John Healey backs Rosebank oil drilling despite Cabinet split

Mr Healey is backing plans to develop the Rosebank field, which is believed to contain around 500 million barrels of oil, according to The Telegraph.

However, Ms Fahnbulleh, who has formal responsibility for deciding whether the project can proceed, is reportedly leaning towards rejecting the application because of its environmental impact.

Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband is also opposed to the development. He has previously described proposals to extract oil from Rosebank as “climate vandalism” that would damage the Government’s net zero ambitions.

The disagreement leaves the Prime Minister caught between senior members of his Cabinet. Downing Street insisted on Sunday evening that Mr Burnham was not involved in the decision.

Rosebank is located around 80 miles west of the Shetland Islands and is the largest undeveloped oil and gas field in the UK.

Environmental campaigners have warned that developing the site could produce seven times as much carbon dioxide as the Jackdaw gas field east of Aberdeen.

Ms Fahnbulleh approved drilling at Jackdaw this week after deciding that the project would strengthen Britain’s energy security. However, she believes Rosebank presents a different case.

Officials said the Energy Secretary expects most of the oil produced at Rosebank to be sold overseas instead of being used in Britain. She therefore believes the development would do little to improve the country’s energy supply and is leaning towards blocking it.

A decision is expected within the coming weeks.

Ms Fahnbulleh has stressed that the final choice rests with her. Speaking to journalists this week, she said: “Ultimately, only I can make that decision.”

She appeared to dismiss media speculation about other ministers steering the outcome. “I’ve really enjoyed reading bits of the media. It’s like Andy’s deciding this, John’s deciding. I was like, well actually, only I can make that decision,” she said.

The Energy Secretary stressed that the process around such decisions is tightly controlled. Even her special advisers are excluded from seeing the relevant documents, she explained, with only a handful of departmental officials granted access.

She characterised the process as regulatory rather than political. A spokesman for the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero confirmed that the Rosebank decision would follow a quasi-judicial procedure, weighing all relevant evidence including environmental assessments and public consultation submissions.

Mr Healey’s enthusiasm for the project appears driven by fiscal pressures. The Chancellor faces the challenge of finding billions of pounds to fund defence and social care commitments, and the revenues from Rosebank could provide a significant boost.

This week, he revealed that profits generated by the Jackdaw field would be channelled into a newly created energy wealth fund, designed to finance green energy initiatives.

In an interview with ITV, Mr Healey described the fund as a home for “oil and gas” profits.

That choice of words was interpreted by some observers as a signal that Rosebank revenues could eventually flow into the same pot.

The suggestion would align with the Chancellor’s broader strategy of using fossil fuel income to bankroll the transition to cleaner energy sources, while simultaneously addressing the government’s most pressing spending demands.

The trade union movement is itself divided over Rosebank. GMB general secretary Gary Smith said last week that he would “continue to press for further, essential measures that increase our domestic energy capacity, such as granting permission for Rosebank”.

Unite’s general secretary Sharon Graham struck a similar note in March, arguing that “domestic gas from Jackdaw and oil from Rosebank are essential for jobs and for energy security”.

Unison, however, has taken the opposite view. Its general secretary Andrea Egan told the Telegraph that approving Rosebank “would send completely the wrong signal on the climate crisis” and urged the Prime Minister to reject it.

Despite Downing Street’s insistence that Mr Burnham has no role in the matter, a government source told the Telegraph that his involvement was unavoidable.

“It’s a big decision and it has to sit with the Prime Minister,” the source said. “In the end, it’s the Prime Minister’s judgment call.”