§ 13. Mr. Stoddartasked the Secretary of State for Energy if he will commission and fund a completely independent assessment of electricity generating costs and forecasts.
§ Mr. LawsonI am sure that these matters will continue to receive wide scrutiny.
§ Mr. StoddartYes. However, we should like a wide scrutiny on an independent basis. That is why I ask for an "independent assessment".
602 Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is a great feeling among people and organisations that the figures produced by the CEGB, and, indeed, accepted by its partners, do not make correct comparisons between the cost of nuclear energy and that produced by fossil fuels? Therefore, again I ask for an independent assessment.
§ Mr. LawsonThe hon. Gentleman is a distinguished member of the Select Committee on Energy and I know that he has gone into the matter deeply. However, there is a slight confusion implicit in his question. The figures that have been regularly published by the CEGB are historic costs, and, as such, they are accurate. However, historic costs do not provide a good guide to future investment decisions. The CEGB has made that abundantly clear not only in its successive annual reports, but in its statement of case relating to its application to build a pressurised water reactor at Sizewell, which said that cost analysis for future plant must be based on the net effective cost, not on historic cost figures. They are true as far as they go, but they are not the basis on which future decisions are made.
§ Mr. DurantIn reviewing the costs of the electricity supply industry, will my right hon. Friend ensure that there is no political interference in the choice of raw materials used by the electricity supply industry?
§ Mr. LawsonYes. I hope that there will be no improper political interference in that matter.
§ Mr. Merlyn ReesWe welcome the breadth of the Sizewell inquiry. In our view, it covers all the questions that need to be asked. However, in the light of that answer and the electricity consumer report that was published today, would it not be more sensible to provide money for an independent analysis of historic costs, and so on? If that is not done, there will be a cry that it was not a proper inquiry into the basic question of atomic energy costing.
§ Mr. LawsonI hope and believe that there will be no such grounds for complaint at the end of the day and that no responsible person, such as the right hon. Gentleman, will be moved to make such a complaint.
One of the findings of the consumer report that was published today was that consumers would, in all probability, face higher bills under a nuclear moratorium than they would in a "business as usual" future.