As the
wider debate over Brexit interminably winds on in Parliament and the public sphere,
some detailed aspects of the implications of Brexit get overlooked.
For example, today Rachel
Reeves MP, Chair of the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Committee has
written to energy minister Richard Harrington, to call for clarity on a series
of issues relating to the UK’s ongoing relationship with the EU and Euratom and
the Government’s plans for civil nuclear in the event of a ‘no deal’ scenario.
(“Clarity
on Euratom and key civil nuclear issues needed,” 6 December 2018;https://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/business-energy-industrial-strategy/news-parliament-2017/clarity-euratom-civil-nuclear-17-19/)
Ms Reeves
commented:
"There
are some encouraging indications of progress on civil nuclear issues such as
nuclear safeguards and trading arrangements. Nevertheless, serious concerns
persist, particularly in the event of a ‘no deal’ scenario. In the event of no
deal and no transition period, the ongoing operation of the UK’s nuclear power
stations could be put at risk. The Government needs to spell out what it
is doing to ensure that nuclear power stations continue to function from 29
March 2019 and whether it will seek a separate deal with Euratom in these
circumstances. The Government also needs to be clearer about its plans to
facilitate the building of construction of major facilities such as Hinkley
Point C if restrictions on migrant labour are introduced in the future."
She
added: "The UK plays an important role in nuclear research Given the UK’s
proud history of innovation, it’s important the Government sets out its plans
to make up for reduced access to EU R&D funding for future innovation
projects beyond 2020."
(In
December 2017, the BEIS Committee published its report following its inquiry “Brexit and its
implications for the civil nuclear sector. The Committee’s report examined the
UK’s current relationship with Euratom, the role of nuclear safeguards in trade
and research, the establishment of a new UK regime, the importance of nuclear
co-operation agreements in trading nuclear materials, and the impact of exit on
R&D and skills.( https://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/business-energy-industrial-strategy/news-parliament-2017/euratom-report-published-17-19/)
Rachel Reeves has herself been a long-time cheerleader for nuclear
power, and seems unable to distinguish between her independent role a business
and energy committee chair and her personal political prejudice
to almost mindlessly back nuclear power. As a former Bank of England
high-flyer, Ms Reeves should know nuclear energy has for decades been a huge
drain on limited resources for RD&D and capital investment programmes, with
a very high opportunity cost, as financial costs of construction ever
escalate, completion deadlines drift into the far future, and efficiency
of operation decreases, despite greater operational experience. Her call for
replacing Euratom's promotional role for nuclear with a national,
tax-payer funded alternative, is ill-conceived and misplaced.
Meanwhile, yesterday in the House of Lords, a different Committee also pronounced on future UK
relations with Euratom. The European
Union Committee reported:
Paragraph 246
“In our 2017 report on Brexit: energy security we urged the Government
to seek continuing participation of the EU’s Internal Energy Market.222 The Declaration falls short of this, but does call
for cooperation to support the delivery of “cost efficient, clean and secure
supplies of electricity and gas, based on competitive markets and
non-discriminatory access to networks”. It also calls for a technical
cooperation framework between electricity and gas networks operators and
organisations in the planning and use of energy infrastructure connecting their
systems. This should include mechanisms to ensure as far as possible security
of supply and efficient trade over interconnectors.”
European
Union Committee, report on ‘Brexit: the Withdrawal Agreement and Political
Declaration’, 24th Report of Session
2017-19 - published 5 December 2018 - HL Paper 245; https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201719/ldselect/ldeucom/245/24502.htm
The report
added specifically – paragraphs 247-49 - referencing Euratom:
247.”The Declaration advocates a
wide-ranging Nuclear Cooperation Agreement between EURATOM and the UK, to
enable cooperation between them, including exchange of information, trade in
nuclear materials and equipment, and the participation of the UK as a third
country in EU systems for monitoring and exchanging information on levels of
radioactivity in the environment. The UK’s intention to be associated with
EURATOM research and training programmes (which include the ITER nuclear fusion
research programme) is noted. The Declaration indicates that the EURATOM Supply
Agency intends to reassess the authorisations and approvals for contracts for
the supply of nuclear material between the EU and UK, and that there will be
cooperation through the exchange of information on the supply of medical
radioisotopes.223
[para.248] “We regret that the Declaration does not hold out the possibility of
continued UK participation in the Internal Energy Market, but at the same time
we welcome the high-level commitment to cooperation in the supply of
electricity and gas to ensure as far as possible security of supply and trade
over interconnectors.
[para.249] “We welcome the commitment to a wide-ranging Nuclear Cooperation
Agreement, including exchange of information, trade in nuclear materials and
equipment, monitoring of levels of radioactivity, and exchange of information
on medical radioisotopes. While the reference to the UK’s intention to be
associated with the EURATOM research and training programmes is a positive
step, we call on the Government to provide further clarification of its plans
in this regard.”
Former Labour Foreign Secretary Dame
Margaret Beckett, MP for Derby South spoke
at around 8.45 pm on Tuesday in the Brexit debate in the House of Commons,
using her experience in several other ministerial posts to inform her
contribution, picked out the UK role with Euratom and one of the problematic
implications of withdrawal from the EU, telling MPs:
“Over 20 years ago, as the new
President of the Board of Trade, my first overseas visit to a major trade
partner—Japan—was dominated by the most overwhelming concern. Business and
politicians alike wanted reassurance that the then new Labour Government would
not be leaving the European Union. They were polite, but they were blunt. They
had invested in the UK because the UK was in the European Union, and if we
left, so would they. Just today, their ambassador re-emphasised their
nervousness.
Over these two years, while the
Government have wrangled endlessly about how to proceed, one disastrously
unforeseen consequence of leaving the EU after another has been revealed. Government
Members keep insisting that everyone who voted knew exactly what they were
doing and what the possible consequences would be. It may be so. All I can say
is, I did not.
When I heard the Prime Minister
pontificating about escaping the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice,
it never crossed my mind that that meant leaving Euratom—the watchdog not just
for cancer treatment, but for the safety of nuclear power stations. I know from
ministerial experience that we have, and have had for years, a shortage of
people across the world with those skills and capacities, and we are about to
leave behind some of those on whom we presently rely….
“There has been a determined effort
to keep people in the dark.”
Next day, the Conservative chair of the Health and Social
Care select committee, Dr Sarah Wollaston, represents Totnes in Devon,
pointed out:
“We know what the withdrawal
agreement looks like, for example. It is a legally binding agreement with more
than 500 pages, but worryingly, it has only 26 pages describing what will
actually happen after the transition period. That is nothing more than a wish
list of asks and it is very sketchy. We are heading for a blindfold Brexit…
…in as little as 114 days, we will
be up against “Project Reality”. In the context of no deal, “Project Reality”
would be very serious indeed for patients who use our national health service.
We are talking about major interruptions in the supply chain of vital medicines
and medical supplies. We are talking about insecurity in the supply of vital
diagnostic test materials such as medical radioisotopes, which cannot be
stockpiled…”
In a document
published by DeXeu on 3 December,
“EU
Exit:Legal position on the Withdrawal Agreement”, Cm 9747, the Government
said of the future nuclear relationship with the EU:
The UK’s withdrawal from the
European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom) (Articles 79 to 85), where the UK will have sole responsibility at the
end of the implementation period for its nuclear safeguards arrangements to
meet international nuclear standards. The Agreement defines the UK’s
responsibilities in relation to certain types of nuclear material and
radioactive waste, makes provision in respect of ownership of special fissile
material located in the UK and provides for the transfer of specified Euratom
equipment (see also Annex V) and responsibilities to the UK at the end of the
implementation period.
Backstory
On 6
December, to support ‘Industry Day’ on the Government’s campaigning grid to
secure support for Brexit from MPs, BEIS published a 52 page new report, “Forging
our future: Industrial Strategy - the story so far: Achievements of
the Industrial Strategy one year after publication,” which includes the
following material on the nuclear energy strategy:
NUCLEAR
The Nuclear Sector Deal (June 2018),
ensures that the UK’s nuclear sector remains cost competitive with other forms
of low-carbon technologies to support our Clean Growth Strategy and Grand
Challenges.
`` £200m co-investment programme in emerging nuclear
technologies including small and advanced nuclear modular reactors Industry has
committed to stretching targets including:
`` 30% reduction in the cost of new build projects
`` 20% savings in the cost of decommissioning
compared with current estimates
`` 40% women in civil
nuclear by 2030
(approximately 22% today)
IMPROVING NUCLEAR DECOMMISSIONING
Sellafield Ltd is carrying out
essential nuclear decommissioning work, using cutting edge technology enabling
it to meet the highest safely standards. We want to achieve greater value for
the taxpayer in the way we conduct nuclear decommissioning in the UK, and have
set a target of a 20% reduction in the costs of decommissioning by 2030.
A joint government and industry review
is underway to establish a national
decommissioning and waste management pipeline. This aims to create
opportunities for the UK economy by reducing barriers to entry for the supply
chain.
“As part of the High Value
Manufacturing Catapult, supported by Innovate UK, the Nuclear Advanced Manufacturing Research Centre in Rotherham is boosting the competitiveness of the UK civil
nuclear manufacturing industry.”
Nuclear Sector Deal
The
Nuclear Sector Deal (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/nuclear-sector-deal/nuclear-sector-deal)
builds on the government’s historical
partnership with the UK nuclear sector.
It ensure
that the UK’s nuclear sector remains cost competitive with other forms of
low-carbon technologies to support our Clean Growth Strategy and Grand
Challenge. Through adopting new construction techniques and innovative
approaches to manufacturing, the deal will reduce the costs of building new
reactors in a way that builds domestic supply chain capability and skills.
No comments:
Post a Comment