HC Deb 12 July 1976 vol 915 cc28-30
35. Mr. Rost

asked the Secretary of State for Energy if he proposes to announce the cancellation of the SGHW nuclear reactor programme.

The Under-Secretary of State for Energy (Mr. Alex Eadie)

As was indicated in the answer of 28th June to the hon. Member for Bedford (Mr. Skeet), the Atomic Energy Authority has suggested that we are at an appropriate point to take stock of progress with the SGHWR. It will be advising my right hon. Friend further

Mr. Rost

Will the hon. Gentleman come clean and admit that the programme is not only very far behind but will prove far too costly, and that the industry realises it will be a mistake to go ahead with it?

Mr. Eadie

There is no question of not coming clean. The hon. Gentleman has been tabling many Questions on energy conservation. There has been a change in the climate and relationship involved in the consumption of electricity. There have been changes in energy demand. There is no doubt that these factors will be taken into consideration. I stick to the answer that I have given the hon. Gentleman. There is no question of not coming clean—it is very clean.

Mr. Hooley

Does my hon. Friend agree that it would now be a disastrous error to abandon the proven technology of the SGHWR in favour of the fast breeder?

Mr. Eadie

I agree with my hon. Friend that decisions taken in nuclear power should be ones that give confidence to British technology. The facts that are involved relate to those that I mentioned in answering the hon. Member for Derbyshire, South-East (Mr. Rost), who posed the question—namely, that there has been a downturn in energy demand. Therefore, there is no question of turning our backs on British technology.

Mr. John H. Osborn

Will the hon. Gentleman ensure that once having embarked on a programme of this type there will be no quick changes of political or commercial decisions that were taken, rightly or wrongly, two or three years ago? Will he bear in mind the cost of any change in direction? Does he realise that nuclear energy is important if we are to have greater independence from outside fuel sources for our energy?

Mr. Eadie

I know how assiduous the hon. Gentleman is in his approach to these matters, on which he has made some noteworthy speeches in the House. The House should be aware that when one is trying to break through frontiers of technology it can be a very costly exercise. I give an assurance that the estimate of the Department of Energy, confirmed by some noteworthy fuel technologists, is that there is evidence that there will be a nuclear power gap in the 1980s. That is generally the view expressed in the House and in the Department.

Mr. Hardy

While welcoming my hon. Friend's response to my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield, Heeley (Mr. Hooley), may I ask my hon. Friend to make sure that any gap in the 1980s will not in any circumstances be met by the introduction of American light water reactors?

Mr. Eadie

I think I can tell my hon. Friend that if any Government were confronted with a chance or a reversal in the position, it would not be at the expense of British technology. As a country, we have over-capacity in generating. It is not a question of trying to substitute foreign for British technology. There is over-capacity, and there is a general down turn in energy demand.

Mr. Evelyn King

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that over the years hundreds of millions of pounds have been invested in the atomic station at Winfrith, in my constituency? Can he give me an assurance that no further development is contemplated which will seriously affect the prospects of those who now work there?

Mr. Eadie

I can certainly give an assurance that before anything happens at the establishment in the hon. Gentleman's constituency, which, incidentally, I have visited twice—and I am not saying that we contemplate anything happening at the moment—there would be the utmost consultation with the workpeople involved in that establishment.

Back to