I was proud to lead a Westminster Hall debate on an issue of local, national and international significance: the urgent need to ban small-scale fracking operations.
This was a timely moment for a debate. In my constituency of Scarborough and Whitby, Europa Oil and Gas have applied to explore for gas at Burniston, just outside the picturesque North York Moors.
The plans, published in full in March of this year, include erecting a 38m high drilling rig and proposals to carry out small-scale hydraulic fracturing, which Europa are calling “proppant squeeze”, plans widely opposed by the local community.
The planning application is due to be heard by the North Yorkshire Planning Committee imminently.
But what is small-scale fracking? Fracking, short for hydraulic fracturing, is the process of injecting fluid at high pressure into underground rock formations to release the gas or oil inside.
The UK has had a moratorium on fracking since 2019, which was brought in after operations caused an earthquake in Lancashire.
However, the law only covers operations above certain fluid volumes. That definition leaves a loophole which allows companies to argue that smaller‑scale fracking, such as “proppant squeeze” is not fracking at all.
This loophole is arbitrary and unscientific. Regardless of the fluid volume injected, the intent is the same: to fracture rock and extract oil or gas. The risks are the same too.
A 2020 study commissioned by the then Oil and Gas Authority concluded that it is not possible to predict seismic responses with confidence, regardless of fluid volume.
Worryingly, the volume of fluid proposed for use at the Burniston site surpasses the highest daily fluid amount in the week leading up to the 2019 earthquake which triggered the existing moratorium.
There are plenty of other environmental concerns too. These include potential groundwater contamination from methane migration or the chemicals in frack fluid, methane leaks, flaring and air pollution. Of course, fracking at any volume leads to more greenhouse gas emissions, which contributes to climate change.
Since I was elected, I have been calling on the Government to close the loophole and ban small-scale fracking operations.
This is a view shared by legal experts and various campaign groups. Estelle Dehon KC, a renowned public law barrister, has advised that the Petroleum Act 1998 should be amended to adopt a simple, broad definition of fracking that captures both high‑ and low‑volume operations. Other countries have already taken this approach, showing that it is workable.
I welcome the Government’s recent commitment to legislate for a permanent ban on shale gas fracking and to stop issuing new licences for oil and gas exploration, but their proposals do not go far enough. Sixty-six licences remain in place, and companies can still apply for planning permission under them.
There are various ways that the Government could amend legislation to prevent oil and gas companies from applying for new permission to frack. These include revoking the current provisions in the 1998 Petroleum Act, and subsequently the Infrastructure Act 2015, and replacing them with a flat prohibition, either on the grant of any licences permitting fracking or on any person carrying out fracking. Another change could involve amending the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to include a general ban, ensuring that no application for planning permission that uses the technique of fracking may be granted by a local planning authority or by the Secretary of State.
During the debate, I urged the Minister to act decisively: to amend the law in order to prevent new planning applications under existing licences and to introduce a comprehensive ban on all forms of fracking.
In his response, Minister Shanks reiterated that the moratorium remains in place and that no high‑volume fracking will be permitted. Importantly, he confirmed that the Department will keep low‑volume fracking “under active review” and remain open to new evidence.
We already have the evidence; small‑scale fracking is fracking in all but name. It carries the same intent, the same risks and contradicts our climate commitments.
If this Government wants our legislation to be clear and consistent, to safeguard the natural environment, listen to the concerns in our communities and meet our climate targets, it must introduce a comprehensive ban on fracking based on intent and process, and which disregards fluid volumes.
The legislation on fracking must be clear and consistent to safeguard the natural environment and include a “comprehensive” ban
