Michael Shanks

I agree with my hon. Friend, and I will come on to that point. I appreciate the importance of consultation, but I thought the hon. Member for Chester South and Eddisbury put it very well. Consultation is not a briefing exercise; it is a listening exercise, and a reshaping of things on the basis of what we hear back. I will say more about that in just a moment. Let me be really clear about how this project is being developed. The Peak project is being developed independent of Government and is at an early stage. It is crucial that developers engage fully with local communities as they develop the proposals, and they will have to work towards introducing a proposal into the planning system. I have been very clear with developers directly that the project has to take local views into account and offer clear benefits to local communities. If that does not happen, the submission will simply not be taken forward. I am aware that proposals have received a number of local stories in the press and that a public petition has received many signatures. Let me echo something that the hon. Lady said. There is a way to engage in this process. Robust comments are important, as people care deeply about these things, but abuse targeted at either those involved in the project or hon. Members is not a productive way to take this work forward. I hope that there will be a process in which people feel they can genuinely participate. As I understand it, the Peak Cluster has plans for more extensive consultation later this year, before any final proposals are made. No decision has been made by the Government either to support the project or on the development consent order process, which will be completed once the proposal is submitted and will be completed in the way that these processes always are—in a quasi-judicial way, by the Secretary of State. Let me respond to a couple of specific challenges raised in the debate. On safety, it is really important to make the case to the public that carbon capture is a very tried-and-tested technology that has been deployed across industry and power generation at scale for a long time. Geological carbon dioxide storage has been in operation for decades, and Norway has stored CO₂ since 1996, with more than 20 million tonnes stored so far. Our regulatory regime rightly has to raise the safety levels to ensure that continues. The hon. Lady raised a number of other points, which I will happily pick up with her in more detail, but let me make a final point in closing. We want to be a Government who drive forward on reducing our carbon emissions and build the technologies of the future, but we do not govern by diktat. The views of local communities matter—they matter deeply to me, but also to the Secretary of State and to this process. The only way this works for everyone involved is if those views are taken seriously, and if communities feel that their views are taken seriously by all those involved. We must also all recognise the really important benefits that come from carbon capture and the pathway we are on as a Government. That is the balance that we seek to achieve as a Government—taking the views of local people seriously, but also building the infrastructure that this country needs for the future. I genuinely thank the hon. Member for Chester South and Eddisbury for bringing this debate before the House, and my hon. Friends for contributing to it. Question put and agreed to.