Referendum votes could decide if Lancashire ever sees fracking happen again

The possibility gained some cross-party support amongst MPs and councillors after the government confirmed in Wednesday’s Labour-led debate on the issue in the Commons that localised votes were a mechanism that could be used to determine whether there was support for fracking in a given area.

Blackpool North and Cleveleys MP Paul Maynard said that that option would be his “preference”, while Azhar Ali, the Labour opposition group leader on Lancashire County Council said that referenda would rightly mean that decisions were taken locally by the people living in the places where fracking was proposed.

However, Gina Dowding, the Green Party group leader at County Hall said that such talk was premature – and that there first needed to be a proper debate on the wider issue of safety.

Jacob Rees-Mogg, the secretary of state for business, energy and industrial strategy, said that the possibility of local polls on fracking would be included in a consultation over how to decide whether there was community consent for it – something which former Prime Minister Liz Truss repeatedly pledged would be a precondition of the process being given the go-ahead in any locality.

It is unclear whether her resignation on Thursday afternoon will change the government’s fracking policy, but Mr. Rees-Mogg said 24 hours earlier that once the consultation was over, the results would be put before MPs for approval.

He added: “Even if the House were to approve a mechanism, local communities would still have to consent in accordance with the mechanism. I reiterate – local communities will have a veto.”

His comments came ahead of a chaotic vote in Westminster on a motion that would have allowed Labour to present a bill next month that the party said would give MPs a say on banning fracking for good.

Government whips told Tory MPs that the immediate vote on whether to allow the bill to be debated would be treated as one of confidence in the government – meaning that any of their number who did not vote against it would lose the party whip and no longer be able to sit as Conservatives in Parliament.

All of Lancashire’s Conservative MPs – except Ribble Valley’s Nigel Evans, who did not get a vote as a deputy Speaker of the Commons, and Wyre and Preston North’s Ben Wallace, who was abroad in his capacity as defence secretary – supported the government.

But in doing so, those representing the Fylde coast said that they had won concessions from ministers that would give their residents a real say over an issue about which feelings in the area have long run high.

Fylde constituency MP Mark Menzies said that he, Mr. Maynard and Blackpool South MP Scott Benton had “fought hard to secure…assurances from the government, so that people in Fylde will have their voice heard”.

Paul Maynard said that he would oppose any consent scheme put forward by the government if he were dissatisfied with it, “as seems likely right now”.

He added: “My fundamental point is that if the Fylde coast says no, that sends a clearer signal than just Westminster politicians saying no right now – a permanent people’s ‘no’ rather than a politician’s ‘maybe later’.

Mr. Maynard said that any consent process would have to be “independent of companies such as Cuadrilla, and transparent” and that “all areas of the Fylde coast should be able to participate, as the consequences are widely spread and all areas should have to agree”.

“Blackpool has no involvement in Lancashire [County Council] planning decisions, but would bear the seismological consequences as much as Roseacre would.”

County Cllr Azhar Ali said that the government’s position overall was a “fudge”, but backed the idea of local votes.

“We don’t need MPs deciding – what we need is local referendums so that everyone can have their say. I believe if local referendums were held, there would be nowhere in the country that would allow fracking,” he said.

Last week, Lancashire County Council unanimously backed a motion calling for clarity on what the government meant by “local community support” for fracking – and demanding a guarantee that any decisions on future fracking applications would be taken locally.

The call was put forward by the Green Party on the authority and amended by the Labour and ruling Conservative groups in attempts, variously, to strengthen it and ensure that it did not put the county council into conflict with national policy.

Cabinet member for economic development and growth Aidy Riggott said that, in the wake of the promises made in Parliament, he believed residents would now be “reassured by the Secretary of State’s pledge that local people will have a veto on any fracking in their communities”.

“It is right that local people should have the final say about whether fracking happens in their area. We await the details of what this will mean in practice,” County Cllr Riggott added.

However, County Cllr Dowding said she took no comfort from what Jacob Rees-Mogg had promised MPs.

“Nothing has changed in terms of the Tory manifesto promise that they wouldn’t go ahead with fracking until it was categorically proved that it was safe.

“Any debate about referenda is absolute nonsense – what we really need is a re-run of the debate in Parliament about fracking [which] was hijacked by the complete chaos in the Conservative Party and people not knowing what was going on and being bullied.”

Liberal Democrat group leader at County Hall, David Howarth, was also sceptical. He said that the authority’s refusal, in 2015, of applications to frack at Little Plumpton and Roseacre Wood – the former subsequently being overturned by the government on appeal – showed that the local planning process worked properly if councillors were allowed to do their job.

“I’m not a great fan of referenda at the best of times. I sat [on the committee considering the applications] for three weeks, going through all the information and all the arguments on both sides, before I came to a conclusion – the general public aren’t going to have that opportunity.

“You elect people to represent you and to assimilate all the information and arrive at a conclusion. And I still think that we arrived at the correct result when we refused those planning applications,” County Cllr Howarth said.

Meanwhile, Miranda Cox, from campaign group Frack Free Lancashire, warned the government against riding roughshod over local people.

“The government has U-turned on its 2019 election manifesto in announcing the lifting of the moratorium on fracking. If it U-turns on its recent announcement to consult local residents and offer a veto, they will be treating constituents, local MPs and elected representatives with contempt.

“Conservative-led Lancashire County Council and Fylde Council both unanimously voted last week to seek reassurance from central government on this matter.

“They understand the strong and unwavering level of opposition to fracking across Lancashire. Jacob Rees-Mogg would be well advised to listen to us.”

LEGAL THREAT FROM LANCASHIRE PROTEST GROUP

The government is facing legal action unless it reverses its decision to lift the moratorium on fracking, which campaigners have branded “unlawful”.

The temporary ban was imposed in 2019, following a 2.9-magnitude earth tremor in the vicinity of Cuadrilla’s fracking site off Preston New Road in Little Plumpton.

The Preston New Road Action Group (PNRAG) has joined forces with campaign groups Friends of the Earth and Talk Fracking to write to the business secretary, Jacob Rees-Mogg, outlining grounds for a judicial review of the change in government policy.

Susan Holliday, from PNRAG said that the moratorium appeared to have been lifted “despite there being no new scientific evidence showing that it is safe to do so”.

“Residents living close to the site at Preston New Road know the impacts of fracking and have not forgotten how disruptive it is to their lives.

“Communities like ours should not have to endure the risks that fracking poses to health, wellbeing and our homes, especially when there are safer, more sustainable, alternatives available. We are ready to mount our opposition and see off fracking once again.”

Solicitor Rowan Smith, from legal firm Leigh Day, said that the government’s promise on fracking “could not have been clearer – no fracking, unless proven to be safe”.

He added: “The Secretary of State is still apparently concerned about safety, but has reassured Parliament that fracking can go ahead nonetheless, despite no consultation with local communities affected and no evidence to support that position from either the British Geological Society or the Committee on Climate Change.

“The latter advised that fracking is not compatible with net zero, a rather unsafe position to be in, unless certain tests have been met. Yet such tests have been completely ignored by this government. This is why our clients consider that the government has acted unlawfully and have written to ministers to demand a U-turn.”

WHAT THE FYLDE COAST’S TORY MPs SAID

MARK MENZIES, Fylde

In Parliament, Mark Menzies told fellow MPs that “the people of Fylde are not for sale, they cannot be bought”.

He later said, in a statement, that he had asked the then Prime Minister, LIz Truss, “to give her own assurances that fair, independent and transparent consultations would be held, with fracking firms excluded from direct involvement in the process”.

He added: “The steps taken, the concessions given, are beyond what we expected.

“This is a major win for people in Fylde, a chance to have their voice heard, to say no and to understand that no will mean no. Parliament will have a vote on how consent will be measured which is an effective veto on fracking.

“Local people will then have their own opportunity to block proposals and to bring an end to this once and for all. It is on this process I am now focused.”

PAUL MAYNARD, Blackpool North and Cleveleys

Mr. Maynard said in a statement: “My aim over recent weeks has been to ensure that the government’s commitment to local consent was a meaningful one – and not one that placed the process in the hands of companies such as Cuadrilla – so residents could veto fracking if we could not persuade the government to recommit to the moratorium.

“The debate and vote held [on] Wednesday was an opportunity to ensure the government moved in that direction. It was not a for/against fracking vote – these votes are never that simple – but rather an attempt by the opposition to ‘seize the order paper’ on the issue of fracking, as one way to force a vote of confidence in the government. That the government then botched that process is a matter of deep frustration and concern.

“Given the subject matter, I spent many hours [on Wednesday] outside the government whips office on my own ‘sit in’ protest to persuade them to change course – which they did to a sufficient extent that I could endorse the next stage as it gave me a meaningful chance to prevent fracking going ahead.

“The moratorium has now been extended [during] the consultation on how consent is conducted. There will be a subsequent vote for MPs on whether the consent scheme is adequate, which I will oppose if I am dissatisfied, as seems likely right now.”

SCOTT BENTON, Blackpool South

Speaking after the debate, Mr. Benton said: “I am fully aware that the majority of residents in Blackpool do not support the return of fracking to the Fylde coast and I share this view and always have.

“The war in Ukraine has demonstrated that we cannot rely on authoritarian foreign regimes for our energy supplies.

“Although I can see why the government has put fracking back on the table, the government have stated time and again it should only take place if it is safe and supported by local communities. The views of those living in the vicinity directly affected by the process must be taken into account. I look forward to taking part in the consultation on this issue and I welcome that the government have promised a vote at the appropriate time.

“However, the Labour Party [used] an opposition day debate on Wednesday to put forward a motion that will force the government to table a new bill in Parliament. This motion [was] not truly about banning fracking but an attempt by the Labour Party to take over the functions of our government.

“Instead of engineering a constructive and fair debate on this issue Labour have contrived to weaponize the issue of fracking. Playing political games and point scoring in this manner is truly shameful behaviour.”

LABOUR MP BLASTS BACKTRACKING ON FRACKING

Lancaster and Fleetwood Labour MP Cat Smith told the Commons debate that Lancashire residents believed the issue of fracking had been “put to bed” after the government moratorium was introduced three years ago.

“They thought they could be safe, knowing that there would not be earthquakes and there would not be fracking wells littering the Fylde coast—but, no, fracking is back: and we still do not want it.

“Local councillors of all political colours are backing motions at councils right across the county. Those include, this week alone, one at Fylde and one at Lancashire County Council, with both those Tory-run councils voting unanimously to pass anti-fracking motions.

“Councillors are telling me that they do not understand what this local consent looks like, so I suppose my question to the Minister is: what on earth does he mean by local consent?”

She added that the people of Lancashire “do not want to have fracking forced upon them”.

“Yes, we live in tough times and, yes, energy bills are going up, but fracking will not solve the energy security or price issues the UK currently faces. We need the government to put far more energy into looking at energy demand reduction, such as home insulation. Frankly, the only viable long-term route to lower bills and energy security is to get off fossil fuels.

“Fortunately for the minister, the answer is staring us clear in the face, because forms of clean energy such as solar, wind, tidal, hydrogen and nuclear are all options that this government should be throwing their full weight behind.

“Fracking is expensive and unsafe, and we know that communities in Lancashire do not support it,” Ms. Smith concluded.