Official Report 307KB pdf
Item 2 is our work programme. We had our business planning day in the Parliament on Tuesday last week. We spent the best part of a day with three panels—one on the economy, one on energy and one on tourism—and discussed the various aspects of our work. Afterwards, we had a discussion about what we will do in the short term and what we will look at in the longer term.
We had some discussion about energy prices, following on from our evidence session before the recess. I think that we agreed at least to keep a watching brief on that issue, if not to get an update.
We did. The issue of fuel poverty was raised by every member in the discussion afterwards, so I think that we should add that to the paper. The short-term part of it is covered under paragraph 5, which says that we will focus specifically on fuel poverty in the budget process. However, you are right that we discussed the matter more widely than that in the context of the impending winter, so we should add it to the paper—that is a fair point.
We asked the power companies whether they would be part of a working panel to look at areas in which we might help to reduce fuel poverty. Is that covered by paragraph 5 or is it a separate element?
If memory serves me correctly, that was your final question to the power companies. You asked for a yes or no answer, and each of them answered yes.
I do not know whether the committee still feels that that approach would be advantageous, but I agree with Rhoda Grant that we need to keep tabs on the power companies, which operate totally independently.
We can add that in. I suppose that at some point we can write to them to find out whether they have actually done anything in response to your question.
I have a slightly longer-term question. Obviously, the specific short-term items will be enough to keep us busy for the first half of the year and perhaps a little longer. When do you intend to come back and revisit the longer-term questions, looking at the rest of this parliamentary year and the priorities for the longer-term—the two or three years after that?
My gut response to that question is to say “Fairly swiftly”. That was the mood of the committee last week. We did not make decisions last week because the Government’s legislative programme comes out this afternoon and we wanted to see what is in it. There was at least a hint that we might get a meaty piece of legislation to look at—I think that that was the description. We will know fairly quickly what we are getting—if anything. Thereafter, even if we are given something big to look at, we can consider what to do afterwards as we will have a rough idea of the timetable. Therefore, although we want to consider the long term fairly swiftly, I suggest that we wait until we see what comes out today.
Thank you.
Are members happy to note the paper as our work programme?