Whatever we think of Donald Trump‘s war in Iran, it has exposed some home truths about Britain’s chronic weakness.
One such truth is that we no longer have a proper navy capable of going to sea. At least half our tragically depleted fleet is holed up in port being maintained or repaired.
Another home truth is that in an increasingly insecure world we don’t have cheap or reliable energy. Successive governments are responsible for this lamentable state of affairs.
But this Government, which has put its energy policy entirely in the hands of one deluded zealot – I’m of course speaking of Ed Miliband – is making things much worse.
And yet, incredible though it may sound, Miliband believes that the crisis in the Middle East actually vindicates his headlong, and ruinously expensive, rush to net zero.
The Energy Secretary should join the Greens, if they’d have him, since his policy is indistinguishable from theirs – and just as bonkers. Who knows, like Green Party leader Zack Polanski he may believe that hypnosis can increase the size of women’s breasts.
Miliband told Laura Kuenssberg on her BBC programme: ‘There is one lesson from this crisis… and that is, we need homegrown clean power that we control.’
The Energy Secretary had previously said to BBC Radio news on Friday: ‘We’ve got to get off the rollercoaster of fossil fuels.’ He went on to justify his refusal to grant any more licences to drill for gas and oil in the North Sea, asserting that granting such licences ‘would not take a penny off people’s bills’.
Miliband told Laura Kuenssberg on her BBC programme: ‘There is one lesson from this crisis… and that is, we need homegrown clean power that we control.’
Where does one start with this nonsense? Whether he likes it or not (and Miliband doesn’t) tens of millions of people are going to need gas and oil for the foreseeable future. Both Sir Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves said as much in the Commons last week.
There are 23 million gas boilers in Britain. Many will be replaced with new gas boilers, which are cheaper, and often more effective, than heat pumps. That is why gas will be needed for a very long time.
Bills might not fall significantly if we produced more of our gas and oil from the North Sea, since prices are determined by global markets. But some experts believe they would come down because we would escape the high costs of transporting liquefied natural gas.
What is certain is that increasing the proportion of our gas we get from the North Sea (at present it is about a third) would give us much greater energy security.
Extracting more of our own gas would also provide thousands more jobs for British workers, which is why Unite, the trade union representing oil and gas workers, is wildly in favour of reviving North Sea extraction and exploration.
It would also provide more tax revenue for the Exchequer. That said, the present tax rate of 78 per cent is grand larceny, acting as a disincentive to gas and oil companies.
Why doesn’t Ed Miliband want more drilling in the North Sea? Because he is a climate change fanatic who puts ideology in front of all other considerations including the security of this country.
He’s a Grade A hypocrite, too. He accepts oil imports via pipelines from Norway (which supplies about half our needs) while the country increases its own North Sea exploration. He tolerates gas shipments from America and Qatar, whose carbon footprint is considerable.
Why doesn’t Ed Miliband want more drilling in the North Sea? Because he is a climate change fanatic who puts ideology in front of all other considerations including the security of this country, writes Stephen Glover
A report in The Mail on Sunday suggested Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper is teaming up with the Energy Secretary on what is justly called a ‘nightmare ticket’
As long as the gas comes from elsewhere, he is content. It is tantamount to my saying that I am giving up meat for Lent and then shamelessly wolfing an Argentinian steak on the grounds that it is foreign.
So when he talks about getting off ‘the rollercoaster of fossil fuels’ he is being mealy-mouthed because he knows we’ll continue to be dependent on gas, and will be long after we have been relieved of his presence.
Incidentally, so little does Miliband like the idea of gas that he has refused to make greater provision for its storage. A week ago it was reported that Britain had only two days of gas stored, whereas many European countries have several weeks of gas. We are unnecessarily exposed.
What Britain requires is a balanced energy policy. We already have more than enough wind turbines. We should have much more nuclear power, as even Miliband acknowledges, though he has nonetheless been dragging his feet.
And we must be honest about our continuing need for oil and gas. That means encouraging more development in the North Sea. It should also mean (though I recognise this will never happen under Labour) fracking for gas once safety concerns have been properly addressed.
Instead of adopting a balanced approach, Miliband is pushing a reluctant country down the narrow path towards more wind turbines and solar power. This can never be the solution for the simple reason that wind and sunshine in Britain are irregular.
Last year the Government paid some £1.5 billion to wind farms for turning off turbines when their electricity wasn’t needed, and to gas plants to fire up when the electricity grid couldn’t cope. That money could have been spent on building up our denuded Navy.
At the same time, about 16 per cent of our electricity was imported via interconnectors from Europe because at times we were not producing enough power from our own sources. Again we are dependent on others – and of course it comes at a cost.
This is the story of Ed Miliband’s hold over us. We are further away than ever from having anything resembling energy security or independence, while Labour’s election promise that bills would fall by £300 hasn’t begun to materialise.
On the contrary, electricity bills have risen by about £200 on Miliband’s watch, and are likely to go up again in the second half of this year unless Trump’s war ends quickly. Much of the explanation lies in Labour’s helter-skelter investment in net zero.
Starmer and Rachel Reeves may be politically at sea but they must have enough sense to see that Miliband’s zealotry is damaging this country, and making an unloved Government even more unpopular.
Starmer is weak, of course, and fears Miliband as a possible successor. A report in the Mail on Sunday suggested that schoolmarmish Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper is teaming up with the Energy Secretary on what is justly called a ‘nightmare ticket’.
God save us from that. Awful as they are, I’d rather have Starmer and Reeves than that dreadful duo, or indeed any other Labour combination that has been spoken of.
Miliband sticks to his dogmatic views in defiance of all the evidence. He gives added credibility to the old dictum that there’s no one more dangerous in life than a clever fool.
If Starmer wants this Government to survive he must get rid of him. Give him another job, if that will sweeten the pill, for all I care. There is nowhere Miliband will do a quarter as much damage as in his present post.
Of course, he’s too old at 56 to adjust. The world could collapse around him and he’d still not concede that he is wrong. The only way to protect the country from Ed Miliband is to change his job.