THE Edinburgh-based Green Investment Bank is to be partially privatised in a move which has brought strong condemnation from across the green industries sector.
The bank was created in 2012 after an initiative by the previous Labour Government as a commercial venture to back green energy projects and to spur private sector investment. It has only just begun to make a profit.
Some 50 projects, many of them in Scotland, have received £2 billion towards a total of more than £8bn investment. The 50th and latest investment was announced just two days ago – some £2m in a sewage heat recovery system installation programme in locations across Scotland, beginning with Borders College.
The bank has backed projects ranging from waste management plants to offshore wind farms.
Yesterday the UK Government’s Business Secretary, Sajid Javid, announced that a majority stake in the bank would be sold to private investors and would thus be able to borrow more, which caused an immediate reaction from companies involved in the renewables sector and from senior politicians.
Deputy First Minister John Swinney is urging the Tories to commit to maintaining a public stake in the bank, and to ensure it retains its original purpose as a green bank.
He is also calling for reassurances that the headquarters and jobs are retained in Edinburgh, and that all of the previously announced £3.8bn capital provided to the bank is carried through.
Nick Mabey, chief executive of E3G, a think-tank that originally developed the idea of the bank, said selling a majority stake would be “reckless”. He said: “Privatisation threatens to destroy investor confidence which in turn will damage both energy security and the UK economy. On no account should more than 49 per cent of the public stake be sold.”
Even senior Tories attacked the move. Ben Goldsmith, brother of MP Zac Goldsmith and chairman of the Conservative Environment Network, said: “The Green Investment Bank was one of the Coalition Government’s few great, green achievements. Why the new Conservative government is considering undoing that achievement by privatising this exciting new institution is beyond me.” Bright Blue, an influential think-tank with top Tories among its backers, said the sell-off was “the last thing we need”.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here