HC Deb 14 January 1980 vol 976 cc1185-7
6. Mr. Adley

asked the Secretary of State for Energy whom he intends to consult about Her Majesty's Government's future nuclear energy policy.

Mr. David Howell

I had consultations with the nuclear industry, the electricity industry and the Atomic Energy Authority in advance of my statement to the House on 18 December. I shall continue to consult the bodies most directly concerned, as appropriate, and to encourage wider public debate about nuclear policy.

Mr. Adley

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply, but does he agree that opponents of our nuclear programme include genuine doubters as well as trouble-makers and even the nation's enemies who would love to see us denuded of any effective form of power altogether in the future? As it is often easier to spread alarm than confidence, will my right hon. Friend bear in mind the need to take the public with him on this matter and ensure that the energy alternatives to no nuclear programme are as widely known and understood as possible?

Mr. Howell

We shall certainly do all that we can in that direction. It is our policy to release information on these matters, not to suppress or withhold it, and we shall certainly put before the public as much information as possible.

Mr. Benn

The list of those whom the right hon. Gentleman consulted did not include the House of Commons. Does he recall that on 18 December he announced a programme which could be interpreted only as a £20 billion investment programme, on a scale far bigger than Windscale, in reactors widely believed to be the American PWR? Will the right hon. Gentleman follow the precedent of the Labour Government and seek explicit authority from the House of Commons by a vote in the House before this massive programme in what appear likely to be the American PWR reactors is regarded as accepted by the House of Commons, to which he is responsible?

Mr. Howell

I do not agree with the right hon. Gentleman's figures, and, as I pointed out to him on 18 December, I think, neither do I agree with his assessment about this being such a massive or, indeed, a crash programme. As to consultation, it goes without saying that consultation with the House is central to this vital policy issue. Indeed, I go further and say that I far prefer the House of Commons to have the central place in consultation than that the matter should be waved away into some tripartite consensus body such as the Energy Commission locked away in Whitehall. It is far better that the issue should be discussed here in the House.

Mr. Rost

Will my right hon. Friend consult also those concerned in the French nuclear power programme, where nuclear power stations are being specifically sited only where the reject heat can be used within a reasonable radius for providing heat for industry and domestic use?

Mr. Howell

We keep in close touch with our neighbours in the EEC over their nuclear programmes, and I see the French Minister of Industry, who carries responsibility for these nuclear issues, fairly frequently.

Mr. John Home Robertson

In an earlier reply, the Under-Secretary of State said that he would ask the relevant authorities to publish the safety reports on the AGR and the PWR. Will the Secretary of State take this opportunity to announce that he will instruct those authorities to publish the full unexpurgated safety reports on these types of plant?

Mr. Howell

This will be done, as my hon. Friend said in the earlier reply. We have ensured that these publications will take place. They are statutory bodies. They recognise their responsibilities, and they will make the publications as we have suggested.