Prime Minister Andy Burnham has approved a gas field in the North Sea (Image: Getty)
Andy Burnham has approved drilling of the Jackdaw gas field in the North Sea. The Prime Minister gave the development the green light on Wednesday following months of pressure from opposition parties and his own MPs.
He said the move would protect hundreds of jobs and help keep millions of homes warm this winter. The development will start supplying gas to homes and businesses from the end of the month, the Government said.
Mr Burnham said: “I welcome the Energy Secretary’s decision, which will protect hundreds of jobs and help keep millions of homes warm this winter. At a time when people are really struggling, it’s right that we look in a responsible way at maximising the existing energy reserves we have in Britain that could help.
“We’re committed to moving towards renewable energy and reaching net zero by 2050. But even on our ambitious climate path, we’ll still require oil and gas as part of our energy needs for decades to come. That’s why we’re taking a pragmatic approach to the North Sea. We’re also establishing a new Energy Wealth Fund to invest in renewable energy, support the green transition and help reduce energy bills over the long-term.
“Our approach will ensure we can boost our energy security, back British workers, ringfence future North Sea proceeds to speed up the green transition, hit our ambitious climate targets and – crucially – bring down bills.”
Drilling in the Jackdaw gas field will not bring down bills this winter, Energy Secretary Miatta Fahnbulleh has said.
She added: “I think it’s important to say that upfront. But look, the key consideration in coming to this decision was at a time when we are in an energy crisis triggered by the conflict in the Middle East.
“Energy security is really important and this will contribute to the homegrown sources of energy that we have.
“The project will be able to supply homes and businesses across the country this month – and that’s really critical.”
The gas field was approved by the former Conservative government in 2022 but was delayed by a legal ruling from a Scottish court when environmental groups argued consent was given without fully considering the climate impact.
Jackdaw’s owner said it will account for 6% of UK gas output when at peak production but environmental groups say it will provide only 2% of UK use when imports are included. Mr Burnham is maintaining the Labour manifesto moratorium on any new North Sea licences being issued.
A decision on whether to approve the development of the Rosebank oil and gas field will take longer, the Government has said.
Industry bodies have argued that starting production at the sites would provide much-needed jobs and improve the UK’s energy security as overseas conflicts threaten supply.
Ms Fahnbulleh said: “This decision will support the country’s energy security with homegrown gas this winter and help minimise the UK’s use of imported higher emission fuels as we continue our transition to renewables and nuclear.
“The decision is compatible with our legally binding climate commitments, and we remain resolute in ending new licences for oil and gas and achieving net zero by 2050.”
Environmentalists fear Jackdaw’s gas will hamper efforts to slash planet-warming carbon emissions as deadly heatwaves and extreme weather affect people across the globe.
Kate Norgrove, chief impact officer at WWF said: “This is a disappointing decision and the government now urgently needs to show that it remains 100% committed to the clean energy transition by rejecting the even more damaging Rosebank oil field. It must set out the UK’s roadmap to transition away from fossil fuels for good, securing well-paid clean energy jobs and protecting the public from soaring bills in the process.
“The truth is that this decision will only support a tiny number of jobs, do nothing to lower prices, barely move the needle on growth, and undermine the UK’s climate leadership. We have all seen the devastating consequences of rising temperatures this summer for people and nature, and it’s clear that politicians are out of step with public opinion on taking action on climate change.”
Jackdaw, which is about 150 miles (241.4km) east of Aberdeen, is a gas field which its operators say could be connected to the UK network within months.
The Conservatives had accused Mr Burnham of “dithering and delaying” on the approval.
The Prime Minister was said to be putting off a decision on the Jackdaw gas field until after the crunch Holborn and St Pancras by-election due to fears of the threat from the Green Party.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch said: “Finally. Labour spent two years faffing about to make a decision which Conservatives had already approved two years ago. If they’d done this in the summer we’d have had that gas heating British homes this Christmas. An unnecessary waste of time and money by a party that puts its own interest above the country’s.
Unions have welcomed Jackdaw’s approval because of the need to avoid a “jobless transition” to renewables.
Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said: “In my conversations with the Prime Minister and the Chancellor, I have been very clear that whilst we of course support net zero, we cannot have a jobless transition, abandon our energy security or offshore our carbon responsibilities. That is why we have argued for this decision on Jackdaw.
“This gives us a bit more time to create and fund a concrete plan for commensurate jobs for workers currently working in the North Sea. Now we urgently need to use that and invest in industries like wind turbine manufacture and refining green jet fuel. We simply cannot let go of one rope until we have hold of another.”
Andy Burnham Makes Major Move on North Sea Drilling That Could Have Huge Consequences
Andy Burnham has made a major decision on Britain’s North Sea energy industry, approving the controversial Jackdaw gas field in a move that could have far-reaching consequences for energy security, employment and the country’s climate commitments.
The decision, announced on October 21, 2026, marks a significant moment for the Labour government. After months of political pressure, legal complications and disagreements over the future of offshore drilling, the government has agreed that the project can proceed.
Burnham has defended the decision as a pragmatic response to Britain’s energy needs, arguing that domestic gas production can support jobs, strengthen energy security and help the country manage the transition towards cleaner energy.
However, the announcement has also intensified criticism from environmental campaigners, who believe the government risks undermining its climate ambitions by allowing another major fossil fuel project to move forward.
At the heart of the dispute is a difficult question: can Britain continue to develop its remaining North Sea resources while delivering on its promise to reach net zero emissions by 2050?
The Jackdaw decision has brought that question into sharp focus.
A major decision for Britain’s energy future
The Jackdaw gas field lies approximately 150 miles east of Aberdeen and is operated by Adura, a joint venture involving Shell and Norway’s Equinor.
The development was originally approved by the Conservative government in 2022. However, its progress was subsequently delayed after legal challenges concerning the environmental assessment of the project.
A court ruling required the authorities to consider not only emissions generated during the extraction process but also the emissions produced when the gas is eventually burned.
That requirement created additional obstacles for Jackdaw and other proposed North Sea developments.
The latest decision followed further environmental assessment and consideration by the government. Energy Secretary Miatta Fahnbulleh agreed that the regulator could grant the necessary consent for production to proceed.
The government said the field could begin supplying British homes and businesses from the end of October, subject to the completion of the required development work.
Officials estimate that Jackdaw could increase domestic gas production by around six per cent at its peak and contribute approximately £2.9 billion to the British economy over its lifetime.
Those figures have become central to the government’s defence of the project.
Ministers argue that Britain should make responsible use of existing energy resources while expanding renewable and low-carbon alternatives.
For Burnham, the approval represents an attempt to balance immediate economic pressures with longer-term environmental objectives.
Why Andy Burnham backed the project
Energy security has become an increasingly important issue for governments across Europe.
International conflicts, disruptions to supply chains and fluctuations in global energy markets have demonstrated how quickly the cost and availability of fuel can become a political concern.
Britain produces a substantial proportion of its own gas, but it also depends on imports, including supplies from Norway and liquefied natural gas arriving by ship.
Supporters of Jackdaw argue that additional domestic production could reduce some dependence on overseas supplies and help maintain the infrastructure needed to deliver energy reliably.
Burnham has defended the approval on the grounds that the country will continue to need oil and gas during the transition to a cleaner energy system.
His government has maintained that the decision is compatible with the target of reaching net zero emissions by 2050, while insisting that it will not issue new licences to explore previously unlicensed oil and gas fields.
This distinction is important. Jackdaw already had an existing licence, but it required further consent before production could begin.
The government therefore presents its decision as allowing an existing project to proceed rather than abandoning its broader policy on new exploration licences.
Nevertheless, critics argue that approving additional production could encourage further demands from the oil and gas industry.
The decision may therefore have implications beyond the Jackdaw field itself.
Could the project reduce energy bills?
For millions of households, the most important question is whether the approval will make gas and electricity cheaper.
The government has linked Jackdaw to energy security and the need to maintain domestic supplies. However, ministers have also acknowledged that the project will not immediately reduce household bills this winter.
Energy Secretary Miatta Fahnbulleh has stressed that the decision was made against the background of an energy crisis influenced by international instability.
That distinction matters because Britain’s energy prices are affected by international markets rather than simply by where gas is extracted.
Domestic gas production can contribute to supply, but British producers operate within a market influenced by global demand, geopolitical developments and competition between countries.
Consequently, increasing production in the North Sea does not automatically guarantee lower prices for British consumers.
Critics of the project argue that its contribution to the overall market will be too small to produce a meaningful reduction in household bills.
They also question whether the economic benefits justify the environmental consequences of developing another fossil fuel resource.
Supporters counter that domestic production can still provide strategic advantages, even if it cannot insulate consumers completely from international price movements.
They argue that maintaining a reliable supply is important for households, businesses and industries that cannot immediately switch to alternative energy sources.
The debate highlights the difference between improving energy security and directly reducing the cost of living.
Both are important policy objectives, but they are not necessarily achieved through the same measures.
Environmental campaigners challenge the decision
Environmental organisations have criticised the approval, warning that continued fossil fuel development could make Britain’s climate objectives more difficult to achieve.
Their concerns focus on the emissions associated with extracting and burning the gas, as well as the possibility that new production could prolong the country’s reliance on fossil fuels.
Campaigners argue that government policy should prioritise renewable energy, energy efficiency and technologies capable of reducing emissions over the coming decades.
They also question the scale of the employment benefits associated with Jackdaw.
According to estimates published by the government, the developer expects the project to create 27 direct jobs and safeguard 273 existing jobs that might otherwise be lost.
Supporters say these positions are only part of the wider economic picture, pointing to potential work for suppliers, contractors and companies involved in maintaining offshore infrastructure.
Opponents argue that the direct employment figures illustrate why the project should not be presented as a complete solution for North Sea workers.
They want the government to invest more heavily in renewable industries and provide clear pathways for workers to move into new roles.
Environmental groups have also called for a clearer roadmap showing how the government intends to reduce fossil fuel dependence while protecting jobs and keeping energy affordable.
The disagreement is therefore not simply about whether Jackdaw should proceed. It also concerns what should happen to Britain’s energy workforce and industrial infrastructure over the longer term.
Pressure from both sides of the political debate
Burnham’s decision has exposed competing pressures within British politics.
Conservative politicians have criticised the time taken to approve Jackdaw, arguing that the previous government had already supported the project and that further delays created unnecessary uncertainty for the industry.
Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative leader, has argued that the government should have acted sooner to allow domestic gas production to begin.
From this perspective, the approval is a necessary step towards strengthening energy security and supporting investment in the North Sea.
Environmental campaigners, meanwhile, have called for the government to demonstrate that it remains committed to a rapid transition away from fossil fuels.
Some Labour supporters also face a dilemma. They want Britain to protect industrial jobs and maintain reliable energy supplies, but they are concerned about the environmental consequences of expanding oil and gas production.
Trade unions have emphasised the importance of avoiding a so-called jobless transition, in which traditional energy jobs disappear before comparable employment opportunities are available in emerging industries.
Their position reflects a wider challenge for the government: the transition to cleaner energy must be accompanied by a credible plan for workers, training and regional economic development.
The Jackdaw approval has brought these competing demands into direct conflict.
Rosebank could be the next major test
Attention is now turning towards the Rosebank oil and gas field, another controversial North Sea development that has faced legal challenges over environmental assessments.
Unlike Jackdaw, Rosebank has not received the same final approval under the current government.
The decision is expected to attract even greater attention because of the field’s potential scale and the wider debate over new oil production.
Industry representatives argue that developments such as Rosebank could support investment, maintain skilled employment and contribute to Britain’s energy supplies.
Environmental campaigners believe that approving the project would send a damaging signal about the country’s climate commitments.
The government will need to assess the relevant environmental evidence and legal requirements before reaching a decision.
Jackdaw could therefore become an important reference point in the debate over Rosebank, even though the two projects have different characteristics and must be considered separately.
The outcome may help clarify how the government intends to interpret its existing commitments when dealing with previously licensed fossil fuel developments.
A wider debate about Britain’s future
The consequences of the Jackdaw decision extend beyond one gas field in the North Sea.
Britain must determine how to maintain reliable energy supplies while reducing emissions, supporting industrial communities and protecting households from volatile prices.
These objectives can sometimes pull in different directions.
Domestic gas production may help support existing industries and provide additional supplies, but it cannot guarantee lower bills or remove Britain’s exposure to global energy markets.
Renewable energy can reduce dependence on fossil fuels over time, but the transition requires investment, infrastructure and careful planning to maintain reliability.
The government has also announced a new Energy Wealth Fund, beginning with a £2 billion contribution, intended to direct investment towards renewable and low-carbon energy and support the longer-term transition.
The effectiveness of that approach will depend on how the money is used, whether it attracts further investment and whether it creates sustainable employment opportunities.
For Burnham, the challenge is to demonstrate that approving Jackdaw forms part of a coherent energy strategy rather than a departure from the government’s wider commitments.
That means explaining how the project will contribute to supply security, how environmental impacts will be addressed and how Britain will continue developing cleaner alternatives.
The government will also need to be realistic about what the field can achieve. Its contribution to national gas production may be significant for the industry, but it is not a complete answer to the country’s energy problems.
Ultimately, the Jackdaw decision represents a consequential choice in Britain’s ongoing debate over energy and climate policy.
It offers the North Sea industry an opportunity to move forward with an existing development, while raising difficult questions about emissions, household costs and the future of offshore employment.
Whether the decision proves beneficial in the long term will depend on how effectively the government combines domestic energy production with investment in cleaner technologies and a managed transition for workers.
The approval has settled one important question about Jackdaw. It has not settled the larger argument over what Britain’s energy system should look like in the decades ahead.