Approval and the government's case
The government has given the go-ahead to the Jackdaw gasfield in the North Sea, a decision that had been widely anticipated. Ministers said the field would begin delivering gas to households and businesses before the end of the month. Andy Burnham, the prime minister, argued that developing Jackdaw would safeguard hundreds of positions and help keep millions of homes heated through the winter.[S1][S2][S3][S4][S5][S6][S7][S8]
Burnham described the approach as responsible, saying Britain should make the most of reserves it already holds while people face hardship. He maintained that the country remains committed to renewables and to reaching net zero by 2050, but added that oil and gas would still form part of the energy mix for decades. Miatta Fahnbulleh, the energy secretary, said she had weighed all relevant factors before allowing the regulator to consent to production at the site.[S1]
Asked about the employment impact, Fahnbulleh put the figure at 27 jobs created and 273 secured, and said this was not the main reason for the decision. She framed the approval as a contribution to energy security through domestic gas, reducing reliance on imported fuels with higher emissions while the shift to renewables and nuclear continues. She also insisted the move is consistent with legally binding climate targets and that the government still intends to end new oil and gas licences.[S1]
A fund meant to bridge the transition
Alongside the approval, Fahnbulleh announced a new energy wealth fund seeded with a £2bn downpayment. The plan would channel oil and gas revenues into the climate transition, and ministers hope it will show that backing gasfields need not conflict with Britain's climate obligations.[S1]
Campaigners dispute the benefits
Environmental organisations have pressed for both Jackdaw and the separate Rosebank project to be dropped. Tessa Khan, who leads the anti-oil group Uplift, said Jackdaw would meet only about 2% of gas demand for roughly a decade, argued that the project has been oversold, and said it would not halt the wider fall in North Sea employment because it will operate largely without staff and by remote control. She said Labour's climate credibility is at stake and that no new oil and gasfields can be squared with safe climate limits.[S1]
Understand this article deeper
The industry maintains that the fields will account for 10% of UK output when they peak, while campaigners counter that the environmental harm would outweigh any economic gain. Jackdaw is owned and run by Adura, a joint venture split evenly between Equinor and Shell. Both hold operating licences, but environmental consent was withdrawn after a judge found the companies had to account for emissions from burning the fuel they produce.[S1]
The companies have lobbied intensively for approval. This week Adura published a report estimating that rejecting the two projects would cost the UK economy close to £10.8bn over ten years.[S1]
Political fallout and public opinion
The announcement may help Labour in north-east Scotland, where much of the industry is concentrated and unions have pushed hard for permits. It is also likely to unsettle some Labour MPs, particularly in constituencies facing Green challenges. Labour's 2024 manifesto pledged to ban new drilling licences, yet the firms behind Jackdaw and Rosebank sought environmental approval under existing licences and resubmitted applications earlier this year. The Jackdaw decision had been expected last month but slipped, apparently to move it past the Holborn and St Pancras byelection on 8 October, which Labour ultimately won against a Green challenge.[S1]
Research by Savanta on behalf of the climate group E3G, reported by the Guardian, indicated that close to one in three voters would be less likely to support Labour if the party allowed additional North Sea drilling. The figure covered roughly a third of previous Labour voters and around half of people aged 18 to 24. E3G's Ellie Mae O'Hagan said the public sees further drilling as the wrong choice, and called for money to go to heat pumps and solar power instead of tax relief for oil and gas firms.[S1]
Green party leader Zack Polanski called the decision climate vandalism and said Labour had forfeited its credibility on climate change. He pointed to the energy secretary's own statement that the move would not affect bills, the health secretary's acknowledgement that the summer heatwave added strain to the NHS, and the industry's estimate of only 27 jobs. Ami McCarthy of Greenpeace UK said approving Jackdaw showed the hold fossil fuel lobbyists retain over energy policy, arguing the project will not cut bills or strengthen security and will mainly generate profits for Shell and Equinor.[S1]
