§ Lord IRONSIDEMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper—and I should like to declare an industrial interest in this field.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they consider that the conclusion reached by the EEC Commission in the communication R/253/76 Organisational structure of the Community nuclear fusion programme and siting of the Joint European Torus (JET) experiment that "the site for JET must be Ispra", in Italy, is in the best interests of this country or consistent with the need to assure successful completion of the JET project.
§ The PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE, DEPARTMENT of ENERGY: (Lord Lovell-Davis)My Lords, if JET (the Joint European Torus) goes ahead, the Government believe that, to give it the best possible chance of success, it is essential for the site to be determined on scientific and technical considerations. In our view, Culham is very well placed in this regard, while Ispra lacks the necessary background.
§ Lord IRONSIDEMy Lords, I should like to thank the noble Lord for that Answer, and I am sure that the staff at Cul1iam will be greatly reassured by what he has said this afternoon. First, I should like to thank him for the speed with which his Department has reacted to the receipt of these documents, and for putting them into my hands and allowing me to study them before this afternoon's Question. The document makes—
§ Lord IRONSIDEMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that the document refers to substantial cost savings which can be introduced into the programme if the JET experiment is sited at Ispra? Is he aware that the document makes reference to the fact that electricity charges will be much lower from the Italian grid than from the United Kingdom grid?—it points out that the Italian electricity is cheaper. Is he further aware that this is not so, and that, during the course of this experiment the United Kingdom supplies will be based on indigenous fuel sources?
§ Lord LOVELL-DAVISMy Lords, first, I should like to say that I am grateful to the noble Lord for what he has said about the officials, because, from our last debate on EEC energy matters, I felt that the Department of Energy—despite the protestations of the noble Earl, Lord Lauderdale, that he was not criticising them—must have felt that their very real efforts to keep the Sub-Commitee informed and to be as helpful as possible were not being recognised.
I have indeed read the document. However, the situation remains that, in the Government's view, Ispra lacks the essential background experience of plasma physics and Tokamak engineering which is necessary, and the case for siting JET there is based essentially on considerations of infrastructure. The proximity of power supplies is one consideration in which Culham is also well favoured. We believe that such factors, although important, are not central to the scientific success of the project. We also believe that in addition to jeopardising the scientific success of the project, siting JET at ISPRA could, in the long run, prove the most expensive option.
§ The EARL of LAUDERDALEMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that we are all grateful to him personally and to his Department for their help in this matter? Is he aware that I am on a pacific tack today? Is he aware that this document shows up the difference between the view of the site committee, who consider that the decision should be made on scientific grounds, and the Commission itself who think that the scientific grounds are not the overriding consideration? Is he aware that the Energy Research and 305 Technology Committee of the European Parliament have said that it would be criminal—that is their term—to make this decision on anything but scientific grounds?
§ Lord LOVELL-DAVISMy Lords, I wholly agree with the noble Earl on the last point that he made; that is, that it would be criminal. As I have said, in our view, the success of this project depends very much on the chosen site, and we shall not be irrevocably committed before a satisfactory decision is taken on this point.
§ Lord DAVIES of LEEKMy Lords, despite the conciseness of his information and the rapidity of his Department and their kindness to people who want to make inquiries, may I ask my noble friend whether, rather than risking the hazards of the unknown, he would develop as fast as possible for the next half-century our indigenous coal supplies while more authoritative information is supplied to the public about the hazards involved in the production of nuclear energy?
§ Lord LOVELL-DAVISMy Lords, I think that the Government are doing everything possible to help and develop the coal industry. This is another question. It will in part be referred to on Thursday when we discuss the National Coal Board Finance Bill.
§ Lord HAILSHAM of SAINT MARYLEBONEMy Lords, is it not a fact that, with regard to plasma physics and nuclear fusion, this country has far more experience and far more distinguished scientists than any other Member of the EEC?
§ Lord LOVELL-DAVISYes, my Lords.
§ Lord WYNNE-JONESMy Lords, would my noble friend pay particular attention to the staff engaged in work such as this? As has just been suggested by the noble and learned Lord on the opposite Benches, the staff matter a great deal. Would my noble friend agree that, 306 if the siting of this JET project requires large numbers of staff to be uprooted and moved, this could be disastrous for the whole project?
§ Lord LOVELL-DAVISYes, my Lords; I am very much aware of the matters my noble friend has raised.
Lord BRUCE of DONINGTONMy Lords, would my noble friend take steps to ensure that all British Members of the European Parliament are kept adequately informed of details of the Government's views on this whole matter?
§ Lord LOVELL-DAVISYes, my Lords; I shall do my best to make sure that they are kept well-informed.
§ Lord SLATERMy Lords, in view of the supplementary questions which have been asked from the other side, would my noble friend agree that he ought to bear in mind that we cannot ignore—it would be most dangerous for us to ignore—scientific research and what it means with regard to these basic operations?
§ Lord LOVELL-DAVISYes, my Lords; it would be dangerous to ignore these considerations. Furthermore, I should state that Culham has an excellent record for the construction of its fusion machines on time and to cost. A subsidiary but important consideration is that, although the United Kingdom joined the Community in 1973, no Community project has yet been sited here.
The Earl of LAUNDERDALEMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord to explain one further point about this document? Inasmuch as the Commission has asked the Council for an opinion and not for a decision, does that mean that, whatever the Council descides, the Commission will go its own way regardless?
§ Lord LOVELL-DAVISMy Lords, as the noble Earl points out, the Commission has asked the Council to give its opinion on the Commission's choice of Ispra. The situation is that Member-States will be able to withhold their approval of the fusion programme, provided they are dissatisfied with the choice of site.