Offshore Renewable Energy Bill

I present a legislative statement on the Offshore Renewable Energy Bill.

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Greg O’Connor): That legislative statement is published under the authority of the House and can be found on the Parliament website.

Hon SIMEON BROWN: I move, That the Offshore Renewable Energy Bill be now read a first time. I nominate the Transport and Infrastructure Committee to consider the bill.

This bill delivers on a commitment to put a regulatory regime in place for offshore renewable energy as part of the Government’s Electrify NZ plan. Offshore wind is the most developed offshore renewable energy technology, and New Zealand has world-class offshore wind resources, with some of the highest capacity factors in the world. New Zealand currently does not have a regulatory regime for offshore renewable energy, and this bill delivers that regulatory regime so that we can unlock the potential that offshore renewable energy has for New Zealand.

This bill establishes new permitting regimes for all forms of offshore renewable energy, including wind, wave, and tidal. The permitting regime aims to provide greater certainty to potential developers to invest in offshore renewable energy developments and allows the selection of developments that best meet New Zealand’s interests. The bill also provides for the management of risks to the Crown and the public. Establishing a regime is an important step that will give investors the confidence to construct generation assets to help power New Zealand’s increasing electrified economy. This bill will help us do that.

This bill introduces two dedicated offshore renewable energy permits—first, feasibility permits, which will give developers greater certainty to undertake feasibility studies in specified areas. It will give the holder the right to apply for relevant resource and marine consents in that area and the exclusive ability to apply for a commercial permit to build and operate offshore renewable energy infrastructure in that area. Secondly, it allows for commercial permits. A commercial permit must be obtained before construction begins and provides assurance that the project is ready to progress to construction. It will complement the environmental consents and other approvals required to build and operate offshore renewable energy infrastructure.

The bill limits the ability for developers to landbank certain areas—not that it’s necessarily land—or impede other developments. Permits will have “use it or lose it” provisions, meaning that if a project fails to start or progress, the area can be made available to other developers. Feasibility permit applications will be assessed on a comparative basis and awarded to the projects that are most likely to deliver the most benefits for New Zealanders. Applicants will need to meet minimum eligibility thresholds and establish that they have the technical and financial capability to install, operate, maintain, and decommission the proposed infrastructure.

The Minister for Energy will consider feasibility permit applications and must have regard to any significant risks to national security or public order posed by the applicants, the impact on Treaty settlements, the applicant’s approach to managing existing rights and interests in the area, and the applicant’s compliance record in New Zealand and internationally. Feasibility permit holders will be able to apply for commercial permits whenever they are ready to do so. The commercial permit process will provide assurance that the project is ready to progress to construction. The Minister for Energy will consider commercial permit applications and must have regard to readiness to carry out the proposed development, compliance with requirements in the legislation and conditions of the applicant’s feasibility permit, and the applicant’s ability to put in place an acceptable financial security arrangement.

It is important that people can have their say on potential developments, and there will be an opportunity to do this before the Minister for Energy decides to grant feasibility permits. Feasibility permit applications will be publicly notified, and any person who wishes to make a submission will have a reasonable opportunity to do so. Applicants for feasibility and commercial permits will be required to consult with relevant iwi and hapū ahead of submitting their applications. The Minister for Energy must also consult those iwi and hapū before granting any permit. Provisions in the bill relating to upholding Treaty settlements and associated rights and interests will align with those in the fast-track approvals legislation which was passed earlier today.

We want to ensure that offshore renewable energy infrastructure does not become a significant financial risk to the Crown. The bill requires all permit holders and owners of related transmission infrastructure to decommission their offshore renewable energy infrastructure at the end of its life. The bill also requires financial security arrangements to be put in place and maintained to cover the cost of the Crown in the event that permit holders or infrastructure owners fail to meet their obligations to decommission. This is consistent with standard practice internationally.

Other protections in the bill include the ability to have safety zones to protect the infrastructure and people from intentional or accidental harm.

The bill enables the administration, monitoring, and enforcement of the regime, and it is intended that the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment undertake this role.

The bill also includes a range of offences and penalties for breaches of the regime, ranging from $3,000 to $10 million fines through to permit revocation or imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years. Significant fines and penalties were considered necessary in certain circumstances to provide an effective deterrent, given the financial capability of likely permit holders.

The bill includes regulation-making powers to set out procedural and implementation matters, such as additional matters that the Minister must have regard to when determining whether to grant a permit, and the provision of information. The powers include the ability to set fees and levies to recover the costs of the regulator, and I intend to progress feasibility and permit and cost recovery regulations at the same time as the bill progresses through the House.

The policy proposals in this bill have been developed with input from industry and stakeholders, with two rounds of public consultation. Ultimately, no decisions by Cabinet had been made prior to this Government coming to power, and so this Government has had to make those decisions, draft the legislation, and now bring this legislation to the House. I’m pleased that we’ve been able to do that in our first year in Government—to bring this legislation to the House so we can enable an offshore renewable energy regime here in New Zealand to unlock the significant potential that exists in our oceans surrounding our country, and, critically importantly, unlock that electricity which will help power our country and our economy out into the future; critically important to meeting our net zero 2050 target.

The proposed regime borrows the best from more mature regimes, such as in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Denmark, and Australia, and is adapted to suit here in New Zealand. This Government is committed to enabling offshore renewable energy. It is intended for the offshore renewable energy regime to be in place by mid-2025, and the first feasibility permit application round to be opened in late 2025. I commend this bill to the House.

The question is that the motion be agreed to.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I’m very pleased to take a call on the Offshore Renewable Energy Bill, and very pleased to see it come to the House. Labour will be supporting this bill. This is work that I think continues very much the work that was begun by our Government—the two consultation rounds that the Minister referred to, of course, were consultation rounds that were initiated by our Government. It is pleasing to see that this work has appeared this year. The intention, of course, was to have a regulatory regime up and running this year, but it is pleasing to say that it has had some progress.

One of the things that I will put on the table that Labour wants to see is some increased momentum around this work. We have already seen one significant international investor leave New Zealand—partly because of lack of momentum, also because of decisions with the fast-track bill around competing interests. I’m putting on the table that, while Labour supports the bill, we do think there is far more urgency that the Government could bring to this work. New Zealand undoubtedly has some of the best offshore wind resources in the world. I know, meeting with the Global Wind Energy Council, that they described the resources in New Zealand as some of the best that they have seen.

When we came to think about how it is that we would put together a consenting regime, we looked around the world for best examples. We looked to places like Scotland, who had put together a sophisticated regime that brought community in, and very much about how that engagement with community worked very well. One of the other things that we looked to was regimes where it had enabled the development—not just the seabed banking of permits to block our competitors, as we’ve seen in other jurisdictions such as Japan; how it is that we could facilitate not only the concept but the building of it.

For us, there were several key points we looked at. What we will be looking at through the select committee stage of this legislation: one is around the pace—what can we do to pick up the pace? We’ve already lost momentum with this Government not progressing the work on the original time line. What can we do to pick that up? I’m pleased to see that there is an attempt to have alignment with Australia. The reality is much of the international capital that will be attracted is looking for Australasian investment opportunities, so we will be looking to see how that alignment looks, not only with Australia but without, within the Asia-Pacific region.

One of the critical components is “use it or lose it” clauses, and are these strong enough in not having loopholes? What we have seen in other jurisdictions such as Japan is someone will apply for permits without the intention of ever building offshore wind but in an attempt to block out competitors—something we have to ensure our regime doesn’t have. We need to see a benefit to New Zealand.

One of the fundamental issues that has always sat at the core of this—and what we cannot borrow from international regimes—is getting our Treaty partnerships right. How is it that we’re going to engage with mana whenua? What is the role for mana whenua? What are the opportunities in terms of the 21st century energy system that is different from a 20th century energy system—oil and gas exploration, in particular—that has seen an exploitative model where mana whenua have been a tick-box exercise, rather than commercial players sitting at the table and actually there being good commercial opportunities.

At select committee, Labour will be ensuring that we have enduring provisions within this bill to make sure that we have this right, because what international capital coming to New Zealand realises is that—I don’t think this Government does—unless you get this right, we will tie up offshore wind in the courts for years. This is an absolutely critical component. Yes, this is an absolutely critical component of us making sure that we can get it right. Other things we’ll be looking at in select committee are the royalties regime; also price stabilisation, which we’re seeing in other parts of the world; competing uses—we’ve already seen BlueFloat leave New Zealand shores because of decisions this Government has made. What are we doing in terms of planning to make sure that we’re not crowding out renewable energy?

While we’re supporting this and are pleased to support this bill to select committee, there are many areas—it is a reasonably complex piece of legislation—where we’ll be seeking to work with the Government to make sure we have the best regime for New Zealand.

BlueFloat Energy may have sailed from our shores—and we’re still waiting for the National Policy Statement for Renewable Electricity Generation, which was due in June this year—but finally, at last, here comes the Offshore Renewable Energy Bill.

We do need legislation to govern the construction, operation, and decommissioning of offshore renewable energy developments, so we will support this bill to select committee because we want a rich and thoughtful examination of this bill. The irony—the irony—however, is that National’s Electrify NZ plan is now so far off track, in no small measure due to reneging on the promise to increase demand by supplying 9,000 electric vehicle (EV) charging points, its failure to deliver the National Policy Statement for Renewable Electricity Generation in June, and its one-eyed fixation on fast-tracking coalmines, goldmines, and seabed mining.

Seabed mining is, of course, incompatible with offshore wind development, and that’s why BlueFloat sailed away. Seabed mining will significantly disrupt the seafloor up to a depth of 11 metres. BlueFloat said offshore wind turbines and electrical cables could not be constructed in the same location as an active seabed mining operation, resulting in the unavailability of that zone for offshore wind generation for the duration of mining activities, and we’ve seen a request to make those mining activities a 35-year existence. Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners, in partnership with the New Zealand Superannuation Fund, are still hanging on, but we don’t know for how long. That’s an early taste of the disaster that is the fast-track legislation, and it’s no wonder that there are protests. Here in the House, it’s no wonder that the multinationals are leaving.

Meanwhile, we in the Greens do have many questions about offshore wind and we want to have that conversation. Our priority is onshore wind and solar and geothermal simply because it is faster, cheaper, less resource intensive, and with fewer environmental impacts than offshore wind. It can also be located close to where there is demand and provides for ease of maintenance.

What we like in this bill, however, are the provisions around decommissioning, particularly the financial security obligations to ensure that the decommissioning of offshore renewable energy infrastructure occurs at the expense of the permit holder and owners of related transmission infrastructure.

There are other positives such as safety zones. However, we do want to know how necessary this is and how it will be managed, as other offshore wind developments support local businesses, like boat operators and local guides, providing an alternative source of income and a diversified tourism offering. The two-stage permitting regime—feasibility first, followed by, if appropriate, commercial permits—is also a positive.

What needs greater clarity, however, is how Te Tiriti obligations will be met and what the process is to co-develop with Māori the national guidance and legislation. It appears that this legislation hasn’t gone through this process and only intends to consult with Māori groups before granting any permit, and consultation is very different to co-development. Meanwhile, the regulatory impact statement notes that tangata whenua, iwi, and hāpu have significant rights and interests in the marine area, including recognised customary interests, and cultural and economic interests, etc., and we want to see these interests upheld.

We’re also concerned that the existing Resource Management Act and Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Act consenting environmental assessment regimes are not robust or effective enough at protecting marine ecosystems or mammals. What about other technologies such as tidal generation? There are a number of questions.

There’s another big, big question that we want to see at select committee about port infrastructure to host offshore wind developments, and connecting offshore wind and energy to onshore connection points—the question of “Who pays?” Will the taxpayer be expected to foot the bill or will they do it? In parallel, will we have a reinvention of the electricity market to provide longer-term hedge contracts?

We will support this bill to select committee because we want a rich and thoughtful examination. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. The ACT Party supports this bill. We love innovation. The Offshore Renewable Energy Bill has got the right framework in place, including the construction, operation, and decommissioning. I commend this bill to the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to support the Offshore Renewable Energy Bill. I had the opportunity, earlier in the year, to travel to Taranaki and have a look at the opportunity that offshore wind has the potential for in the New Zealand energy sector, and it is really exciting to see what could actually be done. This bill sets up the legislative way it can be governed. It’s around the construction of the renewable wind, especially the turbines.

When you look at how large some of those turbines are, and the effort that it would actually take to even put one of those into the water—these are a scale that is huge. Just to learn about that—the actual operation of the turbines and the decommissioning side of it as well—is something that’s really important and is taken care of in this bill. It’s also about the investment and the potential developers out there—actually giving them some certainty, and the investment that’s required.

This bill gives that framework to put that in place. It is also about doubling renewable energy by 2050—and that’s the goal of this Government—and this goes as another one of those options. It’s only one part of that puzzle, the renewable energy sector, and especially the offshore wind. On that, I commend this bill to the House.

Thank you. In standing to speak to this bill, I guess it’s one of those situations where we’ve got more questions than answers and look forward to what it is that comes out of the select committee.

The first question that we have is: what is the problem this particular bill is solving or resolving, and is it going to help address the energy security issue that we have in Aotearoa? Is it going to address significantly the energy and equity issue that we have in Aotearoa? Is there a benefit for Aotearoa, for our businesses, for our partnerships, and Te Tiriti claims and states? Or is it going to be, once again, offshore companies that are going to be helping to craft this bill and it’s going to be designed to suit them more than anyone else, energy will be exported, the prices exported and controlled offshore? I guess the question as we were caucusing this was: what is it changing?

The other part of it is: is it addressing the climate issues? Will it lower emissions? Is it going to put us forward truly, in using the full sense of the word “renewable”, noting that turbines last approximately 15 to 17 years offshore, and that when they are devolved then it becomes, effectively, an urupā of turbines in our ocean—and respecting that we did see the decommissioning clause. We live in Taranaki with the decommissioning and have, effectively, seen its failings and as taxpayers have had to pay millions of dollars for the clean-up of those failings.

Is this bill also going to look at business? I think the bill has made it really clear that it is going to be investor-led; investor-focused. That being the case, then, how do we make sure that those investors are our own? Unlike what we saw in the nationalisation of oil and minerals, the Crown Minerals Act—that it’s been really difficult for Māori, even for New Zealand companies, to be able to become part of the oil and mineral sector. I say that conservatively, because if we are going to go down this path, we first and foremost must look and think about our own nationhood.

Our own nationhood has a history, pre-nationalisation, and the recognition of tangata whenua’s rights and the recognition as Wai claims 796 and 852 spoke about. If we go back to looking at some of the things that—I think Margaret Wilson made a statement in 2000 that “The Government’s reaffirmed policy that Crown minerals including petroleum are owned and managed in national interests will not be included in a lot of the Taranaki settlement claims.” She did make a commitment, though, that the Government will explore ways to address the Crown’s contemporary obligations to Māori under the Treaty with regard to natural resources.

Now, this is an opportunity for the nationhood and the wellbeing of Aotearoa to be discussed and realised with those Taranaki iwi that had to forgo the historical grievances in the Crown minerals space, and how that would indeed be put into effect in a way that is best for all of Aotearoa. I would welcome hearing some of this again, as I said, in the select committee stage. Are we looking to transition and do something radically different in the energy space for the betterment of all in New Zealand? Or are we going to open up for the corporate entities that have come in in the name of renewable energy, who will then take everything offshore and make it just as expensive for our businesses, for our communities, and our families to be able to live in Aotearoa?

These are some of the questions that, with all honesty, we haven’t landed with the answers in this bill because, unfortunately, we do have a cynical view of some of the ways that this Government has taken energy and big corporate bias. We’ve seen the fast track today, third reading; we’re seeing the Resource Management Act amendment first reading; we’re seeing this particular bill’s first reading, and nowhere are we seeing a different approach where, in fact, there is an opening up of what could be the protection of Māori, iwi, hapū investments with this Government and for the protection of all citizens of Aotearoa to be able to afford to have good, sustainable energy options.

Those are some of the questions that we have that we look forward to in the next phase of this bill. Kia ora rā.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise to support, and speak on, this very important bill. As part of our policy of electrifying New Zealand, we believe in getting on with doing things, which is what we’re going to do. I commend this bill to the House.

It’s good to be here this evening and contributing to this piece of legislation, which is well overdue. I want to reflect in terms of the process in recent years, and being the MP for New Plymouth at the time—I really want to honour and thank the Hon Dr Megan Woods for her hard work in this space.

The Minister for Energy, the Hon Simeon Brown, in his initial statement did comment in terms of the engagement of communities and the engagement of iwi—and I believe that in terms of that process, it was done pre - last election and the work that we did. I really want to note that there was one particular day—I want to thank the Hon Dr Megan Woods, who committed to a day sitting down with Ngā Iwi o Taranaki, the eight iwi representatives of our region, to sit and listen and engage around the energy space in Taranaki.

What was really telling from that hui was the fact that I heard loud and clear that, for 150 years, Māori had never been included or consulted on when it came to the resources that were being extracted from the whenua of Taranaki. It wasn’t a gracious “Thank you so much, Minister, for listening to us.”, but it was an acknowledgment of how we need to learn and we need to listen. I’m glad but also cautious that this piece of legislation is looking in terms of ways that it actually does listen, it does engage with iwi, with hapū, but also with communities.

As we take this into select committee, I hope and ask of the members of the committee that they’ll really prosecute and dig deep into the community engagement, dig deep into what it means to actually truly engage and consult with local iwi, whether it’s in Taranaki or wherever it may be. We look at this legislation and it’s around offshore renewable energy. It’s not the “Offshore Wind Energy Bill”; it’s the Offshore Renewable Energy Bill, because we know there’s more than just wind blowing out there and what is possible when it comes to wave technology, even solar panels and other forms. I think it is a good day for us to be moving, but I hoped and wished that we could have been here a little bit earlier.

Now, the regulatory framework for offshore renewable energy has been in the pipeline and it has been meandering and moving its way through, and it felt like it sort of stalled a little bit about a year ago. I’m looking through the legislation that dropped this week and seeing that, yeah, work has been done and work needs to continue. The select committee process is the appropriate place. It’s the workhorse of Parliament where it actually engages with experts, engages with community, engages with iwi, engages in all those spaces. I look forward to participating, hopefully, but also seeing the progress that the select committee has on this.

I do find it interesting that on the same day we passed the Fast-track Approvals Bill, which allows the option and the potential beginning of excavating and seabed mining off the South Taranaki coast—on the very same day it passes—we have this piece of legislation around the regulations for offshore renewable energy. I find it so fascinating, as has been said by previous speakers, the fact that BlueFloat has up and left the country because of the uncertainty not only of the regulatory regime; also the fact that the sweet spot for offshore wind, in particular, is in the same spot, and we have heard time and time again in this House that they are not compatible together; and the fact that we’re allowing, on the one hand, a private business in a public piece of legislation to have the option of seabed mining and then, on the other hand, we’re saying, “Hey, look, let’s bring in this wonderful offshore energy regime that’s going to change the world but they can’t coexist together.” The challenge for us is how we get this right to make sure that we can actually have options.

As Scott Willis said earlier, this is about creating options for the future, that we have lots of consented onshore renewable energy projects. This is giving options with the potential of offshore, and this needs a robust and a very thorough select committee process.

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. It gives me great pleasure to stand in support of the Offshore Renewable Energy Bill, which establishes a legislative regime to govern the construction, operation, and decommissioning of offshore renewable energy.

As a member of the Transport and Infrastructure Committee, I’m looking forward to consultation and public submissions and ensuring that this is a practical piece of legislation for our country, moving forward. I commend this bill to the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. It’s a pleasure to take a short call on this bill, and I want to first acknowledge the Government’s work in bringing the Offshore Renewable Energy Bill to the House. It’s something to celebrate to be introducing a piece of legislation in which the intent is to establish a regulatory framework for offshore wind energy in New Zealand. That’s a great thing because by 2030, this country has signed-up commitments which require us to have 100 percent renewables in our energy grid. That’s achievable for New Zealand. That is possible.

We are a country rich in natural resources, especially our water. Our dams were built so many decades ago that now the cost of running them is negligible, and that energy should be cheap. It is the greenest in the world, and it’s something New Zealanders should be proud of. Our offshore wind energy also provides us with so many significant opportunities not for only economic growth but for cheaper energy prices for consumers. That’s something we can all agree on in this House, and this piece of legislation is a step towards that. It’s something that we should be able to get around the table in the select committee room and really get into the detail about how to make this work for New Zealanders, because the Government has said that it’s still committed to increasing the supply of affordable clean energy and to facilitating New Zealand’s transition to net zero carbon emissions by 2050.

What we need to make sure of is that pieces of legislation like this don’t gloss over the fact that the Government is cutting many of the things which will help it to achieve those commitments. We need to hold it to these commitments in this piece of legislation, but things like lifting the oil and gas exploration ban fly in the face of that. Delaying agricultural emissions pricing for five years flies in the face of that. Promoting mining projects that have already been considered and rejected flies in the face of that. Missing its own electric vehicle targets—which it promised voters at the election—flies in the face of that.

We need offshore wind to step into the gap that this Government has created with its policy choices, and New Zealand, as we know, is a signatory to the Paris Agreement. We have signed up to it not only for our domestic obligations under the Climate Change Response Act but also for our global obligations that our partners rely on us for and that our trade relationships rely on us for. The EU fair-trade agreement is a world-leading trade response. It’s great for our agricultural sector. We need our trade partners in the EU to believe that New Zealand is still committed to our clean, green reputation, and here, on this side of the House, we are. I want to encourage Government members to find a way to expedite the process for this. This should be something that we can all agree needs to happen quickly and needs to happen well. Those two things can be done at once.

This legislation is expected to be passed in mid-2025, with the first permits being considered at the end of next year. We’re going to make sure that there’s no impediment to getting these projects built. Projects that would get in the way of an offshore wind energy project—

Glen Bennett: Tell us, Arena. What is it?

ARENA WILLIAMS: —as Glen Bennett has mentioned, are deep-sea mining projects, which are directly in competition with the kind of space that these projects will need. It’s incumbent on all of us to make sure that these projects—these wind projects, which we all agree are needed—are given priority within the regulatory framework.

I’ll tell you how that’s done overseas. In Ireland, they are very committed to their offshore wind energy projects. In fact, they have legislation like this alongside ambitious capacity targets for how much wind should be generating in their energy grid. I think it’s 5 megawatts that was set for their 2030 goal. That would mean a huge investment not only in Government but also through private development. If our Government truly believed in getting these projects off the ground, it needs to set targets in an energy plan, but where’s the energy plan? It is not here. We do not have it, because the Government has not owned up to the fact that it needs a plan to transition to net zero. We need that plan and to be able to integrate offshore wind into it.

Ireland also has a comprehensive policy framework and a national strategy for offshore wind. That needs to sit alongside this legislation—

Hon Member: Has Hipkins got a target on his back? What happened to working together?

ARENA WILLIAMS: —so that it’s not merely window dressing, and I hear members on the other side saying, “Weren’t we working together?” I’m doing their homework for them.

I can give them the national energy plan in Ireland, so they can study up and do their homework, so that they know how legislation like this can actually make a difference to New Zealand’s commitments to climate change not only on the world stage but also domestically, so that New Zealanders now have cheaper energy and so that our children in the future have an environment that they can enjoy and have air that they can breathe.

This is incredibly important to everyone in this House. We need to hold the Government to the commitments that they say outside one side of their mouths, but they cut things that will really make a difference to it out the other. This must make a difference. This is all they’ve got, so we’re relying on it.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I’m pleased to stand on this bill here, the Offshore Renewable Energy Bill, and it’s hard to disagree with some of the comments made around the House. It’s great to see that there is full support to move this through to the important stage that is the select committee stage.

I do just want to talk briefly about the importance of the energy trilemma, and that’s the fact that we want secure energy, we want affordable energy, and we also want sustainable energy. We are blessed as a country with regard to the methods we can use to be able to generate sustainable energy, with solar, hydro, geothermal, and of course, this one here, with wind, not just onshore but now we’re talking about offshore.

The size of these units, as was mentioned by the member from New Zealand First, is immense. If you think about the blades, one blade off one of these units is over 100 metres long. It wouldn’t fit in this room. They are huge. They’re higher than the Sky Tower. If we’re talking about 1 gigawatt, which is what is potentially proposed off the South Taranaki Bight, that’s 70 of these units, spaced about two kilometres apart—an immense amount of area consumed by the units, but generating a good amount of electricity and valuable electricity for New Zealand. I am happy to commend this bill to the House.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a first time.

The question is, That the Offshore Renewable Energy Bill be considered by the Transport and Infrastructure Committee.

Motion agreed to.

Bill referred to the Transport and Infrastructure Committee.