The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority
Energy Bill [Lords]
9:45 am
Mr Norman Baker (Shadow Secretary of State for the Environment, Environment, Food & Rural Affairs; Lewes, Liberal Democrat)
That is an interesting hypothesis, which we have heard over several decades from the nuclear industry, but it has invariably proved to be wrong. Perhaps one day it will be right, but I have seen no evidence for that and would not take the chance. I want to stress that in making these comments, I am not making the argument for or against new nuclear build. I want to address my remarks to the decommissioning challenge.
The first thing to do is establish exactly how independent the nuclear decommissioning authority would be. The Government's framework document refers to the need for transparency, but there are several important relationships with the NDA that are not entirely clear. Before we go into the detailed clauses in chapter 1 of part 2, it would be helpful if the Minister commented on that.
For example, it is not entirely clear what the relationship will be between the NDA and the parts of the nuclear industry that continue to be actively involved in generation, such as BNFL and, to take a private sector example, British Energy. We know that the NDA will be situated in Cumbria, which is a welcome development as it will protect jobs up there. That was discussed on Second Reading by the local Member of Parliament, the right hon. Member for
Copeland (Dr. Cunningham), and we all agree that there is a need to ensure that the skills and knowledge base in Cumbria are not lost and that we have an opportunity to protect jobs in a positive way.
That is not in dispute, but the NDA will be literally across the road from people from whom it is receiving material and locations to be decommissioned. In those circumstances, it is important that the NDA is not only independent, but seen to be independent. The authority is a good concept. I hope that it succeeds and attracts cross-party support—not just in principle, but in practice throughout its lifetime—but if it is to do that it needs to be independent. Any suggestion that it could be used to bolster the nuclear industry would be unhelpful. It has a function entirely separate from nuclear generation, and irrespective of one's views on nuclear generation, the NDA should have that separate role and not be used either to attack or to support nuclear generation. It should have a discrete role, and it is important that it is constructed so that it is seen to have that.
There are real issues as to the independence of the NDA. Will the Minister tell us who will give it direction? The Bill, unless I have misread it, is rather vague on that. Will direction be the sole responsibility of the Secretary of State, or will the industry have a hand in determining how it is governed? That is an important point of principle. My hon. Friends and I believe that there should be an arm's-length relationship between the NDA and the industry. I do not want to speak for the Conservatives, but I imagine that their amendments will propose a different view, so this is an important principle to establish.
The relationship between the NDA and Nirex, which is the great unspoken body in the Bill, is also unclear. Nirex has a responsibility for long-term waste disposal—I do not like the word ''disposal'', because this material remains active for a huge number of years—but clause 6 gives the NDA some responsibility for disposal. Will the Minister clarify what the relationship will be between the NDA and Nirex? Will the NDA's disposal responsibilities be limited to low-level waste, as I believe they should be, or will it have a function on intermediate and high-level waste?
I hope that you agree that this is the best time to raise these questions, Mr. Sayeed. It is important that when we agree to the establishment of the NDA, we understand what we are agreeing to. The issues are fundamental and they will determine whether the NDA will work.
It is important also that the NDA has an overriding principle, so that people are clear about its primary function. I believe that it should be to protect human health and the environment, but that is not stated in the Bill. Will the Minister clarify what he believes to be the primary duty of the NDA? The lists of responsibilities in clause 6 and general duties in clause 12 do not meet that challenge.
I do not want to take too much time at this point, but there are a number of questions about the NDA. There is also the question whether it will be a nuclear
generator or simply a decommissioner. Cross-reading clauses 6 and 12 seems to imply that the NDA can be empowered to continue to generate nuclear waste and nuclear electricity, and even—possibly—to build new nuclear generation stations if that is deemed necessary to carry out its ''functions''. It could continue to generate plutonium and, in other words, it could become the opposite—