asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether the funds available to the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority are sufficient to enable it and its contractors to fulfil their programmes at Sellafield.

My Lords, the Government are funding the largest ever amount of expenditure on the UK civil nuclear clean-up programme. This funding allows the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority to operate safely and effectively, in line with its priorities. Its top priority is tackling the risks at the most hazardous facilities, including those at Sellafield. The authority is satisfied that it has sufficient funds to enable it and its contractors to fulfil the priority programmes at Sellafield during 2008-09.

My Lords, I certainly recognise that there have been increases in funding over the past two or three years, but does the Minister accept that uncertainty about future funding for what is, by its very nature, a long-term programme prejudices the ability of the NDA to plan its work in the most cost-effective way and, perhaps more importantly, impacts seriously on the supply chain's development of skills and employment?

My Lords, I certainly agree that it is important that the NDA has certainty about funding. Its funding comes both from commercial operations and grant from the Exchequer. It plans to spend £2.9 billion this year and there are similar plans for 2009-10. As regards certainty for companies, I believe that the future is bright. In addition to the work related to nuclear decommissioning, the proposed take-over of British Energy by EDF and its proposals for new nuclear build suggest that, as a whole, this could be a very successful industry in the future.

My Lords, the estimated expenditure for decommissioning NDA sites from 2003-07 went up by an estimated 30 per cent to £73 billion. In the short term the estimate for decommissioning between 2008 and 2013 has gone up by 41 per cent. If we are so bad at estimating these costs, how can we guarantee that taxpayers will not land up paying for decommissioning of nuclear new build?

My Lords, the noble Lord is being a little unfair about the estimates. He will know that one of the key purposes of setting up the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority was to ensure that we had much better estimates of the cost of decommissioning over the many years it is due to take place. The result of its efforts has been to update the cost. My understanding is that it is expected that while costs may still rise in the short term, using the competitive approach to bringing in companies to manage the decommissioning programme may well reduce costs in the long term. The noble Lord will know that the approval process has to be satisfied that the companies engaged in new build will be able to meet the decommissioning costs.

My Lords—

My Lords—

My Lords, there is plenty of time. I think that it is the turn of the Labour Benches.

My Lords, after all the decommissioning has been completed, where will the highly radioactive stuff end up? Will it be in a tank in Sellafield, with the waste having a half-life of 1,000 years, or do the Government have a better idea about where it might go?

My Lords, my noble friend will probably know that the whole question of managing radioactive waste was discussed in a Defra White Paper in June 2008. Clearly, the preferred approach is for geological disposal. He will probably also know that the White Paper invited local communities to express an interest in opening up, without commitment, discussions with the Government on the possibility of hosting a geological disposal facility at some point in the future. My understanding is that one such community has already expressed interest.

My Lords, the Question asks what funds are available. What funds are available?

My Lords, I thought I had explained that to the House. This year, £2.9 billion is available, and the plan for 2009-10 is for £2.9 billion. The estimated liability over the many years of the decommissioning programme is £44 billion. That is the current estimate, but it may well change in the future. The hope is that, by bringing in expertise, the cost over the long term will come down.

My Lords, the Government state that,

"operators of new nuclear power stations must ... meet the full costs of decommissioning ... and their full share of waste management and disposal costs".

What is meant by "share"? Will the Minister assure the House that, with no exceptions, operators will cover the entire cost of dealing with waste from their facility for its entire lifetime?

My Lords, those matters will be taken forward as the proposals for new build are made. A funded decommissioning programme would have to be submitted by a prospective nuclear power station operator prior to construction and it must be approved by the Secretary of State. That programme will require a decommissioning and waste management plan that describes the costed steps for both decommissioning and waste management and disposal.