Ministers 'misled MPs over need for nuclear power stations'

www.guardian.co.uk
31 Jan 2012

(UK) Cross-party report says government misrepresented findings on future electricity demand, and ignored case against nuclear

Ministers misled parliament over the need to build a new fleet of nuclear power stations, distorting evidence and presenting to MPs a false summary of the analysis they had commissioned, a group of MPs and experts alleged in a report published on Tuesday. If MPs had been presented with an accurate picture of the evidence for and against new reactors, the government's plans might have been challenged, according to the report. Both the previous Labour government and the current coalition overstated the evidence that new nuclear power was needed, it also alleged.

Building new nuclear power stations is highly controversial, as polls consistently show a substantial minority opposing them. But many people, including some environmental campaigners, have been persuaded towards supporting nuclear by the argument that they would help the UK generate power without CO₂ emissions.

The previous government cited its own research in order to make that case, but according to today's report, some of the findings were misrepresented when relayed to MPs by ministers. For instance, the report found that rather than assess the requirement for new nuclear power stations and then work out how many would be needed, the government commissioned research that took as its central assumption that 10 new reactors would be built and then presented its research as evidence of the need for 10 reactors.

The Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency (DECC) said: "We are confident that the Energy National Policy Statements [which set out the government's arguments that new nuclear power was needed] are robust documents which took account of all relevant factors".

The report suggested that the current government's repeated assertion that electricity demand was likely to double was based on taking some of the highest estimates from its research rather than the average. The author, Ron Bailey, who has written against nuclear power, also accused ministers of ignoring key findings of the research they had commissioned that showed ways in which the UK could do without new nuclear power.

A spokesman for the DECC said: "We need a range of new energy infrastructure to keep the lights on and reduce our carbon emissions in a secure and affordable way. The UK has everything to gain from becoming a leading destination to invest in new nuclear power. This will come alongside investment in other technologies such as renewables, clean coal and gas, and improved energy efficiency".

The report, called A Corruption of Governance?, was written by pressure group Unlock Democracy and the Association for the Conservation of Energy, and was endorsed by a cross-party group of MPs. The organisations called for the debate on new nuclear power to be reopened in parliament.

Caroline Lucas, the UK's only Green Party MP, said: "Despite claiming that it wants an open debate on the UK's energy future, the government has already made it clear in the proposals for electricity market reform and in its dismissive response to the Fukushima disaster that it is betting its money on nuclear. Given what we know about the strength of nuclear industry lobbying, there needs to be far greater transparency around the decisions that will determine where our electricity comes from in ten or 20 years time".

She added: "With other countries turning away from nuclear power, MPs and the public must be told the truth about how we can achieve energy security and a genuinely green economy".

However, despite the report's findings, many experts support nuclear power on the grounds that other low-carbon alternatives cannot supply enough power, particularly when electric cars replace petrol-driven models and more electricity is used for heating to replace gas and oil, driving up electricity demand. For instance, Prof David Mackay, now chief scientific advisor to DECC, has made the case that not enough on and offshore wind farms, biomass power plants and other low-carbon forms of electricity can be built in the UK to satisfy demand, so investments in nuclear power will be needed.

Peter Facey, the director of Unlock Democracy, said his organisation did not have a position on nuclear power, but wanted to "ensure that the information on which ministers based their decisions is as impartial and robust as possible". In the case of the arguments used for nuclear power, he said: "The data appears to have been politicised. It is crucial that meetings between government officials and the nuclear lobby are opened up to greater scrutiny so we can have greater confidence that policy makers are not being misled".

The MPs endorsing the report included Alan Whitehead (Lab), Tessa Munt (LibDem), Mike Weatherley (Con), Martin Horwood (LibDem), Joan Walley (Lab) and Caroline Lucas (Green).