Andy Burnham has put off another big decision. It’s becoming a habit (Image: Getty)

But Jackdaw is a big decision. It should be based on the national interest, not short-term party politics. Britain needs all the reliable gas it can get to see us through a tough winter. Hanging on for another month is the last thing we need to do. The Tories have already accused him of chickening out of this decision once. Now’s it looks like he’s doing it agian.

This is becoming a nasty habit. Vital defence spending decisions have been shoved into 2027. Welfare reform has also been kicked into the long grass. Burnham is dithering over home secretary Shabana Mahmood’s immigration clampdown. And now the energy crisis is on the backburner too.

If you were wondering why Ed Miliband chose this week to announce further sanctions on Israel, it’s for the same reason. To head off the threat from the Greens, a happy home for hard-left activists, virtue-signalling hipsters and Israel-hating Islamists.

It’s grubby politics. And pathetic energy and foreign policy. Get used to it. This is life under Burnham. We may all pay the price when the temperature drops and the heating bills land this winter.

Andy Burnham just bottled another massive decision – remember this when winter bites

Andy Burnham is facing fresh criticism over the government’s decision to delay a ruling on the Jackdaw gas field, with opponents arguing that the government is hesitating at a time when Britain is already preparing for another difficult winter for energy consumers.

The controversy centres on the Shell and Equinor-backed Jackdaw project in the North Sea. The field has already passed through years of regulatory scrutiny, court challenges and environmental assessment. A decision on whether it can proceed under the latest consent process is still pending.

According to a report carried by Reuters on September 11, the government was expected to postpone its decision until after the October 8 Holborn and St Pancras by-election. Government sources were cited as saying that the decision would move into late autumn. The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, however, said there was no publicly announced timetable and that the application remained subject to the regulatory process.

That distinction matters. There is no official confirmation that Burnham personally delayed Jackdaw because of the by-election.

Nevertheless, the timing has created a political controversy.

The Holborn and St Pancras contest is taking place after the resignation of former prime minister Keir Starmer and is being closely watched because Labour faces competition from the Greens. Critics of the government have therefore argued that postponing a potentially controversial North Sea drilling decision until after the election could reduce the immediate political pressure on Labour.

That is an allegation about political motivation, rather than an established fact.

What is established is that Jackdaw remains in a live regulatory process.

In Parliament on September 3, Climate Transition Minister Katie White said the original consents for Jackdaw and Rosebank had been quashed by the Scottish Court of Session in January 2025. The government subsequently issued new guidance following the Finch judgment, requiring downstream or “end-use” emissions to be considered as part of environmental assessments. New consent procedures were then reopened.

The government’s position is therefore that ministers cannot simply wave through the project on political grounds. The Secretary of State must consider the relevant environmental evidence before agreeing to consent.

That process is particularly important because Jackdaw is not simply an ordinary planning application.

The original project received regulatory consent in 2022, but that consent was subsequently challenged following the court’s interpretation of how downstream emissions should be considered. Shell has said that work has continued while the new consent process takes place.

Shell reported in January 2025 that it had already spent more than £800 million on the project. It said Jackdaw could provide enough fuel to heat around 1.4 million UK homes once operational.

The project is now operated through Adura, following the combination of Shell and Equinor’s UK offshore oil and gas businesses. According to the project’s current documentation, Jackdaw involves a wellhead platform connected by a 31-kilometre pipeline to the Shearwater hub. The platform is located approximately 250 kilometres east of Aberdeen.

Supporters of the project argue that its significance goes beyond the number of homes associated with its gas output.

Britain remains dependent on imported gas, while North Sea production from older fields is declining. The industry argues that maintaining domestic production can improve energy resilience and reduce exposure to international supply disruptions.

Offshore Energies UK has recently called for faster decisions on North Sea developments, arguing that delays could reduce investment and increase Britain’s dependence on imported energy. The organisation has also linked the future of projects such as Jackdaw and Rosebank to wider questions about taxation and the regulatory environment.

But there is another side to the argument.

Approving Jackdaw would not automatically mean cheaper household energy bills.

Gas is traded in an international market, and Britain’s electricity prices are strongly affected by wholesale gas prices. Even gas produced in the North Sea does not simply bypass that market and arrive in consumers’ homes at a special domestic price.

The project also cannot be treated as an immediate solution to every winter energy problem.

Its supporters have argued that it could contribute to supply in the relatively near term. Industry publication Offshore reported earlier in September that Adura considered the project close to being ready for production if consent were granted.

However, a government decision in September would not mean that the entire output would instantly transform Britain’s energy market.

This is why the debate has become more complicated than the claim that Britain simply needs “more gas”.

The government must balance energy security against environmental obligations and the legal requirements imposed by the courts. At the same time, ministers face pressure from an energy industry that argues that uncertainty makes it harder to invest in Britain’s offshore infrastructure.

Burnham has previously signalled that he intends to take a pragmatic approach to North Sea oil and gas.

Reuters reported in July that, after becoming prime minister, Burnham said Britain could not ignore the need for energy resources and indicated that he would take a pragmatic approach to existing North Sea resources. He nevertheless remained broadly committed to the previous Labour government’s position on new exploration licences.

That creates an interesting test for his government.

If Jackdaw is approved, environmental campaigners are likely to question why the government is permitting another fossil-fuel development while simultaneously pursuing its clean-energy programme.

If it is rejected, or if the decision continues to be delayed, industry representatives and political opponents can argue that Britain is making itself more dependent on imported gas.

Neither argument automatically settles the policy question.

There is also a question of scale.

Jackdaw’s original environmental documentation estimated that peak production could represent around 6.5% of projected UK Continental Shelf gas production and provide energy equivalent to heating more than 1.4 million homes. Those figures describe the project’s potential contribution to North Sea production, not a promise that household bills would fall by a corresponding amount.

That distinction is crucial for consumers.

A new gas field can contribute to national supply without directly reducing the price paid by an individual household. Wholesale prices, international demand, storage, infrastructure, taxes and the structure of the electricity market all influence the final bill.

Britain is already heading into a winter in which energy costs remain a political issue.

Ofgem’s price cap for October to December 2026 means a typical direct-debit household using both gas and electricity faces an average increase of 4% compared with the previous quarter. The electricity unit rate is set at 26.32p per kWh, while gas is 7.97p per kWh.

The Burnham government has responded with a measure designed to reduce some of the pressure.

From October 1, VAT on household electricity is being reduced from 5% to zero until March 31, 2027. The government estimates that this will save households an average of £45 a year. Around six million households are also eligible for the £150 Warm Home Discount this winter.

So the claim that the government has simply ignored household energy costs would not accurately describe the policy record.

The more specific criticism is about whether the government is doing enough to strengthen Britain’s domestic energy supply.

That is where Jackdaw has become politically significant.

Critics see the delay as evidence of hesitation. Ministers say the project is still being assessed through a legally required regulatory process. Industry groups want greater certainty. Environmental campaigners argue that new fossil-fuel production must be judged against Britain’s climate commitments.

And households are largely left watching the debate from the sidelines, concerned less about the political symbolism of the North Sea than about the number appearing on their next energy bill.

The coming months will therefore put Burnham’s “pragmatic” energy policy under scrutiny.

If Jackdaw receives consent, the government will have to explain how the project fits with its climate objectives and how much difference it can realistically make to energy security.

If the decision remains delayed, ministers will face continuing questions over whether regulatory caution, political timing or both are responsible.

For consumers, the important point is not to assume that Jackdaw would have guaranteed cheaper heating this winter. It would not.

But neither should the wider significance of the decision be dismissed.

North Sea production, gas imports, energy resilience and the transition towards lower-carbon power are connected parts of Britain’s energy system. Decisions made now can influence investment and supply for years, even if they do not immediately change a household’s bill.

The accusation that Andy Burnham has “bottled” the Jackdaw decision is therefore a political characterisation rather than an established fact.

What is undeniable is that the decision has been delayed amid a live regulatory process, at a time when Britain’s energy security is under intense scrutiny.

And when winter arrives, the question for the government will be whether its combination of domestic production, renewable investment, energy-market reform and targeted household support has provided enough security.

That judgment will ultimately depend on the evidence: how much energy Britain can secure, at what cost, and how effectively ministers can protect households while meeting the country’s environmental and legal obligations.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.