‘The Wrong Signals’: Tony Blair Urges Government to Approve New Oil and Gas Fields

Why It Matters

Approving the licences could marginally improve UK energy security but risks undermining the credibility of the nation’s net‑zero commitments and deterring green finance.

Key Takeaways

• TBI urges UK to approve Rosebank and Jackdaw oil & gas licences.
• Electrification could cut two‑thirds of UK emissions by early 2040s.
• Rosebank and Jackdaw would offset only about 3% of gas imports.
• Critics warn new fossil projects send mixed signals to investors.
• Energy Secretary Miliband denies imminent approval despite industry pressure.

Pulse Analysis

The Tony Blair Institute released a position paper this week urging the UK government to accelerate the electrification of heating, transport and industry. The institute notes that electricity accounts for only about 20% of the nation’s final energy use, leaving the grid vulnerable to price spikes in imported oil and gas—a vulnerability highlighted by the Russia‑Ukraine conflict and the ongoing Iran war. By expanding electric demand, the Climate Change Committee estimates the UK could achieve roughly two‑thirds of the emissions cuts required for its 2040 climate target.

The paper departs from the prevailing Conservative stance by calling for the Labour government to reverse its moratorium on new North Sea licences, specifically the Rosebank and Jackdaw developments. While the institute concedes that domestic production will not dramatically lower energy bills—Possible estimates suggest the projects would replace only about 3% of the UK’s gas imports—it argues that a pragmatic, short‑term boost to supply can reduce strategic exposure. The TBI even proposes emergency legislation to fast‑track projects already near completion, framing them as a bridge rather than a long‑term solution.

Financial markets have taken note. James Alexander of the UK Sustainable Investment and Finance Association warned that green capital could be diverted if policymakers appear to backtrack on decarbonisation, while Greenpeace’s Doug Parr dismissed the move as “transparent nonsense.” The mixed messaging risks unsettling investors who are already allocating billions to renewable infrastructure and could slow the UK’s progress toward net‑zero. As the energy secretary continues to deny any imminent approval, the debate underscores a broader tension between short‑term energy security and the long‑term climate agenda.