The nuclear fairy story told us during the first stage of the NuGen CONsultation was that Moorside would produce 7% of the UKs energy. This was of course a big fat lie (amongst others) used to big up the importance of the Moorside project x 3.5. Now DECC have admitted as much saying the lie was “regrettable.” Mmm. So a lie promoting the most dangerous untried and untested (literally) reactors next to the most dangerous stockpile of radioactive waste in the world is “regrettable” …..now that is the stuff of fairy tales. The wolf in red riding hood had nothing on NuGen!
The letter is published in the full banality of grandma’s lacy nightcap below…
Letter to Tim Farron MP from DECC on Nuclear Lies
DECC 1st Sept 2015
Thank you for your email of 20th August to Amber Rudd, enclosing correspondence from your constituent, Mrs Marianne Birkby of Radiation Free Lakeland, about nuclear power. I am replying as this matter falls within my portfolio.
Nuclear power stations have been classified as Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects since the Planning Act 2008. It is therefore not clear to me what your constituent has in mind in saying. “Following new law (2008) making nuclear new build a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project, the ‘test of public support’ is the only thing between Cumbria and new nuclear build.” (and this test of support will be based on the consultations).
NuGen are currently going through the process of public consultation on their proposal to build a new nuclear power station at Moorside, which they are required to do before they can make an application for development consent. In the event of an application being made , the Planning Inspectorate will carry out an examination of the application, which will include asking local authorities to report on the quality of the developer’s local consultation as well as giving those who register an interest an opportunity to comment. When they have completed their examination, the Planning Inspectorate will make a recommendation for a final decision to the Secretary of State. The process is set out in detail on the Planning Inspectorate’s website.
Development consent does not, in itself, ensure that a new nuclear power station can be built. There are a number of other regulatory processes relating to safety, security and environmental protection which the project must complete before it can proceed. I therefore do not agree with your consitituent that this is a matter of “untried, untested reactors.” The UK’s independent nuclear regulators will not allow new nuclear reactors to be built in the UK unless they are satisfied that it is safe to do so.
I agree that the error in the advertisement published by NuGen as part of their local consultation is regrettable. However, in the context of the extensive consultation processes which have taken place on new nuclear in Cumbria and elsewhere, I doubt that it is seriously misleading about the impact of the proposed proposal in the local area and I note that the Advertising Standards Authority has decided not to proceed any further with your constituent’s complaint.
I understand that NuGen will conduct a second stage of consultation next year and I encourage your constituent to take part in that consultation.
I do hope this reply is helpful