Oral evidence: Maximising Economic Recovery of Oil and Gas, HC 989

Oral evidence, 11 May 2016.

Witnesses

Dr Andy Samuel, Chief Executive, Oil and Gas Authority, and Sir Patrick Brown, Chairman, Oil and Gas Authority, gave evidence.

Chair

Can I ask the witnesses to introduce themselves, please, for the sake of the record?

Sir Patrick Brown

Yes, I am Patrick Brown. I am the Chair of the Oil and Gas Authority.

Dr Samuel

Good morning. I am Andy Samuel. I am the Chief Executive of the Oil and Gas Authority.

Chair

I understand one of you would like to give a short opening, and we would appreciate that, and indeed any comments on the previous panel too.

Sir Patrick Brown

Can I just say thank you for again inviting Dr Samuel and me to this Committee. There have been a number of developments over the last six months since we talked, oil price fluctuations of course, publication of our corporate plan, publication of the MER UK strategy and the near completion of the OGA itself. What has become clear to me as the chair of the board is the remit of the OGA was highly appropriate as oil prices declined, so our messages of collaboration, innovation, determined action to reduce costs did not fall on deaf ears. The remit, in my view, remains just as important as the oil price rises, because high efficiency performance and lower cost will always be essential if we are to help ensure a long life for this basin. In the face of the prospect of serious trouble because of the oil price, there has been, in my view, a very good action inside Government, cross-Government, to focus on the issue. This was welcome to the OGA, since obviously if operators cannot sustain their licences the OGA will have a role to play and we need to be clear on what can and cannot be done. We look forward to transforming the OGA into a Government company and thank Parliament for the Act, which finished last night. A company is of course a necessary step to emphasise our independent role. I would like to conclude by saying that, in my view, Dr Samuel, supported by staff from very different backgrounds working together, has made remarkable progress, both in setting up the OGA and at the same time pursuing its unusual remit, and it is going to be another interesting year.

Chair

It seems we are living through a lot of interesting years at the moment. Since we saw you last year—last November, in fact—the OGA has published a corporate plan on maximising economic recovery for the UK. Now, will you give us a quick update and the headline points in each of these development areas?

Dr Samuel

Sure. Our corporate plan is a very aggressive five-year plan. We felt that it was time to really challenge ourselves and industry to shift to much more sustainable and higher performance levels, so we have some very demanding key performance indicators in all the key areas, from exploration all the way through to decommissioning. We also have in there a requirement on ourselves, collaborating with industry, to publish what we call the sector strategies that Sir Ian Wood called for. We have just come out with our decommissioning strategy and are working on that with industry. A very good reception, and we will publish the decommissioning plan in Q2. We have stewardship, exploration and other strategies being developed. Very good engagement with industry, who are welcoming this. In parallel, we have finalised the MER UK strategy, which is a game changer. I think when we met in November, I was a little bit concerned about how we were going to get that over the line, because we want to bring industry with us, but we did not want to lose the important teeth that that strategy holds. We worked that very well and we will be issuing guidance now on exactly how we will implement that strategy. But that does have transformational properties to it, so looking forward to getting into that. We have continued, I believe, a very good collaboration with the Treasury. I think most people were very pleased with the two budgets, particularly the last one, the permanent reduction of PRT, a massive reduction of SCT, an important impact on decommissioning tax measures and a further £20 million, in addition to the first £20 million that Deirdre talked about, for further geophysical studies, along with some other quite welcome measures. So there has been a lot of progress since November, but the context remains probably more challenging than ever, so no one is resting on their laurels.

Chair

You are looking for co-operation among companies in the North Sea and to share and to learn. To what extent then do you, as a body, internationally do what you look to companies to do, and share and learn from counterparts in Norway or wherever?

Dr Samuel

Increasingly quite a lot. I was in the States last week and I met with the head of the Brazilian regulator at OTC. I went to Washington and met with BOEM, who are the offshore US regulator, and I met with the Nova Scotia regulator, so that was all just last week.

Chair

Are you finding ideas there that can be transplanted into this?

Dr Samuel

Yes. It is quite interesting. I do not want to appear to suggest that we have the answers, but increasingly people are looking at what we are doing, because this is a global problem. I find that we learned a lot particularly from the Norwegians and others on the earlier phases of exploration, how to stimulate activity. On the more mature basin aspects, people are very, very interested in what we are doing, and a couple of the regulators I met last week were frankly envious, because what we do have is this kind of fresh policy that is fit for purpose that some of them do not have. We have a Treasury who we can work very closely with and we have a clear plan and very good cross-party political support. So while we can be very harsh on ourselves, and this is a global crisis, I think every now and again we should step back and say, “Isn’t it great that Sir Ian was listened to, the Government, cross-party support got behind it and we moved at great pace?” I do not want to name them, but a couple of the regulators are incredibly frustrated. Without going into details, one of them is being forced to come down very hard on industry around the risk of decommissioning liabilities, which is something that the Government here has pretty much covered. You can imagine that this a bad time for that regulator to come down on their clients, potentially forcing them into administration. So they are being forced to do something that they know is not good for maximising recovery, whereas what I would say is we look at things in the whole and we have very good cross-ministry and cross-Whitehall discussions, because these are tricky times and one has to look very carefully at what you are doing.

Chair

Before I move to Antoinette and then on to James, Tommy Campbell of Unite the union suggested a summit, a collaborative approach. What view do you have on what Tommy was calling for in the earlier panel?

Dr Samuel

I am sitting down with Tommy and four of his union colleagues next week and one of the things—

Chair

But specifically on Tommy’s call on the—

Dr Samuel

I want to hear a bit more. Very open to the idea. We think we are a listening regulator. I think as Deirdre put forward, we would want to make sure it does not duplicate other fora we have. Next week we have the Oil and Gas Day, which the unions are represented and the senior operators, service companies, Ministers, so I would like to understand what beyond that Tommy is looking for.

Chair

Thank you. Could you keep the Committee updated as to what the outcome of your meeting with Tommy is?

Dr Samuel

Absolutely.

Antoinette Sandbach

There was a suggestion from Unite that there was quite a lot of money sloshing around in the industry. I saw your response to that from the seated position. Could you perhaps explain your response to that suggestion?

Dr Samuel

I was over in Houston last week drumming up support for further investment in the UK, meeting the chief execs of some of the major North American investors and private equity banks, a whole range of investors. Some companies have posted record-breaking losses for Q1 and they are very interested in what we are doing in the UK, but they are fighting for survival. This is a transformational change for the whole industry, so I do not think we can overestimate the degree of the global impact of this. I think HIS published on Monday that exploration discovery rates are at a 60-year low, and I was told by numerous analysts that North American drilling is the lowest it has ever been since 1940, when records began. The job losses in the UK are horrific; in North America they are kind of magnitudes greater. So these are very difficult times and I think it is brilliant that we have a better story to tell. Where I agree with Tommy though is people are still caught in the kind of tyranny of the quarterly investor calls and updates and they are finding it very hard to think even about next year. It is just the reality that we are in. On a positive, we did come across some investors, there is money and there are banks who are continuing to support and they were very grateful when they heard the better story than their perceptions would have told them prior to us meeting with them. So I think there is a way forward, but I would not underestimate how difficult it is.

James Heappey

Last time we saw you, you told us that it would not be a pretty picture if oil remained at $50. The OBR’s forecast is going to average about $45 between 2015 and 2020. Presumably from a maximised recovery perspective, things are getting ugly.

Dr Samuel

We are seeing some really good progress in a number of areas. Investment certainly is key and I can talk more about that, but there is a lot beyond that we can do and are doing. In terms of stewardship, we are seeing production efficiency going up, which is very material, it has gone up by about 8%, so if we can continue that trend, that is very important. While last year there was not an awful lot of exploration drilling, discovery rates were at 60%, which was the highest it has been for many years, in fact higher than Norway; more was discovered.

James Heappey

So on exploration, your corporate plan sets some very challenging targets, including 60 exploration and appraisal wells by 2021. What assumptions did you make about oil prices over the next five years when you were setting those targets and then of course does that mean that they need to be revised?

Dr Samuel

I think the point we make is that we need to be competitive, irrespective of oil prices, because we cannot control what we cannot control, hence the drive for sustainable efficiency. It is interesting, the Australians have just put AUD$100 million—US$75 million—in a similar scheme to increase the understanding of the basic geology. We believe there are riches out there waiting to be discovered, but we are behind in terms of just promoting the prospectivity, understanding it, so if we can get that in place it will kind of generate the activities. So that is where are using the Government funding that we have. But those targets are deliberately stretching and they are put on industry, we cannot deliver them obviously on our own, but they were socialised with the exploration group, with the cross-industry group, and everyone believes that is about the right level to sustain an industry.

James Heappey

I am going to ask another question, and sort of ask you to revise, because it just seems slightly odd—not odd, but difficult to accept—that some quite bold commitments within the strategy, or aspirations within the strategy, are relatively unaffected by a very different oil price. The Wood review impact assessment made a central estimate of net revenues of 32.8 billion from an additional 3 to 4 billion barrels of oil equivalent, but this was based on $94 per barrel. Do you think that estimate is still reasonable, given what has happened to oil prices?

Dr Samuel

I believe the 3 to 4 billion extra barrels that Sir Ian cited is still achievable over a five-year period. It is a lot harder with the lower price, but I have to be committed to that and we track progress towards that and we have seen 30 interventions that we have made, some small, some quite large, that start kind of accumulating towards that total. We have line of sight to others, some quite large sanctions that could make bigger inroads, but it is very difficult. I think the problem with oil price is it fluctuates so quickly, so I do not want to de-commit on a target right now and then find oil goes back up $70 in six months’ time, which it could.

Mr Carmichael

Can I get your view on the question of efficiency and infrastructure, and you probably heard exchanges earlier that you might characterise as being everybody is in favour of efficiency until it is their job, their sector or their company that is affected. You have a 30% OPEX reduction target by the end of 2018. What progress are you making towards that?

Dr Samuel

I think that target will be achieved well before then. In fact, I am certain of it.

Mr Carmichael

But you are going to see reductions of that scale collaboratively, are you?

Dr Samuel

That was from the kind of 2014 benchmark, and I think operating costs per barrel were at $29. They are now at $21, and I think they will be close to $15 by the end of this year, so the industry will have gone well beyond that target. The challenge that we put out to them is how much of that is sustainable, and that is the real key thing that we need to achieve. I think some of it is, but I think there is a still a bit further to go.

Mr Carmichael

Of course you heard the unions on the question of safety as a consequence of efficiency savings. Do you have anything to say on that?

Dr Samuel

I think it would be wrong to not be concerned. This is a time of great change. I am always worried particularly about the human factors. People offshore have to be distracted when they are worried about their jobs in the future. I have seen that before, so the more engagement that operators can do the better at times like this. Obviously the tragedy in Norway is a further seismic blow to the industry. I would not underestimate the massive concern, quite rightly, because of that. What I would say is on the process safety side, asset integrity, we now have a strong link with Oil & Gas UK, who monitor that through the Asset Stewardship Board. We do not want to duplicate the work, but we have said that we need to share a strong interest in that. I also have regular meetings with Richard Judge and my team meet with his team from the HSE, so that we are very joined up. I think I said last time we have a memorandum of understanding. It is their job obviously to regulate the safety, but we share a very strong interest in that. A good safe business will absolutely help us maximise recovery and that is the right thing.

Mr Carmichael

Do you have formal interaction in Oil & Gas UK’s Efficiency Task Force?

Dr Samuel

Yes. I meet with them every two months, absolutely routinely. Angela Seeney from my team will probably be joining the group, because there is quite a lot of activity there and we are anxious to make sure that it is joined up. I will give a couple of examples. Since we last met, and with great Government support, we have made huge inroads on technology with the £180 million funding through the City Region Deal for the Oil & Gas Technology Centre, which I am on the board and Sir Ian is the chair. So that is up and running. We have agreed the first four key things, which are around late life asset integrity, drilling wells at half the cost, developing the huge opportunity of the small pools and decommissioning. I would argue all of those are around sustainable transformational efficient operations, so we just need to make sure that everything is joined up, and I know Deirdre and the unions and I are all on the same page here. We have to have a more focused, prioritised hit list. I still worry that there is, if anything, too much activity and we need to make sure we are doing the right activity that is going to lead to sustainable improvement.

Mr Carmichael

Just to pick up what you were saying to us in November on the subject of infrastructure and maintenance in particular, at that point you were particularly concerned about the impact that low oil prices would have on maintenance in the longer term. Is that still worrying you?

Dr Samuel

It is, it is. Like I say, I think companies are struggling with their cash flow. I have no evidence of any cutbacks of anything. I am hearing that the safety critical maintenance log is decreasing, which would be very welcome, but I think it is something we all need to keep a very close eye on.

Mr Carmichael

Last time you told us you would maybe have another look at this in a year’s time or so. Do you have any further plans on that front?

Dr Samuel

Yes. Like I say, the Asset Stewardship Board is teaming up with Oil & Gas UK to not duplicate, but just make sure that we have line of sight. For example, I believe it is in July the safety critical maintenance data are going to be published. They may well show a reduction. We just need to check that it is not a kind of rearranging of categories. I would like to see that it has been real work offshore.

Mr Carmichael

That is published by whom?

Dr Samuel

I think Oil & Gas UK.

Chair

Thank you very much, Alistair. When you came to see us in November, you talked about companies struggling to make the shift to collaborative working. I think it was from yourselves that I first heard the idea that the mantra of the UK, which has maybe been breached over the last number of decades, of competition being king is counterproductive in the North Sea, and you gave examples—I think it was you—of Norway collaborating. That follows from the example I gave earlier. I am guessing from the nodding that I heard those examples from you. What changes are you seeing towards this collaborative working and are there improvements there since even last November, when you last spoke to us?

Dr Samuel

There are certainly a greater number of what I would call success stories, which are, if you like, the proof points for me, and I commend OGUK, I think they are doing a good job now collating those, as are we. So there are 60 bona fide stories, and I think many of those would not have happened without the kind of interventions that have been made. I am not sure we have reached the tipping point yet where it will be sustainable, because the other force that goes in the other direction is that as companies are struggling for survival, legal and commercial behaviours, particularly around trying to get a greater share of a smaller value pie, kind of accentuate some of the old behaviours. That is understandable; some companies are in a difficult situation.

Chair

You find that counterproductive to the maximum economic return then?

Dr Samuel

I do, yes. What we are doing is intervening in a large number of cases, particularly to try to help people see the bigger picture, that people need to see the value of collaboration. But the other thing we are doing as part of the Scottish Energy Jobs Taskforce and as part of the values and principles workstream that we have done, myself, Trevor Garlick, Deirdre, John Pearson from Amec Foster Wheeler, are reconvening a whole day workshop to look at this exact topic. Particularly we are going to try a technique of ramping up what I call dissatisfaction and trying to get at one of the almost psychological behavioural issues that is stopping people from doing the right thing. We are using some methods from Professor Kegan from Harvard, which are tried and tested. But this is difficult work to really help people change almost their mindsets, but it is what is required, I think, to make the sustainable transformation. So we will see how we get on with that. It is going to be a very different type of conversation. The unions are going to be well-represented, along with some of the frontline from the workforce.

Chair

You mentioned psychological there. I find this psychologically and economically interesting, because as I was saying, the thrust of argument in the UK has always been about competition, but you are saying that competition is counterproductive. It is almost like a rabble, I suppose, to an organised army. What sort of powers are you using to force this change?

Dr Samuel

Competition is good, healthy competition.

Chair

That is a refining on the earlier statement.

Dr Samuel

No, we like healthy competition, and in fact we have to obviously, like everyone else, pay regard to competition law, which we take very seriously. But there is plenty of scope within that for healthy collaboration. That is what Sir Ian called for. Sorry, what was the question beyond that?

Chair

Just what powers are you using to enforce that?

Dr Samuel

Yes. We have direct powers with the operators. With the larger system it is influencing, because the service sector are not covered under the Infrastructure Act, so they are not one of the parties bound by the MER UK strategy. I think that is right, but it does mean that sometimes people ask us to do things that we are, frankly, not empowered to do. So there is still frustration we hear from the service sector, and I have sympathy with this, that they are not quite seeing the operators behave how they would like. They expect us to use powers to solve that. We do not have them, but what we do do absolutely is feed that back to the operators, highlight the opportunities that we think they are missing. I have to say, I think the operators are very good at listening, and we have seen many cases where that has led to better relationships. But we think there is more to do. I think they admit there is more to do themselves, and that is part of what we are going to explore in this workshop next week.

Chair

You mentioned earlier there has been 60 changes. I will not ask you to go through them just now, but it is a fascinating area of interplay between psychology, economics, competition and probably a number of other things. Would you be willing to share with the Committee, by writing to us later, just maybe all 60 examples, if that is possible—certainly fascinating areas—for further sharing of what is happening and what can happen?

Dr Samuel

Very happy to do that. I have copies of our corporate plan, which it sounds like most of you have seen, but also our latest OGA overview, which I will leave at the end of this, but beyond that, we will write to give a flavour of the kind of interventions we have been making and further opportunities we see.

Chair

We might see 60 bullet points, who knows. Alistair Carmichael.

Mr Carmichael

Can I take you on to the question of the Health and Safety Executive and your memorandum of understanding with them? You have a remit, very clear, maximum economic recovery. The HSE has its statutory duties, maintenance of safe systems or safe places of work. You can see that there could be potentially a contradiction between the two. How do you balance these and how does the memorandum of understanding work?

Dr Samuel

The MOU covers five key areas and the first is just to ensure that we understand each other’s roles, which kind of alludes to it; the second is then that we align mutual objectives, where appropriate; the third is that we plan and co-operate collectively where appropriate; the fourth is that we can share data, which is in everyone’s interests and minimises the burden on industry. Then we are also looking at whether we should jointly communicate and show up at events. I have never seen a conflict between safety and good operations; I really haven’t. In fact, safety leadership is often the key to good leadership, the kind of things that the unions are talking about, which I fully support. The workforce engagement leads to far safer operations and it leads to far more efficient operations.

Mr Carmichael

So your work can inform and kind of influence the work of the HSE, but come the day when the HSE says, “No, that is an unsafe practice” or, “That is a step too far” that is it, they have primacy in that still?

Dr Samuel

Absolutely, and we would fully support them. Interestingly, I had this conversation with the head of the Brazilian regulator, who has both the role that I have, but also the safety role, and she shut in half the Brazil production on a safety point and it was probably the best thing she ever did. She had a call from the Prime Minister, but it was the right thing to do and it led to a more sustainable, safe operation down the line. So again, no discord.

Mr Carmichael

It is what in the civil service they call brave, I think.

Dr Samuel

It was brave.

Mr Carmichael

This follows on very naturally from what you were saying there about the importance of maintaining safety and the standards in relation to the longer term, and you heard there from Jake Molloy and Tommy Campbell about the concerns of the merchant shipping that is associated with the oil and gas industry. You heard them talking about the Filipino crews working on levels of pay below the minimum wage. I hear from my own constituents, a number of whom work in that sector themselves, concerns about the way in which the English language requirements for officers, for example, are got around. Trade unions have expressed a view that you should have power to set up a policeman on standards. Is that an area where you be interested in extending your remit?

Sir Patrick Brown

No.

Mr Carmichael

Who should do it then, because if you do not, clearly what is happening at the moment in the North Sea has to be unacceptable?

Sir Patrick Brown

If it is marine, of course it is the Department of Transport and Mr McLoughlin. There are, however, international treaties about marine operations and I do recall from my own background that sometimes the UK Government finds it impossible to act, which is not satisfactory and, unless things have changed since those days, it may still be the same.

Mr Carmichael

But this is an integral part of the work of the industry in the North Sea. You are talking about standby vessels, you are talking safety vessels, you are talking about supply boats. You cannot divorce that from the workings of this industry.

Sir Patrick Brown

I do not disagree with you.

Mr Carmichael

Surely they cannot accept a different standard of employment practice and a different standard of safety regulation than applies to the rest of the industry?

Sir Patrick Brown

I do not disagree with you. I am just saying that for the Oil and Gas Authority, it is well outside our remit.

Chair

It might be outside your remit, but do you see it having any impact at all on areas that are within your remit? If there is a change of seafarers’ practices, change of wages, would this not be impacting? We are talking about collaboration has been a huge part. Surely the seafarers would be integral in collaborating between what is specifically working and what isn’t.

Mr Carmichael

Let us put it another way: you are about talking about mass production in all things, we know that. Andy has told us in fact it is going even further than that. Is there not an opportunity here for the industry, for the operators, to say, “There is a part of our OPEX going on the money that we are paying to shipping companies and it is just shipping it off balance sheet”?

Sir Patrick Brown

There is clearly an opportunity for the operators, if they see it as a valuable step, to get together. They after all procure the shipping.

Mr Carmichael

So the holistic regulation doesn’t extend to shipping interests? Does that not look a bit like a gap in your set-up?

Sir Patrick Brown

I do not think so, because we do not have powers to direct, only to influence.

Mr Carmichael

That takes me neatly on to my final question, and it is some of what we have heard from the unions about their view that you should be given powers to prevent oil and gas companies from demanding cuts from contractors that they term as having a direct detrimental impact on jobs and safety. That again would be brave, in civil service terms. Do you see that as being something that you should be getting involved in?

Sir Patrick Brown

No. It is asking us to take a policy position that is not one, I think, for a regulator.

Mr Carmichael

So ultimately, if you do not have direct powers, these are still obviously a number of aims that you would want to achieve. How do you achieve them?

Dr Samuel

One very interesting area is decommissioning, because it is a bit newer, a bit of a fresh start in some ways. So what we are trying to do with our strategy is set from the outset a culture that is quite different that I think can then start to feed back into when we start new major projects. What we have with the Energy Bill though is the power to scrutinise operators’ plans on decommissioning, because quite rightly the Treasury was very anxious to make sure that it was done very efficiently. So we have a team now that will be able to go in, and we have started it with operators, working with them to look at their plans. One of the core planks of our strategy is strategic contracting. We think the transformational aspect is operators working in a very different way with the service sector, so we are promoting that. I would say the operators are very open to this, they can see the value, so we are hoping, if you like, to start changing the culture to a more collaborative one. Another key aspect of this that I think is of interest also is to make sure legitimately that there is a level playing field for UK jobs in this space. Some of my team have been up to the Shetlands and looking at Dales Voe and other opportunities; we are speaking to Dundee. How do we best influence this with operators? Getting involved early. If we wait until the last minute and they have done a lot of work and come up with some plan and we say, “That is the wrong plan” that is just frustrating for everyone. So what we are doing is we are working in partnership with them early on, and where we see the good practices from one operator, we transfer it to another, and that is welcome all round. We are trying to do a lot here. We are starting to do that, even though it is perhaps less of an official remit, but we still think it is very important for new developments, so we are working very closely with operators to understand what are they doing to really make sure that they are maximising value, working as best as possible with the service sector. I have to commend the cross-party group that is doing some very valuable work in this space as well. There has been a couple of very good meetings this year already. The first one looked at some of the issues in the past around UK projects, both those done in the UK and those done overseas. One of the key messages of course is that don’t just assume that taking it to South Korea ends up with a good result; it often does not. So we do want the level playing field. The second meeting, then we brought in the fabricators and got very good ministerial support to challenge what we are doing to sustain these skills and fight for the future. We are doing a lot in this space, but it is more in the influence role. What I would say is where we get in early, industry are listening and we are getting good results.

Chair

Thank you. Two aspects that have been identified there are contractors and the shipping area and you seemed not to take a full approach there, a full holistic approach, and you seem unwilling to tackle the cultural shift of a race to the bottom, which we have certainly seen in seafarers. There are issues around contractors and you do not want to extend your tentacles in there at all. The maximum economic return is indeed seen for the industry, but surely the maximum economic return has to be for seafarers as well. If you are laying off seafarers and taking on cheaper seafarers, that is hardly a maximum economic return to communities all over the UK, where these seafarers are from. Isn’t it a dereliction by the OGA not to get involved with that?

Dr Samuel

One of the things we have been very open about, and a risk that we see, is what we call mission creep, and the chair and I agreed early on that we would have a headcount limit. We have done well in most areas. We are still struggling to attract in some areas, we still do not pay enough, but in most areas we have attracted the workforce we need, so we are about at about 160. We will not go much beyond that. The team are incredibly stretched, they are working harder than they have ever worked, and I think we currently have taken on too much, so I am worried about how we will sustain quality delivery just to deliver what we have in the corporate plan, which, as I think we have already reflected, is a very demanding plan. So my concern is taking on more, but I am very happy—and we can think about doing this together—meeting with fellow Departments and raising issues. That is certainly within our remit and we have done an awful lot of that. I am on the inter-ministerial group, but below that we have the cross-Whitehall group and we do pick up these conversations with BIS and other Departments. Very happy to get a bit more evidence. I will pick it up with Tommy and Jake when I meet with them again next week, get the detail, and then I will—

Chair

I think it is something, with respect, that is almost a strategy by the Oil and Gas Authority, that of see no evil, hear no evil in these particular areas that Alistair Carmichael raised. That will be disappointing to many people working in the oil and gas sector, that the Authority chooses not to look into certain areas.

Dr Samuel

I think we have to stick to our remit. Our remit is set out in the Infrastructure Act and it certainly doesn’t cover the service sector or offshore marine, but like I say, we are happy to pick it up—and we do a lot of this—to represent the industry’s interests across Government, but we cannot do the work of other Government Departments.

Mr Carmichael

As it happens, I am with the Minister for Shipping for a meeting to discuss some of this soon, so I think you can expect a call.

Chair

Thank you very much for coming in. I don’t think there are any further questions, are there? Okay, panel, thank you for your time and hopefully we will see you at some point again in the future. Good luck in maximising economic return and let us hope it is a maximum economic return for all those involved in the sector. Thank you. Oral evidence: Maximising Economic Recovery of Oil and Gas, HC 989 [1] Note from witness: This should read “we are seeing production rise for the first time in 15 years”.