THE PRESS WEDNESDAY. MAY 25, 1977. An energy super-department

Press, 25 May 1977, Page 20

THE PRESS WEDNESDAY. MAY 25, 1977. An energy super-department

The real test of the worth of creating a new energy department will be whether a single, large department will be able to frame more wisely and put into effect more expeditiously the comprehensive, properly co-ordinated, longterm energy policy that the country needs. The departments responsible for planning and producing energy supplies today have not been noticeably illmanaged, except that the coal-mining industry could still do with gingering up after years of neglect and decline. This industry should profit from having its activities seen in association with the activities of those producing more popular forms of energy But the real problems are those of long-term prediction. research, and planning. Under the present arrangements, the committees and individuals responsible for deciding what the country’s energy requirements will be in future years, and for deciding how they can be met, have maintained links with those responsible for the production of energy to meet immediate demands. In theory, at least, they are distinct from the departments.

In its five years of life the Ministry of Energy Resources has apparently not provided the necessary co-ordination among those responsible for energy planning and it has never gained sufficient stature or authority to provide the firm lead that is needed. This may have been in part because the newer Ministry was regarded with distrust by the vested interests in established departments. The creation of a single energy department may prevent suspicion and distrust from hindering any longer the full coordination of plans being laid to meet the country’s demand for energy.

This goal might have been achieved by creating a smaller department charged solely with long-term planning. The question still remains: was it wise or necessary to bring the day-to-day operations of those producing energy and the different activities of the longterm planners under one roof? Distinct advantages would result from having the activities of the planners clearly separated from the activities of those with an interest in the producing and selling of energy in a particular form. Nevertheless, when the existing departments are submerged in a superdepartment, the planners should have an easier task. Particularly, they should find it easier to give greater attention to conservation measures and to research into new and alternative sources of energy. The planners should also find it easier to curb or resolve the rivalries that could impede sound decisions about the use of the country’s resources of coal and gas. While at present these are used to generate electricity, they might well be given more status as prime sources of domestic or industrial energy. If the Government is convinced that long-term planning will be easier within a single department dealing with all forms of energy, it should proceed with the reorganisation with all decent haste and charge the planners within the new department to proceed promptly with the task of producing the long-overdue energy policy. The failure so far to produce a coherent policy may be taken as evidence that the present divisions have been, even unwittingly, an obstruction to policymaking.