The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security and
Net Zero (Andrew Bowie) With permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I
wish to make a statement on civil nuclear power in the UK. Today,
we have published three key documents that reinforce the UK’s
position as a leader in the civil nuclear renaissance: a civil
nuclear road map, a consultation on alternative routes to market,
and a consultation on a proposed policy for siting new nuclear
power stations. That...Request free
trial
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security
and Net Zero ()
With permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I wish to make a statement
on civil nuclear power in the UK. Today, we have published three
key documents that reinforce the UK’s position as a leader in the
civil nuclear renaissance: a civil nuclear road map, a
consultation on alternative routes to market, and a consultation
on a proposed policy for siting new nuclear power stations. That
sets us on a path towards deploying up to 24 GW of nuclear power
in Britain by 2050 as part of a cleaner, cheaper and more secure
energy system for the future. It is the biggest investment in
more than 70 years.
In the civil nuclear road map we are setting out our overarching
strategy for the deployment of new nuclear reactors in the UK,
and how His Majesty’s Government intend to work with the nuclear
sector to deliver that ambition. The road map establishes our
vision for a vibrant British nuclear sector, providing detail on
the policies that we are pursuing to enable delivery, covering
areas such as siting, regulation, financing, the joint work that
we are undertaking with Defence nuclear colleagues to develop the
required nuclear skills and supply chain in the UK, and how we
are taking care of our nuclear legacy through policies on
decommissioning and waste management.
Announcements in the road map include a commitment to reform the
regulations, financing and decommissioning of civil nuclear to
make it more agile, thereby streamlining regulation while
retaining the UK’s world-class standards of safety. For example,
the measures that we are announcing today could cut by up to 50%
the approval times for reactors that are already approved by
overseas regulators.
We are also announcing our commitment to reduce global dependence
on Russian fuel and to grow the UK supply chain by investing £300
million, alongside industry, in the British production of clean,
green high-assay low-enriched uranium fuel for innovative new
reactors, thereby offering a commercial alternative to Russia for
ourselves and our allies and partners.
The road map also sets out our long-term ambition for nuclear,
providing high-level timelines and key decision points for a wide
range of nuclear technologies over the next decades. Those
technologies include small modular reactors, advanced modular
reactors and gigawatt-scale projects, including a new commitment
to explore a further gigawatt-scale nuclear project after
Sizewell C. Advanced nuclear technologies, such as SMRs and AMRs,
present the opportunity to decarbonise across the energy sector,
from grid electricity through industrial heat to entirely new
industries such as the production of hydrogen and synthetic
fuel.
Last year, we set up Great British Nuclear as an arm’s length
body responsible for helping to deliver new nuclear projects and
lead our energy revolution, but we are also keen to harness
innovation in the private sector and help developers to bring
forward new nuclear projects outside of GBN’s ongoing SMR
selection process. We are therefore today also launching our
alternative routes to market consultation. That consultation,
which will run for 12 weeks, aims to understand where the
Government could support the private sector to bring forward
advanced nuclear projects.
Finally, in recognition of our enhanced nuclear ambitions and the
exciting potential offered by advanced nuclear technologies, we
are launching a public consultation on a proposed new policy for
the siting of new nuclear power stations. That consultation marks
an important first step in the process for developing a new
nuclear national policy statement for England and Wales, and will
run for eight weeks. The results of the consultation will be used
to inform the drafting of the national policy statement document,
which we intend to publish for further consultation.
The proposed siting processes announced today would, of course,
apply only to England and Wales. Although our ambition is for a
whole British nuclear revolution, the current Scottish Government
sadly remain committed to blocking any planning application for
new nuclear in Scotland under their devolved consenting regime.
However, we continue to invite the Scottish Government to join us
and more than 30 other countries around the world to allow for
reinvestment in, and the renewal of, our nuclear capacity across
the whole UK in order to meet our net zero and energy security
objectives. Our intention is to designate the NPS in
2025—subject, of course, to parliamentary processes. For the
first time, we intend for the NPS to provide a planning policy
framework for SMRs and AMRs, as well as the traditional
gigawatt-scale power stations.
To achieve the UK’s nuclear ambitions, the Government believe
that additional sites will be required for new nuclear projects,
along with greater ongoing flexibility in the site selection
process to enable new technologies. We are excited to introduce a
positive shift in approach in the siting consultation: the new
NPS will empower nuclear developers to identify potential sites
for development, fostering developers’ innovation and, indeed,
flexibility. Although the existing designated nuclear sites may
possess many inherent positive attributes that potentially make
them a consideration for future development, the change allows
for the exploration of diverse new locations. By entrusting
developers with that responsibility, we aim to streamline the
process, encourage creative solutions and enhance the overall
efficiency of nuclear development, ultimately contributing to the
growth and sustainability of the industry.
We propose that the siting of new nuclear would continue to be
constrained by robust criteria that determine where development
can occur. Developers would be empowered to undertake the initial
screening of sites based on those criteria, with advice from
regulators and statutory agencies. Of course, it is our intention
that safety will remain paramount, with the highest safety,
security and environmental standards overseen by the independent
nuclear regulator and environment protection agencies. Public
consultation and community engagement will also remain essential
parts of the process. This package —this vision, this
announcement—represents the biggest investment in nuclear in the
UK for over 70 years, ensuring our energy security, keeping us on
the path to net zero and delivering the jobs of the future: our
nuclear future.
I commend this statement to the House.
Madam Deputy Speaker ( )
I call the shadow Minister.11.48am
(Croydon Central) (Lab)
I thank the Minister for advance sight of his statement.
The energy bills crisis of the past two years has exposed the
deep vulnerabilities in Britain’s energy system and the urgent
need to build more home-grown power in this country so that we
can cut energy bills and have real energy independence from
dictators such as Putin. In that context, we support the
Government’s commitment to new nuclear power. Labour supports new
nuclear, which must form a critical part of our future energy
mix. Nuclear power is a long-term project for any country, and I
want to give the industry and nuclear workers clear assurances
that there is a cross-party consensus for nuclear power in this
country.
It was the last Labour Government who identified 10 sites for new
nuclear in 2009, and in the time since this Government’s record
has been one of continual delay and false dawns. Yesterday, I met
people from west Cumbria who have been waiting six years for a
decision on nuclear since the last plan collapsed on this
Government’s watch. The road map published today is two years
later than they promised, and it still leaves a number of
unanswered questions about how the Government intend to turn warm
words into practical action, so I shall ask the Minister a number
of questions.
First, I am glad that the Minister has woken up to the urgent
fact that we need to generate more cheap, clean electricity in
this country. In which year will any of the policies announced
today actually cut bills for people? Secondly, it is all well and
good talking about commitments to new stations in the next
Parliament, but what is the timetable for the final investment
decision for Sizewell C? The Government promised to have a final
investment decision by the end of this Parliament, so will the
Minister give a categorical promise today that that will be done?
Time is running out. Thirdly, will he update us on the timetable
for Hinkley Point C, originally promised to be delivered by 2017,
and when will it start supplying power to households?
Fourthly, on SMRs, what is the timetable for concluding the
competition? Just yesterday I met representatives trying to site
SMRs who were complaining of long delays from Government and the
Nuclear Decommissioning Authority in getting the project moving.
How will the Minister unblock that and wider SMR development?
Fifthly, what steps are being taken to ensure that the UK retains
critical skills in our nuclear sector? Nuclear jobs are
high-skilled, well-paid and unionised jobs, and Labour supports
the workers and unions in the nuclear industry in calling on the
Government to ensure that investment in the industry supports
good jobs and apprenticeships right through the supply chain.
Finally, will the Minister address the ongoing concerns about the
safety and security of our nuclear decommissioning process, given
the disturbing revelations about Sellafield? What steps are being
taken to ensure that every nuclear site is secure?
Labour supports new nuclear for Britain after 14 years of
inaction under the Conservatives. The wider lesson is that this
country needs a Government going full pelt for clean power. We
should be investing as a country in nuclear, offshore wind,
onshore wind, solar, hydrogen, carbon capture and storage, and
all forms of clean power that can help to cut bills and make our
country energy independent. That is what we need, and that is
what a Labour Government will do.
I am so pleased to hear the hon. Lady’s support for the
Conservative party’s policies regarding nuclear, given that we
are investing in all of the above and more. I do welcome the
support of the official Opposition and their recent damascene
conversion to the benefits of nuclear power, but we should never
forget, in this place and beyond, that any nuclear projects in
this country and any nuclear power stations have been delivered
only by a Conservative Government. It is a record of which were
very proud. Labour was in power for 13 years and delivered
nothing.
We are very proud today to be publishing our civil nuclear road
map. As I say, it is important for the industry that there is
cross-party consensus and agreement that investment in nuclear is
to the benefit of this country, the economy and the environment
and, indeed, will provide energy security and wean ourselves and
our allies off our reliance on Vladimir Putin for our energy
needs.
The hon. Lady is absolutely right that delivering new nuclear
power stations will yield results for the British people and
deliver cleaner bills. In Finland, where nuclear power stations
are now delivering more than 40% of energy on to the grid, bills
have dropped by an incredible 70%. She asked about the final
investment decision on Sizewell C; we remain committed to making
that decision by the end of this Parliament. On Hinkley Point C,
we are in fact very proud of the progress that is being made.
Just last month we saw the dome being lifted on to the top of
reactor 1. I have nothing but admiration for the workforce and
everybody involved in delivering that first-of-a-kind project at
Hinkley, and we continue to support it.
The hon. Lady asked about the next phase of the small modular
reactor competition. It will be launched within weeks, so I ask
her to bide her time and keep her patience. We are very excited
to have six fantastic technology companies bidding to deploy in
the United Kingdom, and we are moving faster than any comparable
programme around the world, to ensure that Britain and the
British people benefit from investment in small modular reactors
and the benefits they can bring to the energy mix and to local
economies.
The hon. Lady asked about skills. One of the things that the
nuclear industry can bring, and indeed delivers at this point, is
high-skilled, high-wage jobs throughout the country, and indeed
in many places where those jobs are at a premium. It is
absolutely right that we look at how we can encourage more
people, and make the spaces available within industry and in our
educational institutions to get more people into the jobs of the
future in the nuclear industry. That is why I, along with my hon.
Friend the Minister for Defence Procurement, have launched the
nuclear skills task force, chaired by Sir . It will publish its initial
findings and recommendations in the very near future.
As I said, I welcome the new-found support, optimism and
positivity for nuclear demonstrated by the Labour party, and when
we as the Conservative party go on to win at the next election, I
am sure that the hon. Lady will continue to offer that support
from the Opposition Benches.
Madam Deputy Speaker ( )
I call the Chair of the Science, Innovation and Technology
Committee.
(Tunbridge Wells) (Con)
The Committee that I have the privilege of chairing published a
big report on the future of nuclear power last year, calling for
a comprehensive strategy for new nuclear, so I warmly welcome the
Minister’s statement and the publication today, which responds
very comprehensively and substantially to many of the
recommendations we made. In particular, I welcome the commitments
to new gigawatt-scale nuclear as part of the 24 GW target; to
streamline the regulation, which is extremely important; to small
modular reactors; and to the security that comes from investing
in our own domestic source of nuclear fuel. Those are very big
steps forward. May I ask the Minister specifically to say whether
the new site approval mechanism will allow these sites to be used
for SMRs by the 2050 deadline or target?
I thank my right hon. Friend for his question and for all the
work he has done to champion nuclear, not only in his capacity as
Chair of the Select Committee but in his time as Secretary of
State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, when he was
in charge of getting this ship moving. To answer his question
directly, yes it will. The new siting strategy will cover the
possibility of the deployment of all technologies —SMR, AMR and
gigawatt-scale reactors. I welcome my right hon. Friend’s
support.
Madam Deputy Speaker ( )
I call the SNP spokesperson.
(Gordon) (SNP)
I thank the Minister for advance sight of his statement. He is
absolutely right in one respect: the Scottish Government do not
support the development of new nuclear power in Scotland. The
reasons for that are simple: beside the environmental concerns,
the economics do not lie. Nuclear power is slow to deliver and
horrendously expensive, and the policy of recent years under
Labour and Conservative Governments has been simply to allow
private companies to privatise the profits while the risks are
socialised for taxpayers. We on this side of the House—at least,
on the SNP Benches—all know that Scotland’s comparative
advantages lie in hydrogen and renewables, both areas in which
the Scottish Government’s ambitions appear to considerably
outstrip those of the current UK Government.
May I ask the Minister two simple questions? First, despite his
disagreement with the Scottish Government’s stance on planning
and nuclear, will he and his Government respect the devolution
settlement as it stands? Secondly, will he give an undertaking,
as none of his predecessors over the last half century or more
have been able to do, that when the multibillion-pound
decommissioning liabilities become live for any new generation of
nuclear power stations, they will lie squarely on the private
companies that have benefited in the preceding decades and will
not fall on the taxpayer?
The Scottish National party, like almost every nationalist party
in the world, has a misplaced belief in its own exceptionalism,
and nowhere is that more true than on nuclear. At COP28, we saw
over 30 countries come together to pledge to increase civil
nuclear capacity around the world by a third, so clear and
obvious is it that nuclear is essential not just in ensuring our
energy security, benefiting local communities and driving forward
our economy, but in reaching our net zero goals and ensuring that
we have a cleaner energy baseload in the future. Indeed, there is
no net zero without nuclear.
It pains me, especially as a Scottish Member of Parliament, that
the Scottish Government’s wrong-headed position on this remains
extant. I would very much welcome a change of direction within
the Scottish Government. I urge the Scottish National party to
look around the world at the countries joining with us in this
nuclear renaissance and revival, and to think of the huge
benefits that could be brought to Scotland, with its proud
history in nuclear going back many decades, if it were to join us
on this journey.
Of course we respect the devolution settlement. We are absolutely
committed to maintaining it. What I urge, though, is a change of
direction, a change of approach and a change of position by the
Scottish Government, so that the Scottish people, the Scottish
economy and the Scottish environment can benefit from future
investment in nuclear that will be felt in England and Wales, and
indeed in so many other countries around the world.
Madam Deputy Speaker ( )
I call the Chair of the Environmental Audit Committee.
(Ludlow) (Con)
Today’s statement provides welcome clarity about the Government’s
road map for the delivery and revival of new nuclear energy
capacity, and I will be writing on behalf of my Committee to the
Minister shortly to raise some points about the SMR competition
that he has touched on today. Notwithstanding the grudging
support from those on the Opposition Front Bench, what steps is
my hon. Friend taking to build the broad consensus behind this
essential component of the delivery of net zero, so that the road
map does not fall victim to the short-term thinking that
bedevilled the delivery of a safe and effective renewal of
nuclear capacity in the past, notably under the previous Labour
Government?
I thank my right hon. Friend for his support of this document and
for the work that he has done in chairing the Committee to drive
forward the arguments for further investment in nuclear. I know
he shares my belief that if we are to reach net zero, nuclear
will play a large part in the mix of energy solutions that we
invest in.
My right hon. Friend is absolutely right that we need to build a
broad consensus. I genuinely welcome the support of the official
Opposition for new investment in nuclear. As I said, when we look
around the world, the pace at which the mood is changing and the
broad acceptance of nuclear as a key benefit in reaching our net
zero goals is incredible. It will take a lot of hard work on the
part of all of us who believe in the benefits that nuclear can
bring economically, to our energy security and, ultimately and
most importantly, to the environment, to keep the pressure up. I
look forward to his writing to me, and to discussing the issues
that he has raised further, and I thank him once again for his
broad support for what we are trying to deliver.
(Warley) (Lab)
May I welcome the statement? I was going to commend the Minister
on the work that I know he has done, until he unfortunately
became petty political—I think he spent a bit too much time in
Scottish politics. He will be aware that the small modular
reactor assessment is already behind the Government’s own
timetable. That is undermining Rolls-Royce, which builds small
reactors for the Royal Navy and has done for many decades.
Meanwhile, the formidable American political industrial machine
is hoovering up customers around the world. Can we not learn from
the vaccine taskforce how to accelerate process while maintaining
safety? Will he now get a move on so that we can build British
modular nuclear reactors using British workers?
I know the right hon. Gentleman would never stoop to petty
politics in this Chamber or anywhere else, but I have to disagree
with him. I share his passion for small modular reactors, and I
share his belief that Rolls-Royce is a world-leading company that
is delivering for this country right now and will continue to do
so in future.
We are proud of the small modular reactor competition, which we
launched in July. We have already completed the first process. We
have six world-leading technologies competing to get investment
from the UK Government for deployment here domestically, of which
Rolls-Royce is of course a part. We will be launching the next
phase in a matter of weeks. It is world-leading, and faster than
any comparable programme in the world. The right hon. Gentleman
says to get a move on, but we have not stopped to draw breath
since we first launched GBN and the small modular reactor
drawdown competition in the summer. However, I welcome his
support for what we are doing, and I hope that he can encourage
more of his colleagues to support it.
(Copeland) (Con)
Today I am fighting back tears of joy and jubilation for this
road map, because it is absolutely clear that we have a Minister
and a Government who are utterly committed to nuclear—whether
that is civil, defence, safe storage, medical isotopes or the
entire supply chain. May I remind my hon. Friend the Minister
that the road map clearly refers to the A595, the road between
Barrow and Workington, where the journey began? Will he give his
absolute assurance that he will remember where the journey began
—with the commitment from my community and the community across
Furness and west Cumbria—and ensure that that is at the forefront
of his decision making on future missions?
My hon. Friend—she is a friend—is rightly proud of the
contribution that Cumbria has made to our nuclear journey over
the last century. The journey began at Calder Hall and has
continued. She is right, and at the forefront of our decision
making will be the experience, expertise and learning that has
developed in and around her constituency, which will of course be
at the forefront of our nuclear renaissance.
(Harwich and North Essex)
(Con)
I congratulate my hon. Friend on his statement, which is probably
the most significant statement on energy policy for at least a
decade. I welcome in particular the intention to streamline
planning processes and regulation to reduce unnecessary costs and
delays. May I ask for an assurance that if there is to be new
nuclear development at Bradwell in Essex, it will be of a type
that does not affect the marine protected area of the Blackwater
estuary, a historic oyster fishery on which many of my
constituents depend?
I thank my hon. Friend for his question and for his support at
this exciting moment. Of course, many sites will be looked at for
future nuclear development, and in every case they will have to
adhere to the stringent, strong and gold-plated environmental
standards that we expect of nuclear licensed sites across the
United Kingdom.
Madam Deputy Speaker ( )
I do apologise for having called two Members in a row from the
same side. I shall immediately correct myself by calling two from
the Opposition side.
(Bath) (LD)
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker—I took no offence at all; it is
fully understood.
The best route to affordable energy security is renewables.
Nuclear power is blighted by delays and rocketing costs, and the
Government are never honest about its much higher costs compared
with renewables. On the Government’s watch, renewables have faced
long delays and the costs for offshore wind development have
increased by 40%. Will a renewables road map soon follow the
statement to address those challenges and ensure that the
Government do not lose their competitive advantage in offshore
wind development?
I lose track of where the Liberal Democrats sit on nuclear. I
know that their current leader was against it, then he was for
it, and then against it again. Right now, I am not quite
sure.
I do take issue with the hon. Lady’s insinuation that we are not
leading the world in renewables. We have the first, second,
third, fourth and fifth—and, soon, the sixth—largest offshore
wind farms in the world generating power right now for Great
Britain. We are investing at pace in solar and in a host of new
and emerging technologies because, unlike some parties, we
believe that we should not invest all our time and money in one
technology. We need a broad range of technologies if we are ever
to meet our legally binding net zero commitment. I look forward
to the day when the Liberal Democrats can hold a policy for more
than five minutes and come to the House and actually support us
on the journey to our net zero future.
(Sheffield, Hallam) (Lab)
I welcome the Minister’s statement. However, what lessons will be
learned from previous and current projects on value for money?
The National Audit Office was scathing about some of the
decisions that had been taken on those projects. What more can be
done to support manufacturing in this area right across the
UK?
Building up the UK’s supply chain is essential. One of the huge
benefits that will be accrued through this biggest-in-70-years
investment in new nuclear is the ability to build up our
manufacturing base in the United Kingdom, creating those
high-wage, high-skilled jobs that we want to see in more
communities around the entire country. Of course, lessons will be
learned from previous projects. We are always looking at value
for money for the British taxpayer, which is why, for example, we
are using the regulated asset base model for funding Sizewell
C.
(The Cotswolds)
(Con)
I warmly welcome my hon. Friend’s announcement today, because
when the advanced gas-cooled reactors are decommissioned by 2030,
we will have a dip in nuclear production. The Public Accounts
Committee, of which I have the honour to be deputy chair, has
done a lot of work on this. We recently had a follow-up visit to
Sellafield. I agree with my hon. Friend that they do fantastic
work there, but it is our largest single project, with a minimum
cost of £200 billion over the next 100 years. Will he undertake
to renew our efforts to get a better handle on the
decommissioning costs, so that they can be properly allocated and
we can have a true estimate of what nuclear generation costs?
I agree with my hon. Friend on the amazing work being conducted
at Sellafield in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member
for Copeland (). The lessons being learned
through the decommissioning process at Sellafield will yield
benefits. We are leading the way across the world on the
decommissioning of sites and are very happy to be advising other
countries on their decommissioning efforts. We need to ensure
that any projects run by the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority
are proved to be value for money, and that we learn from the
lessons of the past.
(Dwyfor Meirionnydd)
(PC)
My party’s policy is to support the development of the present
nuclear sites in Wales, one of which is Trawsfynydd in my
constituency. The Welsh Government have funded Cwmni Egino to
develop Trawsfynydd, and £20 million was allocated only last
autumn for that purpose by the north Wales growth deal to enable
critical development and planning, prior to the final investment
decision to be made anon. Given the strategic developments and
investments in Wales, can the Minister confirm that the entirely
publicly owned Trawsfynydd, with its potential 550 jobs, remains
a possible location for an SMR in the near future? Will he please
visit Trawsfynydd?
I would be delighted to visit the right hon. Lady’s constituency.
Trawsfynydd has exciting potential as a site for an SMR, and for
other nuclear licensed activities. It and many others are
potential sites for the deployment of these new technologies in
the years ahead.
(Warrington North)
(Lab)
As co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group on nuclear
energy, I warmly welcome today’s publication of the long-awaited
civil nuclear road map, in particular the exploration of
alternative routes to market for SMRs and AMRs outside the Great
British Nuclear scheme. On the delivery of large-scale projects,
I am curious to know why the road map states on page 20 that the
Government will need to wait for the Sizewell C final investment
decision before they can set out timelines and processes for a
new large-scale project in the UK. That formal work and
engagement in the Minister’s team need not wait on the work of
another team over which he does not have control or oversight. In
the spirit of speeding up delivery, might he begin this work now
in readiness for maximising the time we have left before 2050 to
get this done?
The hon. Lady can be assured that work is already beginning on
identifying future sites for large-scale gigawatt power stations.
We are committed to announcing more in due course.
(Hartlepool) (Con)
May I add my intense excitement for this announcement and, in
particular, for the inclusion of advanced modular reactors in the
road map? Finally we have a way forward for them. My hon. Friend
knows how important it is to me to get an AMR in Hartlepool. He
was with me on his first ever visit to Hartlepool on the day that
we announced a two-year extension for our reactor, which takes us
to 2026. Does this announcement mean what I think it does—the
guarantee of a future for nuclear at Hartlepool? Is it only a
matter of time before he comes back to announce not only what we
will build there, but who will build it and when?
I remember that visit distinctly—my first as the nuclear
Minister. I thank the hon. Lady and everyone who hosts nuclear
power stations in their constituencies for championing that
industry, the sector and the workforce. The workforce and the
sector have been widely castigated in the popular mindset over
many years, but now are reaping the rewards of continued support
from people such as my hon. Friend and others in this House. I am
delighted that Hartlepool got the extension. The road map that we
set out today will deliver a clear identification of what can be
delivered, where and how. That means a bright future for nuclear
in Hartlepool.
(Edinburgh North and Leith)
(SNP)
Nova Innovation in my constituency recently announced the
wonderful news that it had won €20 million of investment from the
EU to lead a pan-European consortium to create the Seastar tidal
energy farm in Orkney, the largest tidal energy site in the
world. Why does the UK Government continue to largely ignore this
safe, lower cost, reliable form of energy? As Greenpeace points
out, the energy industry itself knows that the economic case for
slow, expensive nuclear just does not add up.
Tidal received money for the very first time through the last
auction round in the contracts for difference process. This
Government are investing in tidal technologies, wind, solar,
hydrogen, carbon capture and storage, continued exploration for
oil and gas—which the hon. Lady’s party opposes—and nuclear. Of
course, it is fantastic news for her constituents and the
businesses around Scotland that are winning contracts to invest
in renewables. What, to their shame, Scottish National party
representatives in this place never mention is the hundreds of
thousands of jobs in Scotland that depend on the nuclear
industry—manufacturing, construction, education and the fantastic
work going on right now in Torness, the only generating power
station in Scotland currently delivering power to 1 million
homes. Perhaps the Scottish National party will come to the
Chamber and explain how, when that power station closes down—as
sadly and inevitably one day it will—they will replace the power
generated for Scottish homes under their plans to completely
ignore this safe, secure and clean option for secure future
energy.
(Folkestone and Hythe)
(Con)
I welcome the civil nuclear road map, in particular the
recognition that we will need additional nuclear sites to those
in the existing policy framework. Does the Minister agree that
there is one big difference between a gigawatt reactor and an
SMR—gigawatt reactors are very big, and SMRs are comparatively
quite small? Therefore, does he believe that we need to consider
smaller sites such as Dungeness in my constituency, which could
be very suitable for such technologies as SMRs?
Again, I welcome my hon. Friend’s support and I thank him for
hosting me on a visit to Dungeness—the fish and chips were
exquisite. I agree that we will look at every site and possible
site and judge them on the basis of what type of technology could
be built there. That will benefit his community, communities
around the country and the United Kingdom more widely.
(Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Minister for his statement. It is great that the
Government have outlined plans for the biggest expansion of
nuclear power in 70 years to reduce energy bills, which so many
of our constituents struggle with on a daily basis. Minister, I
ask you this question because you admitted that Northern
Ireland—
Madam Deputy Speaker ( )
Order. The hon. Gentleman knows that he should not refer directly
to the Minister. Let us have another go.
Apologies, Madam Deputy Speaker. What provisions does the UK
civil nuclear plan include to involve Northern Ireland? How will
it ensure that the region’s perspectives and concerns are
adequately taken into account in the development and
implementation of nuclear politics and policies, so that we can
create jobs and strengthen our economy at the same time as other
areas in the United Kingdom?
As ever, the hon. Gentleman champions his constituents and the
people and economy of Northern Ireland. It is essential to me
that every part of our United Kingdom benefits from this
once-in-a-generation investment into new nuclear. I would be
delighted to meet him to discuss how Northern Ireland and his
constituents in Strangford could benefit from investment in
skills and the supply chain. Deployment of nuclear capabilities
is a devolved competency, but I would be happy to meet him to see
what his constituents can get from this historic
announcement.
(South Ribble)
(Con)
From Anglesey, all the way up the coast to the tip of Cumbria,
the north-west nuclear arc will be, as some Members have already
suggested, dancing a little jig today. Springfields in Lancashire
is the geographic and, I would argue, fuel production heart of
that north-west nuclear arc. I welcome this announcement to
secure the future £300 million investment to ensure that Vladimir
Putin does not have his hands on the taps of advanced nuclear
fuels. That is so important for the hundreds, if not thousands of
people who live in South Ribble and work in the adjacent
Springfields. This investment helps Lancashire support the UK
domestic nuclear industry, but can the Minister tell me if there
are opportunities for exporting Lancashire nous, skills,
capability and fuel to the world?
Absolutely. Lancashire, like Cumbria, is at the heart of the
vision we are announcing today. The £300 million investment in
new nuclear fuels means that the United Kingdom will remain among
a handful of nations committed and able to work across the entire
fuel supply chain. The Secretary of State for Energy Security and
Net Zero is visiting Springfields as I speak, demonstrating our
commitment to that plant and its people. Moving forward, we will
be central to our allies and partners around the world being able
to move away from and wean themselves off relying on hostile
foreign actors like Vladimir Putin for their energy baseload.
Lancashire will be key to doing that.
(Buckingham) (Con)
Nuclear is hugely important for our energy security, so I welcome
today’s statement. Missing from my atomic Friend’s extensive list
of the benefits of nuclear is how much kinder nuclear is on land
use, with a small modular reactor needing just two football
pitches to produce enough power for around 1 million homes,
compared to 2,000 acres of solar that will power only 50,000
homes. Does the Minister agree that nuclear is so much kinder and
does not involve destroying vast swathes of the British
countryside and impacting our food security?
My hon. Friend is absolutely right about the footprint and the
comparable impact on land of nuclear compared to other
technologies, but it is very important that we have a wide range
of energy technologies moving forward. We will benefit from
investment in wind, solar, hydrogen, CCUS and the nuclear we are
announcing today, but I welcome his support for what we are
announcing.
(Waveney) (Con)
I welcome the statement and the publication of the three
documents. With Sizewell C, as well as offshore wind and
hydrogen, East Anglia, Suffolk and Lowestoft will play a vital
strategic role in enhancing our energy security, keeping bills
low and driving forward the transition to net zero. To enable the
local area to play this lead role to the maximum advantage of
local people and local businesses, does my hon. Friend recognise
the vital importance of investment in skills at East Coast
College and investment in infrastructure, such as in the port of
Lowestoft?
Absolutely. My hon. Friend is spot on. I was very happy to visit
East Anglia last year and see for myself the investment Sizewell
C is making in the local community and in local colleges,
supporting young people who want to get into the new high-skilled
jobs that will be produced through the development of projects
such as Sizewell C. I am very happy to announce that I will be
visiting East Anglia again on Monday to see the progress that has
been made at Sizewell C. He is absolutely right that the benefits
that accrue locally through investment in nuclear, at large scale
and at small modular scale, are unprecedented. That is one of the
things that I hope comes out of today: yes we are talking about
our energy security and yes we are talking about reaching net
zero, but the impact locally to communities through investment in
new nuclear is unprecedented. I am very excited to see what it
brings in the years ahead.
(Cleethorpes) (Con)
I welcome the Minister’s statement. Clearly, nuclear will have a
major part to play in energy generation in coming years. A number
of companies have already looked at sites in my northern
Lincolnshire constituency, which he will know is a major centre
for the renewable energy sector. He spoke of encouraging
developers to identify potential sites. Does he agree with me
that it is also important that local authorities play a part in
encouraging this type of development? I can assure him that North
Lincolnshire Council and North East Lincolnshire Council will
welcome such developments.
I completely agree. Local authorities have a key role in driving
forward interest and investment in small modular reactors and
advanced modular reactors, and indeed in any new technologies
that come through as the result of today’s announcement and the
investment we are making in nuclear. I would be delighted to
visit his constituency and see the potential of possible sites
for small modular reactor deployment in the area he represents,
because he is absolutely right. The potential for these
technologies is huge not just, as I have said, for our energy
security moving forward, but for the benefits they bring to
communities up and down the length and breadth of the United
Kingdom.
|
