Labour was warned of ‘real and present danger' to oil and gas sector
The job losses come on top of 350 roles that were cut by the firm in 2023.
Mr Flynn said the latest cuts amount to a quarter of the company's workforce in Aberdeen, where much of the UK oil and gas industry is based.
Stephen Flynn voiced concern the job cuts at Harbour Energy could be 'the start of something that could be quite devastating for Aberdeen and the north east' (James Manning/PA)
The MP said he and 'many others', including the Unite trade union, are now 'very fearful' the job losses at Harbour Energy may be 'the start of something that could be quite devastating for Aberdeen and the north east'.
Mr Flynn told BBC Radio Scotland's Good Morning Scotland programme: 'Harbour is one of many companies that operate out of Aberdeen, one of many huge companies that work out of Aberdeen and there is a real and present danger, it was something that the Labour Party was warned about prior to the election, that the decisions they were seeking to take in relation to policy both for licensing and taxation in relation to the North Sea sector would lead to catastrophic job losses.'
Scott Barr, managing director of Harbour Energy's UK business, said on Wednesday the job losses were 'due mainly to the Government's ongoing punitive fiscal position and a challenging regulatory environment'.
Mr Flynn pressed Sir Keir Starmer on the issue at Prime Minister's Questions this week, and he told the programme on Thursday: 'If 250 jobs were being lost elsewhere in the UK, perhaps in Keir Starmer's constituency, he would be more interested than he appeared to be yesterday when I asked him about it.'
Mr Flynn, who is due to meet senior directors at the firm on Friday, said as well as the increase the Energy Profits Levy – also known as the windfall tax – changes had been made to the licensing regime when Sir Keir's party came to power.
Chancellor Rachel Reeves said the job losses were a 'commercial decision' by Harbour Energy (Andrew Milligan/PA)
Labour has been clear on its opposition to new developments in the North Sea, with Mr Flynn saying there has been a 'direct impact upon investment decisions'.
The SNP MP said: 'Everyone knows the North Sea is a depleting asset but the argument is how quickly you seek to shut down the industry and what we are seeking is a clear pattern of direction from the Labour Government in that regard, which is seeking to accelerate that.'
Speaking during a visit to Scotland on Wednesday, Chancellor Rachel Reeves said the job losses at Harbour Energy were a 'commercial decision by the business'.
She stressed 'the Energy Profits Levy is being used to properly fund public services', and she insisted oil and gas will have an 'important role' in the UK economy 'for years to come'.
Ms Reeves added: 'It's a commercial decision by one company… but there are many other companies that aren't laying off workers.
'It is important that, with energy companies making record profits after Russia's invasion of Ukraine, that we ask those companies to pay their fair share of tax, especially when ordinary working people saw their energy bills go through the roof.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scotsman
4 minutes ago
- Scotsman
Why victory for British trans judge in European Court of Human Rights would be Pyrrhic
Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... As a highly experienced lawyer, I can only presume retired judge Victoria McCloud has gamed the implications of appealing to the European Court of Human Rights to overturn the Supreme Court ruling on biological sex. Even if successful, it could turn out to be a Pyrrhic victory and one of the last times the ECHR has anything to do with British laws. There was a time when leaving the ECHR was only the preserve of hard-line Brexiteers, and with the potential to split the Conservative Party had obvious attractions for Sir Keir Starmer and his friends in the human rights industry for whom the ECHR has been such a valuable backstop in derailing repeated attempts by the previous government to tighten up on illegal immigration. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The boot is firmly on the other foot as cross-channel illegal immigration reaches record levels and Labour finds solutions as hard to find as their predecessors. The European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg | Hans Lucas/AFP via Getty Images The EU's much-vaunted freedom of movement is now hopelessly compromised as the influx of economic migrants from Africa and Middle East refugees overwhelm local services and the housing supply, laying the foundations for political movements like Alternative für Deutschland which challenged the previous open doors orthodoxy promoted by former German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Now Germany, France, Denmark, Sweden, Austria, Italy and Slovenia have all introduced border controls, rendering the Schengen Agreement almost redundant. Now departure from the ECHR, or at least its reform, has gone mainstream as the full impact of a supra-national appeals system on democratically elected governments struggling to cope with mass migration is being felt. Court attacked by EU member states In May nine EU members led by Italy and Denmark — supported by Belgium, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Poland, the Czech Republic and Austria — signed an open letter which attacked the way the European Court of Human Rights was interpreting the Convention, claiming rulings were going beyond original intentions and threatened their ability to 'protect their democracies and populations'. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Off-shore asylum processing hubs, not that dissimilar to the Conservatives' much-derided Rwanda scheme, are being considered by the EU. Italy's deal with Albania signed in 2023 has been repeatedly stymied in the Italian courts, which has only strengthened Prime Minster Giorgia Meloni's hand. The ECHR was accused of over-playing its hand last year when it ruled in favour of two elderly Swiss women who claimed their right to life (Article 2) was being denied by their government which they said was not doing enough to tackle climate change. The Strasbourg judges ordered the Swiss government to do more which it duly snubbed, a decision later backed by a referendum which found a majority felt the government's actions were adequate. The ECHR ruling was widely seen as going well beyond the remit of Article 2 and a direct challenge to a legitimate policy decision made by a sovereign government. Members of the European Court of Human Rights open a hearing in a climate change case involving six young Portuguese citizens against 32 countries, in Strasbourg, in September 2023 | AFP via Getty Images Of course, there will be the Just Stop Oil types who will argue the court's decision was absolutely correct, and failure to do more to tackle climate change is akin to mass murder, just as there is no shortage of activists who argue that men can become women just by thinking about it hard enough. Which brings me back to Victoria McCloud. As Britain's first trans judge she has, for want of a better phrase, skin in the game and argues the Supreme Court undermined her Article 6 rights, to a fair trial, by refusing to hear evidence from her and other trans representatives. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad But when the ECHR was being drafted in 1948-50, its authors were thinking more about the ordeal of people like Sophie Scholl, a key member of the anti-Nazi White Rose movement who was ritually humiliated at her trial by the infamous People's Court judge Roland Freisler who then sentenced her and her associates to death. Clearly, Ms McCloud was not on trial, fairly or otherwise. She is also claiming her rights under Article 8 (right to a family life) and Article 14 (protection from discrimination) and again, it's hard to see how the Supreme Court's decision impinges on either, given the judges were unanimous in their view that people who had undergone gender reassignment were protected by the 2010 Equality Act, but that there was a distinction with the Act's sex-based protections which they ruled applied to biological males and females, regardless of gender reassignment. UK government could face impossible position The problem for trans campaigners is really with the legislation, not the Supreme Court interpretation, so their goal should be for repeal or amendment, but as Nicola Sturgeon found to her cost that would not just be political dynamite but a nuclear bomb. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad However, it's not difficult to see the European judges siding with Ms McCloud but that would put the UK Government in an impossible position, of either snubbing the ECHR like the Swiss, or reforming the law in ways which it is clear from the SNP's attempt to pass the Gender Recognition Reform Act into law would be hugely unpopular and a gift to Reform, if not the Conservatives. Sir Keir Starmer and Nigel Farage | PA Having been instrumental in laying the groundwork for Britain's departure from the EU, I can imagine Nigel Farage secretly willing on Ms McCloud so he can point to another European institution from which we should be decoupled; an unaccountable international court which interferes with the way sovereign states protect their borders, deal with climate change, and police sex-based rights. And this time, prominent EU members would be right behind him.
South Wales Argus
33 minutes ago
- South Wales Argus
Quiz candidates on user road charges: Michael Enea
Here is one crucial question I would ask all the prospective candidates. Will your political party categorically rule-out a motorway toll or "road user charge" on the M4 around Newport? Why ask this question you may say? After the M4 Relief Road was sensationally scrapped by Mark Drakeford in June 2019, a commission was set-up to look at so-called "alternatives" to tackle the traffic congestion on the motorway around Newport. This commission was chaired by Lord Burns. Section 239 of the final Burns Report stated: 'We are in favour of a comprehensive UK wide pay-per-mile road user charge.' The report continued: 'This could be within 10 to 15 years given the projected trajectory for the decline of traditional motoring tax revenues.' The report also stated: 'We recommend future policy decisions on road user charging in south east Wales reflect our findings, in particular - the case for higher charges in peak times and in places with the worst congestion air quality.' Can it get any worse? The report went on to say: 'We would support local authorities taking earlier steps to implement local charging schemes to address congestion, improve environment outcomes, or raise revenue to invest in public transport schemes.' You may say I'm scaremongering? Well, why not read the Welsh Government's own National Transport Delivery Plan. Section 3.3.3 states: 'We will also motivate people to move away from private car use. The Wales Transport Strategy includes a commitment to develop a national road user charging framework.' So in their own words, they are "committed" to developing road user charges. In November 2023, the Welsh Senedd then passed the Environment (Air Quality and Soundscapes) Act 2024. This gives ministers the power to introduce Clean Air Zones (CAZs) on trunk roads to tackle air pollution hotspots. Could the floodgates now open over the next decade? Well, Cardiff Council has already given serious consideration to the installation of a congestion charge or road user scheme for its city centre. Luckily, after strong opposition, it has since backed away from idea (for now). So will Newport City Council follow Cardiff's lead and look to introduce a "congestion charge" for its city centre? Thankfully, the answer is no. But what of the M4 around Newport? Now that's an entirely different question. It's a valid question you should seriously ask every Senedd candidate when they turn-up on your doorstep pitching for your vote. Can you imagine the utter carnage and chaos on Newport's side-streets and A-roads should a "road user charge" be introduced on the M4? Michael Enea is a Conservative campaigner and blogger
Scotsman
33 minutes ago
- Scotsman
Fishing leaders call for immediate halt to wind farm expansion ‘stampede'
Fishing leaders in Scotland have described wind farm expansion as a "stampede" and a "gamble" as they demanded an immediate stop to further offshore consents | PA Industry demands no more offshore consents and an end to 'gamble' on renewable energy expansion Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Fishing leaders in Scotland have described wind farm expansion as a 'stampede' and a 'gamble' as they demanded an immediate stop to further offshore consents. The Scottish Fishermen's Federation (SFF) said Scottish Government plans to install up to 40GW of offshore wind capacity by 2040 are 'far too high'. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad It said achieving the target will cause irreversible damage to the marine environment and displace fishing fleets from grounds they have worked for generations. Fishing leaders in Scotland have described wind farm expansion as a "stampede" and a "gamble" as they demanded an immediate stop to further offshore consents | PA The call is included in the SFF's official responses to two major Government consultations, the updated Offshore Wind Policy Statement and the draft Sectoral Marine Plan for Offshore Wind Energy. The Government outlines that offshore wind could ensure Scotland meets its net zero target by 2030 and provide scores of green jobs as part of the just transition away from dependence on oil and gas. Last month, First Minister John Swinney visited Scotland's newest wind farm – Neart na Gaoithe (NnG) off the coast of Fife. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad During his visit he said offshore wind is 'one of Scotland's greatest modern success stories'. He said: 'Driving economic growth and tackling the climate emergency are two of my Government's priorities, and NnG is a shining example of how these priorities can work hand-in-hand to reshape Scotland's future for the better.' The UK Government has also expressed support for the expansion of Scotland's wind farms. It announced in March that the Port of Cromarty Firth in the Highlands will be a major hub for the UK's world-leading floating offshore wind industry, and it awarded more than £55 million for its expansion. 'Slam on the brakes' Elspeth Macdonald, chief executive of the SFF – which is Scotland's biggest fishing industry body – said: 'This isn't a plan – it's a stampede. The Government is charging ahead without the faintest idea how to protect the people and places that will be trampled in the rush. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'We've been telling them for years these plans will seriously damage our industry, but they haven't listened. Now their own assessments show the harm that will be done to fishing, and the environment on which it depends. 'Until they can prove our industry and our seas will be safeguarded, the only responsible choice is to slam on the brakes.' The SFF said current mitigation measures are almost non-existent and there is no credible plan to compensate fishing businesses for the losses they will face. It also says the Government's updated Offshore Wind Policy Statement published in June made repeated references to economic benefits but failed to mention the climate crisis. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Ms Macdonald added: 'Fishing is one of Scotland's original green industries. The Scottish fleet has been putting healthy, renewable and sustainable food on plates for generations. 'But we're being shoved aside for projects that feel like a last gamble for a Government to revive an ailing Scottish economy.' Fishing leaders say the cumulative impact of existing and emerging marine conservation policies, renewable energy projects alongside fishing being expected to offset environmental impacts of offshore wind developments, is leaving the industry at 'breaking point'. Environmental damage Ms Macdonald said: 'The Scottish Government's approach is picking winners and losers, and fishing seems to lose every time. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'We need ministers to step up and support our industry with positive action. 'Renewable food cannot be the price to be paid for renewable energy. Betting the house – and Scotland's fishing industry – on offshore wind that is far from 'clean' and where all the evidence points to both known and not yet fully known environmental damage is a very high-risk strategy.' Shadow Scottish secretary Andrew Bowie said: 'Scotland's fishing industry has been let down by the SNP government for too long. They must finally listen to these legitimate concerns from the Scottish Fishermen's Federation about the impact future offshore wind could have on Scottish fishing activities. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'Fishermen are already being hit by damaging SNP policies and the threat of Labour's sell-out to the EU as part of their trade deal looms large. They are understandably sick and tired of both SNP and Labour politicians ignoring their interests. 'Ministers must engage with these concerns to guarantee the industry is not damaged by their plans and offshore developments must always be done in ways that minimise the harm to the sector.'
