|
Proliferation in ParliamentBack to Proliferation in Parliament, Summer 2008 Westminster ParliamentKey to Column Numbering
Nuclear Facilities and Security
Sellafield, Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Oral Questions, 3 July 2008 : Column 1014Mr. Gordon Prentice (Pendle) (Lab): When he expects the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority to make its recommendation to him for the preferred bidder for the new parent body organisation for the Sellafield Site Licence Company. The Minister for Energy (Malcolm Wicks): The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority is running a competition to select a new parent body organisation for the Sellafield Site Licence Company. Ownership will enhance the company’s performance. The NDA is evaluating the four bids received for this competition against agreed evaluation criteria. The results of the evaluation are expected later this month. Mr. Prentice: It is a little known fact that only one nuclear power station anywhere in the world has been wholly dismantled; I am thinking of Three Mile Island. Even decommissioned structures are still hazardous. My question for the Minister is this: what factors will he take into account when deciding which company will be responsible for the clean-up of Sellafield, or is he simply going to rubber-stamp the recommendation of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority? Malcolm Wicks: I am pleased about—indeed, rather proud of—the
fact that after several decades in which no action was taken, it is this
Government who now have a clear strategy on decommissioning our existing
nuclear sites. Whatever the arguments and controversies about future nuclear,
we have an ethical duty to ensure adequate decommissioning and clean-up.
We are looking to the competition to get companies to bring world-class
management to the task so that we can spread best practice and innovation
and drive forward efficiency. We have four strong bidders and that is
what we need to do. We cannot duck this task. We may wish that we did
not have to do it, but we are doing it and we will do it in the most competent
and cost-effective way. Nuclear Power: Security, Written Answers, 2 Apr 2008 : Column 1078WMr. Dai Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform how the Government plans to strengthen the capacities of the International Atomic Energy Agency's Nuclear Security Fund, as indicated at paragraph 4.21 of the National Security Strategy of the United Kingdom, Cm 7291. Malcolm Wicks: The UK is a contributor to the Nuclear Security
Fund (NSF) and provides a cost free UK expert to the fund. The UK seeks
to further strengthen delivery mechanisms within the NSF by improving
internal IAEA efficiency. We intend to do this by providing continuing
assessment and feedback on project progress, exploring means to overcome
difficulties and by encouraging the agency to streamline its operations.
We will seek to feed our experience of working with the NSF into the current
'2020 Review' of the Agency's operations. Nuclear Power Stations: Security, Written Answers, 26 Mar 2008 : Column 288WTony Lloyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform what assessment he has made of the likely security of future generation of nuclear power stations against accident or deliberate attack. Malcolm Wicks: As part of the consultation on the Future of Nuclear Power, the Government carefully considered the security and safety of new nuclear power stations. Having reviewed the arguments and evidence put forward and based on the advice on independent regulators, and the advances in the designs of power stations that might be proposed by energy companies, the Government set out in their White Paper that they continues to believe that nuclear power stations pose very small risks to safety and security. We also believe that the UK has an effective regulatory framework that
ensures these risks are minimised and sensibly managed by industry. The
White Paper said that we will work with the independent regulators to
explore ways of further enhancing the transparency and efficiency of the
regulatory regime, without diminishing its effectiveness in dealing with
the challenges of new build. Nuclear Power: Security, Written Answers, 27 Mar 2008 : Column 330WMr. Dai Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform what assessment he has made of the security implications of developing new nuclear facilities in the United Kingdom, with reference to paragraph 4.89 of the National Security Strategy of the United Kingdom, Cm 7291. Malcolm Wicks: Paragraphs 2.83 to 2.109 of our White Paper on Nuclear Power set out the assessment we have made and our reasons for concluding that the UK has an effective regulatory framework that ensures that safety, security, health and proliferation risks are minimised and sensibly managed by industry. Mr. Dai Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform whether vulnerabilities of (a) nuclear installations and (b) nuclear materials in transit were evaluated in drawing up the new National Security Strategy. Malcolm Wicks: Our evaluation of these vulnerabilities, set out
in paragraphs 2.83 to 2.115 of our White Paper on Nuclear Power, was taken
into account in the preparation of the National Security Strategy. Back to Proliferation in Parliament, Summer 2008 © 2008 The Acronym Institute. |