§ 2.54 p.m.
§ The Earl of LAUDERDALEMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will make a Statement about the proceedings of the Council of Energy Ministers in Brussels on 14th June 1977.
§ Lord STRABOLGIMy Lords, the second meeting of the EEC Energy Council during the United Kingdom Presidency took place in Luxembourg on 14th June. The Council had a useful discussion on nuclear energy questions, identifying several points on which further study by the Community could help to develop nuclear energy with the maximum degree of safety and public acceptability. In a discussion on key coal proposals, the United Kingdom stressed the need for Community preference. No agreement was reached on a proposal to aid investment in coal fired power stations, but the concept was remitted for further study. In a discussion on refinery surpluses, there was a broad consensus on the external aspects, but not on the extent to which the Community should discuss any national plans for new construction, albeit on a non-binding basis. The United Kingdom's reserve was explained; the question is to be studied further. Some progress was made in discussing arrangements for reductions in oil consumption in the event of a crisis.
§ The Earl of LAUDERDALEMy Lords, in thanking the noble Lord for that reply, may I first apologise to him, and through him to the House, for having misphrased the Question by referring to a meeting in Brussels which was, in fact, held in Luxembourg? But may I ask him whether he can tell us what are the several points remitted for further study in regard to nuclear energy?
§ Lord STRABOLGIMy Lords, I accept that the noble Earl made a small mistake about the venue of the conference. Of course, the first meeting was in Brussels last March. With regard to the nuclear questions, these were mainly concerned with the development of the reactor programme in the EEC, and the fact that the somewhat ambitious programme for the construction of reactors has steadily been revised downwards. But the United Kingdom always thought that the original programme was somewhat unrealistic.
§ Lord AVEBURYMy Lords, the Minister talked about there being the maximum degree of safety and public acceptability. Can he say whether it is the intention that additional procedures of a European dimension should be grafted on to those which already exist in this country, as to the protection of nuclear installations and the approval of sites at which sensitive nuclear materials are to be used or manufactured?
§ Lord STRABOLGIMy Lords, the discussions on nuclear energy questions were not concerned with non-proliferation aspects.
§ Lord AVEBURYMy Lords, I did not say that.
§ The Earl of LAUDERDALEMy Lords, may I ask the Minister two further questions arising out of his helpful and informative reply? First, can he tell us when the Energy Council will meet next? Secondly, can he tell us whether the Government will make a Statement to the House about tomorrow's discussion with regard to the future of the JET project?
§ Lord STRABOLGIMy Lords, the date of the next meeting will be proposed by the Belgians, whose presidency is next term. It will probably be in the autumn, but of course I cannot say further than that. With regard to JET, I think this is a question that could probably be discussed through the usual channels, but I may say now that this was not on the agenda for the Council of Energy Ministers.
§ Lord AVEBURYMy Lords, I did not mention nuclear proliferation. I asked the Minister whether any additional measures were contemplated of a European dimension, with regard to public acceptability on questions such as the determination of sites which will handle or process sensitive nuclear materials. I am thinking particularly, in the present context, of the Windscale Inquiry, which is in progress at the moment. Is it the intention of Ministers that there should be additional procedures on a European scale, over and above those that are determined nationally, for the approval of such sites?
§ Lord STRABOLGIMy Lords, I am afraid I cannot answer that question. I am answering about proceedings in the report of the Council of Energy Ministers, not about the policy, necessarily, of Her Majesty's Government.
§ The Earl of LAUDERDALEMy Lords, will the noble Lord agree, and perhaps pass it on to his colleagues, that although JET was not on the agenda for the Energy Ministers it is very relevant to our energy problems? Furthermore, is he aware that many of us hope that we can have a Statement after the meeting, which I think takes place tomorrow, to discuss its future?
§ Lord STRABOLGIYes, my Lords; of course that may well be so, but JET is a matter for the Research Council. At the moment, we are talking about the Energy Council.