THE UK Government is "misleading" the public over claims it has no power over the decision to approve or reject the Cambo oil field, campaigners have said.
Environmental activists have taken Business Secretary Kwasi Kwarteng to task over repeated statements made by his department that he is “not involved in the decision”.
The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) have frequently said that the authority to approve a license for the oil field is with the Oil and Gas Authority (OGA) and it “cannot intervene”.
However, Friends of the Earth (FoE) Scotland and campaign group Uplift say that this is wrong and that the UK Government does have the power to stop the “new and damaging fossil fuel development”.
READ MORE: Cambo oil field: What does it mean for climate targets?
They accused the Givernment of “washing their hands of the dirty development” which contains over 800 million barrels of oil.
Campaigners are challenging repeated statements by BEIS which they say are used to “deflect calls” to reject the proposals.
They cite The National’s article on the Scottish Greens condemning the UK Government as an "embarassment" as a prime example of the government department’s tactics.
Further articles in the Evening Express and Sky News showed similar wording.
In our article, BEIS said: “The original licensing consent for the Cambo oil field dates back to 2001.
The Cambo oil field is located 125km north-west of Shetland
“The Secretary of State is not involved in the decision whether to grant consent to Cambo oil field – this will be taken by the Oil and Gas Authority, who are ultimately responsible.”
However, FoE Scotland and Uplift insist that the government does have the power to intervene.
In a letter to Kwarteng, the campaigners set out the “government’s apparent misunderstanding of its legal position”.
They say that the Energy Act (2016) gives the Secretary of State power to give a “general direction” to the OGA on matters that are “in the public interest”.
The letter reads: “The ‘climate emergency’ and related matters, particularly in the run up to COP26 later this year, could plainly provide a basis for such a direction.”
READ MORE: Nicola Sturgeon: SNP-Greens deal gives 'undeniable mandate' for indyref2
The second point made in the letter relates to the Environmental Statement and the process involved.
It states: “In particular, regulation 4(1) of the 2020 Regulations provides that a developer must not commence a project without the Secretary of State’s agreement to the OGA’s grant of consent and the consent of the OGA.
“Regulation 4(2) provides that the OGA must not grant consent without the agreement of the Secretary of State.”
The letter also says that the Secretary of State must reach a conclusion on the “significant effets of the project” as part of the process to grant consent for it to go ahead, and that this must include “matters relating to the impact of the proposal on climate change”.
It says that Kwarteng and the UK Government “has the power to intervene”, adding: “It follows that the Secretary of State’s public statements, assuming them to have correctly reported as above, are based on errors of law (and, as a result, that the Secretary of State is unlawfully failing to consider the exercise of the powers in question, as above)”.
Kwarteng has been called out by campaigners for 'washing his hands' over the oil field project
The campaigners have asked for an explanation from BEIS on Kwarteng’s position, but said “dependant on the answer” they are given, they are “likely” to commence judicial review proceedings “seeking declarations as the Secretary of Stae’s legal error(s)”.
Tessa Khan, lawyer and director of Uplift, said: “The government has repeatedly tried to shirk responsibility for this decision, claiming the process is controlled by the regulator, the Oil and Gas Authority (OGA), and that it “cannot intervene”, but they are wrong.
“They can and must use the power they have to stop this new and damaging fossil fuel development.
“For a government that enthusiastically took back control from EU regulators, to be suddenly cowed by a UK regulator doesn’t make sense.
READ MORE: Greenpeace take UK Government to court over Aberdeen BP oil permit decision
“Kwasi Kwarteng is bound by law to be involved in the decision to approve or reject the Cambo oil field. To claim otherwise is unlawful.”
Dr Richard Dixon, Friends of the Earth Scotland Director, said: “The climate can't afford new oil and gas projects like the Cambo field which would be spewing devastating climate pollution for decades.
“The recent code red climate warning makes it absolutely clear that we must urgently transition away from fossil fuels if we are to limit further climate breakdown.
“The Government does have the power to stop Cambo and it must use that power instead of trying to wash its hands of this dirty development.“
A BEIS spokesperson said: “As we have previously stated, the Cambo oil field was originally licensed in 2001 and consent for development of the field is a matter for our expert regulators, the Oil and Gas Authority (OGA), and the Offshore Petroleum Regulator for Environment and Decommissioning (OPRED), following their standard regulatory processes”
The IPCC warned that to avert the climate crisis oil and gas exploration must stop
We previously told how First Minister Nicola Sturgeon wrote to Prime Minister Boris Johnson urging him to reassess the plans for the oil field in the North Sea amid the climate crisis.
The crude oil field plans sparked further controversy after the UN warned of a “code red for humanity” off the back of a damning report by the IPCC which said human activity is causing unprecedented and potential irreversible damage to the climate.
And, last month Boris Johnson was asked to explain why drilling equipment was set to be installed at the Cambo field despite the project not being signed off.
However the owners of the crude oil field, Siccar Point Energy and Shell, denied this was the case and that work had been postponed until next year.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel