future.

I welcome the Committee's decision fully and enthusiastically to rule out forever, if possible, any prospect of nuclear power generation in Northern Ireland. As a representative for South Down, I am well aware of the enormous concerns that that community has about the impact of emissions from Sellafield. Therefore, we felt that it was important to put down a marker to say that that type of generation is unacceptable. It poses too many dangers and threats to the environment.

The Committee took a different view on Orimulsion, and I wish to deal mainly with that subject. I went into the debate deeply cynical about, and critical of, Orimulsion. I remember being telephoned by a company representative and telling him that if he was contacting me about Orimulsion I was not interested. That was my view based on media coverage of the issue.

However, even with that scepticism, I went to Denmark and saw electricity generation at the Kalundborg plant. I spoke to the Danish equivalent of Friends of the Earth and to the World Wildlife Fund. I spoke to other environmental groups in the area, and I examined all the papers. In addition, I asked Dr Andrew Galway, a leading scientist formerly of Queen's University, to look at the science of Orimulsion, and the emissions and the environmental problems associated with it.

At the end of that process, I believe that Orimulsion should remain an option for electricity generation in Northern Ireland. I am surprised that I am taking that viewpoint, but that is based on the facts. Much of what has been said about Orimulsion has been slightly inaccurate. The statistics show that Orimulsion could lead to a significant reduction in generation costs in Northern Ireland - possibly up to 25% lower. Moreover, with proper technology and the installation of a flue gas desulphurisation plant, Orimulsion could lead to a significant reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. However, that must be done with the most modern technology.

Orimulsion is 2·7% sulphur, heavy fuel oil is 4% and coal is 2·5%. However, with the installation of a modern flue gas desulphurisation plant, we envisage a 95% to 97% reduction in sulphur emissions. That is a major environmental benefit that cannot be ignored. Moreover, with the use of electrostatic precipitation measures we can reduce particulate emissions significantly. We can also reduce carbon dioxide emissions, which are the same as heavy fuel oil and 15% less than coal.

The danger of spillage from the tankers that come from Venezuela to Kilroot has yet to be investigated satisfactorily. It must be emphasised that we are talking about a small number of movements of very large tankers, rather than the hundreds of movements of smaller oil tankers that already occur in Belfast Lough. The Committee took a very responsible view on that. It said that it would proceed to consider Orimulsion as an option only if the environmental impact analysis stacks up, which will be a very important document, if the economic appraisal comes out in favour and if it is voted through by the Assembly. Therefore, there is a triple lock on Orimulsion.

It would be foolish for the Assembly to dispense with the option of Orimulsion. That could leave us totally dependent on gas as a major source of electricity generation. It took a great deal of debate in Committee to arrive at that compromise to which everyone has signed up. The Committee agreed - courtesy of heavy lobbying from Jane Morrice - that Orimulsion should not be allowed to stand in the way of a rapid growth in the use of renewables in Northern Ireland.

The Committee has signed up to a target of 15% renewable energy by 2010 and 35% renewable energy by 2020. Those are demanding targets, but they are the least that we can do in order to meet the obligations of the Kyoto protocol. That was an issue that the Committee had to think about long and hard. However, even if there is the potential for the production of 10,000 megawatts of renewable electricity in Northern Ireland, there will always be times when the wind does not blow. Today, for example, it might be difficult to generate enough renewable electricity to keep Northern Ireland going.

The physical problem in Northern Ireland is that electricity cannot be stored. The scientist who discovers how to generate huge amounts of electricity in the winter, store it in a huge battery and release it in the summer, when less renewable energy sources are available, will make a fortune. That science, however, does not yet exist. Therefore, supply has to be matched to demand during periods of peak wind flow and periods of calm. Whatever happens, fossil-fuel-burning electricity plants will always be necessary for those periods.

The questions are simple. Do we become entirely dependent on gas? Do we go down the route of coal, or heavy oil, which are greater pollutants, or do we retain the option of Orimulsion, the supply of which is guaranteed and cheaper, and which could reduce greenhouse gas emissions?

Mr Wells, please draw your remarks to a close.

For that reason, we agreed to retain Orimulsion as an option.

I am delighted that the report included a strong recommendation on the alleviation of fuel poverty. That is long overdue, and what is proposed could tackle the problem, and end it once and for all.

I shall begin by declaring an interest. My sister is involved in an American energy company, which gave evidence to the inquiry. I have no financial interest in that company.

I wish to add my thanks to the Committee Clerk, her staff, our researcher and our expert adviser for the tremendous work that they all put into the production of the report.

During the inquiry, I came to the conclusion that to describe the energy industry in Northern Ireland as complicated must be the understatement of the year. Every time I turn on a switch, I think of transmission lines, grids, pylons and generators, and hundreds, if not thousands, of workers toiling day and night to ensure that I am connected. It is important that Committee members also pay tribute to those workers.

Each member of the Committee has his or her particular area of interest. Although the repetition of some points may have been somewhat boring at times, it is always valuable to make those points. It is well known that my area of interest is renewable energy.

There is no question that the recommendations on renewable energy, if implemented by the Minister, will open new doors for the potential of the renewable energy industry in Northern Ireland. The Committee Chairperson spoke about the establishment of a renewable energy agency with a pricing system that would regularise prices and bring them into line with modern realities. All those recommendations will be valuable in changing attitudes towards the use of energy and in encouraging people to use local resources properly.

The aspect of renewable energy in which I have most interest is wind, in particular offshore wind energy. Everyone realises that wind has never been in short supply in Northern Ireland and that it never will be in short supply. We also have tremendous amounts of water. If those elements were brought together and properly harnessed they could totally revolutionise the region's industrial fortunes. That would place Northern Ireland back on the pioneering global technology map. Energy produced from offshore wind has the potential to breathe new life into Northern Ireland. However, the biggest challenge that we face is human energy, which we did not discuss much in Committee. Do we have the skills, the creative thinking, the innovation and the confidence to match the natural resources supplied by the earth? Northern Ireland's advantages in that area are substantial.

We heard the Minister's statement about Harland & Wolff and liabilities, and we are pleased that something is being done to help the yard with claims from employees. Shipbuilding skills are, of course, diminishing. However, let us not talk about shipbuilding; let us talk about marine technology. A company such as Harland & Wolff, with its knowledge of the sea, and the instruments and machinery that manoeuvre its depths, is perfectly positioned to pioneer this new technology for the good of the shipyard and for the good of Northern Ireland.

Northern Ireland has the edge in other areas - we have the combined research capacity of our two universities, especially in the areas of environmental science and engineering. An increased focus on research, development and innovation, and a greater appreciation of the growing world market in clean, green technology, would enable our universities' capacity to expand. Another area of skills is our highly educated, youthful workforce, which, in the past, has tended to leave Northern Ireland in search of new opportunities. For 30 years we exported our greatest resource - our young people - and with those young people went their potential to bring new thinking, new ideas and new energy to these shores. We must give them a solid reason to stay.

The greatest opportunity that we have to reverse the downward spiral of our decline is the new beginning that is offered by devolution. We need positive, constructive leadership, the promotion of inspiration, innovation and creative thinking, and we desperately need collective self-confidence.

The winds of change are blowing in our direction. Our location on an island, off an island, off mainland Europe, gives us a passport to a healthier, wealthier, sustainable, economic and social development. However, do we have the human geography? I am not only talking about people skills, I am talking about leadership skills. Do we have the human energy to match that which the earth gives us?

When there were bad times in Northern Ireland, and people were leaving in their droves, the old joke was "Would the last person out please turn out the light". Those of us who stayed or came back believed for a long time that we were operating in complete darkness.

With devolved government the lights have been switched back on, and the spotlight is on us, our economic development and our ability to move forward. It is up to us, and it is our duty, to ensure that we never fall back to the dark days that we experienced in the past. I am taking poetic licence and moving slightly off the subject of energy when I talk about human energy, but that is just as important.

As we discovered with this inquiry, there is a lot more to do than just flick a switch to turn a light on. We need energy to build up our skills, our abilities and, above all, our confidence. We need to believe in ourselves again, we need to have pride in ourselves, and we can do it. As the Chairperson of the Committee said, we can lead the world in global technology in renewable energy. We have the resources, we have the skills, and all we need now is the will.

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I place on record my thanks to the Committee Clerk and her staff, the research staff, the special adviser to the Committee and to all the people and organisations who gave evidence and worked with us. I look forward to working with those people and groups in the future.

There was a huge amount of work in the inquiry - much more than we anticipated. However, it was enjoyable and interesting - it is a fascinating subject - and we all learned a lot. We covered a wide range of issues, as can be seen from the report. The Committee was unanimous on some issues, for example renewable sources such as wind energy, which it was glad to welcome, and particularly, as Mr Wells said, the offshore wind farm off the north coast. All those are good, exciting plans with which the Committee is pleased to be involved.

On other issues such as Orimulsion - and this has already been mentioned - there was not complete agreement, but the recommendation shows that the Committee managed to come to a consensus on it. On health and environmental grounds not all of us were convinced about the efficacy of Orimulsion, but we believe that this recommendation comprises enough checks, balances and triple locks to ensure that the subject gets a proper airing and debate.

A key issue that came up time and again is generation contracts, which is the bad deal that was negotiated for consumers at the time of privatisation. Consumers here are still paying through the nose for the bad deal made then. The more the Committee examined this, the more we became concerned about the nature and effect of these contracts. Unacceptably high electricity prices in the North of Ireland are matched by unacceptably high profits. The Committee looked long and hard at various ways to deal with the generation contracts: do we go down the route of consumer bonds; should we look at more vigorous pursuit of the British Treasury, which was the main financial beneficiary of this deal; or should there be more exploration of legal action in Europe on grounds of anti-competitiveness?

As the inquiry progressed, Committee members became aware that we were probably not in possession of all the facts and so could not come to a fully informed decision. Further public airing of these matters and consultation are vital. That is why the Committee arrived at the conclusion in recommendation 2 that it would be content to await the outcome of the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment's consultation paper 'Towards a New Energy Market Strategy for Northern Ireland'. The Committee will be taking a keen interest in this consultation process.

Time and time again, the critical importance of an all- Ireland energy market was raised. It became clear that it was illogical for a small island of five million people to have two separate energy markets. It was also clear that both home and business consumers in the North of Ireland are disadvantaged by high electricity prices. It makes sound economic sense to have a single all-Ireland energy strategy. Regardless of the political views and persuasions of the members of the Committee, they agreed with the notion and creation of an all-Ireland energy market, and our recommendations reflect that.

Another issue raised was the need to eradicate fuel poverty, and there is a responsibility on all of us to achieve that. The Committee supports increasing the energy efficiency levy to £5, as agreed by the Assembly. However, key to that is the need for the levy to be administered openly, so that everyone can really see people being taken out of fuel poverty in a quantifiable, rather than a piecemeal, way. The task force on fuel poverty must be cross-cutting and cross-departmental. Targets for eradicating fuel poverty must be set down and kept to. We can now see a clear way to deal with fuel poverty and finally eradicate it "once and for all", as Mr Wells said.

This report will, I hope, open up these issues. There are many matters to be debated and considered in further detail, but I commend the report to the Assembly.

Go raibh maith agat.

I welcome the opportunity to debate the Committee for Enterprise, Trade and Investment's energy report. The Committee members and clerks worked hard to produce a thorough and comprehensive assessment of the twenty-first century energy market in Northern Ireland.

The report makes several key recommendations in respect of gas energy and the gas network extension. Specific recommendations concluded that

"Any postalisation of both gas and electricity costs must be borne equally and equitably by all commercial and domestic customers."

And that

There are many obvious and some less obvious reasons for the Committee's supporting the gas network extension to the north-west of the Province. I will briefly mention some of them under four specific headings.

First, there is an economic imperative to bring gas to those parts of the country that have no access to that fuel source. The proposed northern gas corridor would encompass the main urban areas of Londonderry, Limavady, Coleraine, Ballymoney and Ballymena, which, combined, represent a substantial economic region with an even greater potential for employment, investment and business start-up rates than before. There are pockets of high unemployment, higher-than-average levels of multiple deprivation and below-average industrial diversity. There is a strong argument that a gas pipeline extension to these areas would be an incentive for further foreign direct investment and would facilitate the diversification of the local economy. It would also ensure a level playing field for attracting future inward investment to the Province. Industrial competition would improve, as a cheap and environmentally friendly fuel would be widely accessible.

Secondly, from an environmental point of view, the gas pipeline extension would significantly reduce emissions of carbon dioxide, sulphur dioxide, black smoke and nitrogen oxides. That would help the north and north- west of the Province to contribute to a cleaner environment in areas renowned for their outstanding natural beauty. The estimated net present value of the reduction in environmental damage costs is some £20 million over 25 years.

Thirdly, the Government have stated objectives on energy policy. The gas pipeline extension to the north- west would offer potential diversification of energy supply to almost one fifth of the population. Ultimately, that would increase the availability of natural gas to 65 % of the entire Northern Ireland population. Costs to consumers would be reduced by an estimated £10 million per annum over 10 years. Energy efficiency would improve also, because of the ease with which gas, as a fuel, can be controlled.

Perhaps the most compelling arguments in favour of the extension of the gas pipeline relate to social need. As a result of the pipeline extension, average annual domestic savings are estimated at £100 per household. That would contribute considerably to the reduction of fuel poverty, as some of the most deprived areas in Northern Ireland would be served by natural gas.

Failure to extend the gas pipeline would make the north and north-west more peripheral and less attractive to inward investment. The northern corridor area would be put at a disadvantage by comparison to Greater Belfast, and the region would be prevented from attaining some 2,000 person years of employment arising from the construction of a combined-cycle gas-turbine power station, gas transmission and distribution pipeline. Over 50,000 people who live in wards that are among the 15% most deprived in Northern Ireland would be excluded from the environmental, employment cost and associated benefits of natural gas.

For some unknown reason I am slightly biased towards the north and north-west of the Province. However, the arguments in favour of the gas network and its extension to those areas speak for themselves.

I want to comment briefly on two other recommendations in the Committee's report. It is important that electricity and gas costs be borne equally among all consumers in Northern Ireland. It would be grossly unfair if, for example, consumers in Coleraine were asked to pay more than consumers in Belfast, just because of the increased cost of piping fuel to Coleraine. Therefore, postalisation of both gas and electricity costs must be equal and equitable for commercial and domestic consumers alike throughout Northern Ireland.

To help to finance the gas pipeline extension to the north and north-west regions, there should be a combined and concerted effort, along with other energy-emergent peripheral regions, to obtain European Union support for the project and for future pipeline extensions.

The proposals and recommendations in the report, which relate specifically to the gas network and pipeline extension, demonstrate a common sense approach to the development of our energy supply needs in the decades ahead. I commend the entire report to the Assembly, and I support the motion.

I support the report. I am relatively new to the Enterprise, Trade and Investment Committee and have not taken part in the enquiry, but I am pleased to be able to comment on such an important issue. I commend the Committee on its inquiry and thank the officials for their help.

I want to deal with two aspects of domestic energy consumption. My Colleague Dr McDonnell and other Members have talked already about high energy costs. In order to realise Northern Ireland's commitment to reducing worldwide emissions, a comprehensive strategy for energy efficiency across all sectors is needed.

The energy inquiry report makes several sensible recommendations for increasing energy efficiency. Paragraph 3.20 recommends that Northern Ireland building regulations should be amended to include major improvements and minimum standards in the provision for energy conservation. Many of us live in homes that were built 40 to 50 years ago, and some live in homes that are over 100 years old. The Assembly must examine building standards in order to bring them up to those in many parts of Europe. Houses that are built this year will still be standing in 80 years' time, wasting as much energy as we are foolish to allow.

The report ensures that the public sector leads by example, making rigorous savings in energy use. The report also calls for energy efficiency improvements in the domestic setting, with energy linked to the rateable value of homes, and finance for homeowners - with which to make their homes more energy-efficient. Everyone, young and old, can play his or her part towards energy efficiency. The simple task of switching off unnecessary lighting and televisions in homes when not required is one way of saving energy and money. The Department for Social Development's Warm Homes Scheme can play an important role in providing energy efficiency measures for low-income households. The Assembly must monitor the funding and eligibility of that programme to ensure that all those who need assistance can get it.

'Energy Efficient Appliances' recommends that concerted action be taken, both to raise public awareness of appliance labelling, and to ensure that that is underpinned by appropriately competitive retail prices for category "A" labelled appliances. It is estimated that in Northern Ireland less than 20% of our energy use is through efficient appliances. The report also recommends that the use of domestic rates be given further consideration as a fuel source for combined heat and power (CHP). A further recommendation, referring to power stations, recommends that all new gas power stations should be CHP stations. A presumption in favour of those stations when awarding contracts would help to achieve that. Combined heat and power plants should also be mandatory for planning approval for large developments such as hospitals, industrial estates, and so on.

The report also proposes that serious consideration be given to the regulation of domestic oil distributors. That is an important point, since - through the Northern Ireland Housing Executive and the Department for Social Development schemes - low-income tenants increasingly use oil to heat their homes. Although gas and electricity are regulated with regard to price, payment methods and customer service, oil companies are not expected to adhere to such regulations. Some oil distributors offer excellent services, but that is not widespread. Domestic customers must be protected.

The introduction of the climate change levy was widely criticised in Northern Ireland. The report recommends that the five-year derogation on that levy should be extended to 10 years for industrial natural gas users in Northern Ireland. Companies that have met energy efficiency targets should be given a rebate on the climate change levy. That sensible and important recommendation encourages companies to connect to the expanding gas network, particularly in areas such as west Tyrone, Omagh and Strabane.

Other Members mentioned fuel poverty. Twenty eight per cent of householders in Northern Ireland live in fuel poverty. That is equivalent to 170,000 homes. The Assembly cannot credibly claim that it is a functional devolved Government if it allows that scandal to continue. I support the report.

I support the motion and commend the report to the House.

Since spring 2001, the Committee has studied in earnest ways to reduce the cost of generating electricity - not only to exact the more efficient use of energy, but to bring about a significant reduction in greenhouse gases that arise from the production and use of energy. I have no doubt that the Minster will elaborate further on the need to bring about such a reduction in greenhouse gases, if Northern Ireland is to meet the targets defined within the Kyoto protocol by 2008-2010.

The report says much about the conversion of Kilroot power station to burn Orimulsion. Serious account of the environmental aspects of that move should be taken before it is pursued. The Assembly should note the potential of renewable energy, both in accessing it directly and as a means of generating electricity.

I draw Members' attention to page 53 of volume I of the report, which describes the biomass process of producing heat for private use and electricity for sale. Willow, grown as a short-rotation crop, may be harvested as a fuel in a combined heat and power plant to produce both heat and electricity. Important jobs and opportunities may be provided through growing and harvesting willows, the processing of raw materials and maintaining CHP plants.

I am sure that the hon Member was alarmed, as I was, at Dr O'Hagan's assertion that the Committee supported the development of an all-Ireland energy market. Does he agree that that is not the case? Nowhere in the report is there any endorsement of an all-Ireland energy market. The phrase that is used is an "all-island energy market" that will enable this part of the United Kingdom to buy and sell power from another state - the Irish Republic.

I acknowledge the Member's point.

Among the environmental benefits of renewable energy are less waste in landfills, valuable habitats for wildlife and fewer greenhouse gas emissions. I commend the work of Rural Generation Ltd at Brook Hall Estate. The Committee saw a prototype gas generator that ran off gas from landfill sites on its visit to Brook Hall. I encourage the Department to look favourably upon "green" electricity and power.

The uptake of renewable energy in Northern Ireland must be increased. It would make an important contribution to driving down fuel poverty and making it a thing of the past in Northern Ireland. However, for such an outcome to be realised, the public sector is under a responsibility to lead the way in promoting the advantages of, and harnessing the potential for, greater use of renewable energy.

Much in the report is to be commended to the Assembly. I ask the Minister to attach significant weight to all its recommendations. I support its proposals, and look forward to their early implementation. I thank the Committee Clerk and her staff for compiling the report.

I welcome the opportunity to participate in this debate. As a member of the Committee for Enterprise, Trade and Investment, I commend the report to the Assembly.

The report covers all aspects of energy, including electricity costs, energy efficiency, renewable energy, gas networks and Orimulsion. However, the report does not sufficiently emphasise the importance of waste management, especially the use of waste in the production of energy and heat. Vast amounts of waste are produced across Northern Ireland and all over the world. Waste must be used in some manner, whether it is buried, burnt or reused. There must be more research into the use of waste products and their conversion into heat and energy.

The city of Gothenburg in Sweden is almost entirely heated by the incineration of city waste. It must be emphasised that modern incineration techniques are clean burning. There should be several plants in Northern Ireland to segregate waste into different categories and incinerate it, producing energy and heat. Different filters can be used, depending on the type of waste, to eliminate toxic fumes. If used in that way, waste can be converted efficiently and effectively into energy. That energy would be constantly transferred into a grid system or used to provide continuous hot water for nearby towns, cities or local industries.

Similarly, the establishment of anaerobic digesters enables animal waste to be used by converting slurry and other farm and food waste into biomass. The digested mass is returned to the land as a less toxic fertiliser than raw slurry.

Modern farming methods produce much waste, and the establishment of biomass plants, such as the proposed plant at Fivemiletown, is to be commended. The Department of the Environment and the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development should consider, and assist financially, a network of digesters in that area.

The section of the report dealing with renewable energy states:

Windmills and biomass plants should therefore be used in conjunction with each other. All waste could then be restructured as a recognised product, with no unwanted and unused surplus, and as a vital component in the production of heat and energy, with liquid fertiliser as a by-product.

The analysis and correct utilisation of our food and animal products would end the advice given to farmers that slurry should be spread only at certain times of the year. Farmers are conscious of the environment. That analysis would enable the farmer to know exactly what he is putting on the land, thereby using the product more effectively and efficiently. The efficient and effective use of waste is of the utmost importance. What better way is there to produce energy to the benefit of all?

The report mentioned the Committee's visit to Brook Hall Estate, where willows are cultivated and the biomass is used to produce heat, energy and power. The energy produced is used on the farm, and the excess is sold to the grid system. The price received is low -approximately only 2p per kilo - but perhaps negotiation could improve it. The Department of Agriculture and Rural Development has adopted a scheme to promote the growing of willows. I highlight the success of the process and recommend the use of such regeneration. It is a possible cash crop that would enable farmers to diversify. The process of converting willows into energy delivers such benefits to the farmer as additional income, the use of the biofilter by which the willow can be irrigated by either slurry or water from treatment plants, the production of semi-charcoal ash and the by-products of the gasification process, which can be used as fertiliser.

Wind turbines enable the use of free fuel in the production of energy. Some people consider them unsightly. That is probably how they were regarded when they were put up many years ago in Denmark. However, they are now a tourist attraction. That type of energy production would work well in many areas.

The report considered the use of Orimulsion at Kilroot power station. Its successful use in this country, as in others, would avoid dependence on gas or oil as a single-energy source. It is relatively cheap, and I am sure that further research would show that its use is safe.

With regard to the natural gas network, the fact that Lough Neagh lies between mid-Ulster and Belfast puts my constituents at a disadvantage, although it is vital in the supply of water to Greater Belfast. I urge the Minister to invest in biomass facilities in that densely agricultural rural area to ensure the more environmentally friendly production of energy.

In conclusion, I commend the report to the Minister. However, I recommend that financial assistance be given to facilitate the conversion of domestic and industrial waste products to energy and heat. That would benefit our people's health and that of the environment. Biomass, biogas, renewable energy produced by wind turbines and the utilisation of waste are of vital importance, and I strongly recommend that they be further investigated, with the welfare of the people of Northern Ireland in mind.

I feel like a dysfunctional Don Quixote because, while Don Quixote tilted at windmills, I want to tilt at the people who tilt at windmills. I shall return to windmills later.

The Committee for Enterprise, Trade and Investment is to be commended for its report on the energy inquiry. It is a perceptive analysis of an issue that is of great importance to industry and commerce, and to families - all of which are burdened by punitive and excessive energy costs. To its credit, the Committee is sensitive to the suffering of the 170,000 or more households that are experiencing fuel poverty. In addition, it is not looking for cheap solutions to energy problems. Whatever profits that the big players in energy production might make, nothing is really cheap if the provision of the product brings with it threats to people's health or damage to the environment.

I shall leave the economic and technical aspects of the report to those who are better qualified than I - most Members are better qualified than I - and express my contentment that the report demonstrates the Committee's commitment to sustainable development, and that it takes an enlightened approach to the environmental implications of energy production and marketing.

The fact that the Committee comes out firmly against nuclear energy production and reprocessing, and that it is highly critical of the UK Government's arrogant and irresponsible approach to those issues, is particularly satisfying.

The report highlights the fact that more than 60% of Northern Ireland's greenhouse gases arise from the production and use of energy. To meet its obligations and targets for the reduction of those gases, it is essential that energy production from dirty sources be rapidly phased out and that only clean and environmentally friendly processes be encouraged or permitted. In that respect, I draw attention to an alarming proposal to mine up to 600 million tonnes of lignite, with the intention of using it to fuel a massive 600-megawatt power station. Lignite is an extremely dirty fuel. To permit that development would have a devastating impact on the natural environment. Added to that, the potential for air pollution is such that I urge the Committee to be firm in its opposition to such proposals, which strike at the heart of its declared objectives.

I am satisfied by the support that the report offers to the extension of gas pipelines. My memory is not what it used to be, but I believe that I was the first Member to raise the matter in the Assembly, in the hope that natural gas would be made more widely available to domestic and business users, and that a gas-fuelled power station could be developed at Coolkeeragh.

The report raises a raft of other environmental matters worthy of examination, but I shall limit my contribution to two further issues. I have serious reservations about the use of Orimulsion as a fuel in Kilroot or any other power station in these islands - sorry, Mr Wells.

I now return, as promised, to the windmills.

The hon Member stated that he is opposed to the use of Orimulsion. Will he tell the House why?

I have serious reservations about its use. The same reservations are contained in the report. I could expand on the issue. The Member knows more about it than I do, but I shall keep my reservations. I am sorry, Mr Deputy Speaker, I should not be amused by that.

Finally, as promised, I return to the subject of windmills. Land- and sea-based power-generating windmills are the most exciting and visible manifestation of the merits of renewable energy resources. As someone with an interest in, and concern for, all aspects of environmental protection, I am aware that some environmentalists are offended by the visual impact of windmills on our beautiful landscape. Hence, my earlier comments on windmill-tilters.

It is more than clichéd to say that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, or that, in design terms, form follows function. It can be argued that the power-generating windmill is an elegant and restrained piece of design, as much in tune with our times as the master mills of La Mancha, which so upset Don Quixote, and the quaint and beautiful windmills of south-east England and the Netherlands were with their times. Windmills are certainly no more obtrusive than the thousands of high-tension power pylons and the myriad telecommunications masts that are menacingly mushrooming everywhere.

The squeaky-clean efficiency of the graceful, wind- powered mills should leave the most fervent environmentalist with a happy glow; they more than compensate for their visual impact. Some might even say that they brighten up and add interest to our dullest and most featureless hillsides. I support the motion.

I am not sure how much time you will permit me to respond, Mr Deputy Speaker. There is a great deal of ground to cover. I shall try to address as many of the issues that Members raised as I can, after my initial remarks.

Like other Members, I welcome the report. Today's debate has been notably mature. There are related issues that people could exploit and use to play to the Gallery. However, the amount of effort that the Committee put into the report over almost a year clearly indicates that all the issues are being taken seriously and dealt with in a mature and methodical way.

In moving the motion, the Committee Chairperson made it obvious that no blinding flash of light revealed how we should deal with the electricity costs and other issues. The Committee recognised the complexity of the subject, and the report itself is a complex document. I commend it to the public. This debate will not create a cheap headline; that should not diminish the fact that the report represents a great deal of work by many people over a long time. Their work will ultimately help to contribute to the solutions to our energy difficulties. I hope that the media cover the debate. I also hope that the public recognise that work is being done here, and that not all debates involve headline-grabbing play-acting, although many do.

Reference has been made to the 32 written submissions made, the 29 organisations involved, the visits that took place and the 30 issues that were raised in the submissions. Those issues have been grouped into five broad themes: electricity costs; improving energy efficiency; renewable energy; gas network extension; and an all- island market.

The report makes a total of 45 recommendations, not all of which are directed at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment. Some recommendations are directed at other Departments and at parties with a direct interest or involvement in the energy market. I shall respond formally to the report's recommendations in due course, when I have consulted with Executive Colleagues. In the meantime, I wish to make some initial observations and to respond to some of the questions that Members raised.

It is almost one year to the day since I made a statement to the Assembly in which I reviewed progress on the energy front in the previous 10 years, assessed the current position, drew attention to the continuing historic and structural problems in the energy arena and outlined some initial thoughts on the actions that were needed to resolve those problems in order to create a more modern, efficient energy sector.

In particular, I indicated my intention to prepare a revised energy strategy for Northern Ireland. One of the main difficulties for policy-makers in that area is that the context in which decisions are taken continues to change. Progress is made, new issues arise, and little remains static. If we compare the Northern Ireland of today with that of 10 years ago, several significant differences are apparent.

Energy is now the responsibility of the devolved Assembly. There is increased worldwide concern about climate change and the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions as much as possible. The issue of fuel poverty is becoming much more evident, and it was mentioned by almost every Member who participated in the debate. The previous policy of a centralised, largely publicly- owned energy sector has been replaced by a policy of energy decentralisation based on private or community ownership. The outworking of that revised policy has yet to be completed. The development of a liberalised market in electricity and gas across the European Union has had, and will continue to have, major implications for the local market. Finally, the emergence in recent years of energy taxation and the associated subject of emissions trading may well have a major impact on our economic life.

Although the context may continue to evolve, it has not prevented progress being made. That includes further significant progress in the past year, most notably the endorsement of an extension to the natural gas network; the commissioning of the Moyle interconnector; the further opening up of the electricity market; the publication of the Ian Cope Associates reports on an all-island market; the renewables consultation exercise; and the announcement of the proposed first major offshore wind project off the north coast. I appreciate the wholehearted support and co-operation of the Committee on all those issues.

In the next few days, I plan to publish an initial consultation paper on a revised energy market strategy. The paper will canvass views on the shape, structure and content of a new energy strategy for the Northern Ireland of the twenty-first century. Having considered the responses to the paper, and also taken into account the Committee's recommendations contained in its report, I plan to issue a revised draft strategy, and to introduce the associated legislation required to underpin that strategy, later this year. With the Members' co-operation, I hope to have legislation dealing with the priority issues passed in this Assembly's lifetime.

Some major problems remain, which the Committee has considered. It will be invaluable to have their helpful analysis and recommendations on solutions set out in the inquiry report.

Taking each of the five report themes in turn, I shall outline my initial thoughts on the action needed to address those problems. Electricity costs are probably the most intractable problem on my desk, and I take some comfort from the fact that the Committee sees no easy answer to that complex issue. I have asked my officials and the Regulator General for Electricity and Gas to give me an action plan to achieve an early and continuing reduction in electricity prices. I plan to say more on that crucial matter when clear options are identified, and I assure the Assembly that that will be sooner rather than later. Only last week, it took only a few major businesses in Northern Ireland to starkly underline the impact that energy costs have on competitiveness. I am, therefore, determined that the time for words is over and the time for decisive action has come.

Many of the report's recommendations for improving energy efficiency fall within the remit of my Executive Colleagues. It will be necessary to consult them before I prepare my response to the report. The efficient use of energy will benefit not only industrial and domestic consumers, especially those on low incomes, but also the environment. Improved energy efficiency is not an option for Northern Ireland - it is a must.

TOP

<< Prev / Next >>