1st August 2026
Want the UK to ‘Get On With It’ on North Sea Energy
The debate over the future of the UK’s North Sea oil and gas sector has become one of the most emotionally charged issues in British politics. Yet beneath the political noise, a clear public mood is emerging — one that is less ideological, more practical, and increasingly impatient. For many Britons, the message is simple: get on with it.
the public mood is mostly pragmatic, shaped by energy bills and the optics of importing gas while sitting on shared fields that Norway continues to exploit.
Burnham’s signals toward approving Rosebank and Jackdaw fit that mood — even though he hasn’t formally announced anything yet.
At a time when households are still grappling with high energy bills and a stubborn cost‑of‑living squeeze, the idea of delaying or blocking already‑licensed North Sea projects feels, to many, like a luxury the country cannot afford.
A Cost‑of‑Living Lens, Not an Ideological One
Polling over the past year has consistently shown that a majority of the public supports developing existing North Sea licences. Surveys from YouGov, Survation and others indicate:
50–60% support for using already‑approved fields
Support rising to 70%+ when framed around reducing imports or lowering bills
Opposition concentrated among younger voters and those prioritising climate targets above affordability
This isn’t a public clamouring for endless expansion. It’s a public reacting to the reality of their bills, their budgets, and the fact that the UK still imports around 60% of its gas.
For many, the logic is straightforward:
“If we’re going to use gas anyway, why import it at a premium when we have our own?”
The Norway Factor: A Growing Source of Frustration
One of the most powerful drivers of public sentiment is the comparison with Norway — a country that shares the same geological basin and many of the same fields.
Norway has made its position crystal clear: it will continue producing oil and gas as long as Europe needs it. It has expanded gas output since 2022 and is now the UK’s largest supplier.
This creates a perception that Britain is sitting on resources while Norway profits from shared fields. For many voters, it feels like a self‑inflicted disadvantage.
“We import Norwegian gas while leaving our own fields undeveloped”
is a line that resonates deeply with the public.
Energy Security: A Post‑2022 Reality
The war in Ukraine fundamentally changed how people think about energy. Security of supply is no longer an abstract concept — it’s a lived experience.
When people hear that developing fields like Rosebank and Jackdaw could provide roughly 10% of UK domestic gas, it lands with real weight. Not because people love fossil fuels, but because they remember the shock of price spikes and the vulnerability of relying on global markets.
The public mood is not anti‑renewables — far from it. But it is anti‑uncertainty. And right now, many see domestic production as part of a stable transition rather than a contradiction to it.
A Growing Disconnect Between Public Mood and Political Messaging
While climate groups and some MPs warn against approving new developments, the broader public mood is more pragmatic. People are not rejecting climate goals — they are rejecting what they see as unnecessary self‑restraint during a cost‑of‑living crisis.
This creates a tension for leaders like Andy Burnham, who must balance:
climate commitments
union pressure
Scottish regional interests
industry expectations
and a public that increasingly wants action, not hesitation
Burnham’s repeated use of the word “pragmatic” reflects this balancing act. He has not formally announced decisions on Rosebank or Jackdaw, but his signals align with the public’s desire for a practical, cost‑focused approach.
The Public’s Underlying Logic
Across interviews, polling, and public commentary, a consistent pattern emerges. People tend to think:
“We’re going to use gas for years anyway.”
“If we don’t produce it, we’ll just import it.”
“Imports cost more.”
“Norway isn’t stopping, so why should we?”
“My bills are too high to ignore this.”
This is not ideological. It’s lived experience.
Conclusion: A Country Ready to Move Forward
The UK’s energy debate is often framed as a clash between climate ambition and fossil‑fuel dependency. But the public mood suggests something more nuanced: a desire for realistic transition, energy security, and lower bills.
Most people aren’t asking for a return to the past. They’re asking for a future that doesn’t leave them paying more for imported gas while domestic fields sit idle.
In short, the public mood is clear — get on with it.