Steve Webb Replies to our email about the "so say" DECC Consultation

Dear Reg,

Many thanks for the message.   It is indeed disappointing that the DECC committee report did not make more reference to the concerns of the communities directly affected.  When I wrote to the Chairman of the Committee on behalf of SANE he simply said that he would ensure that the Committee received my letter.   However, I think that the whole issue of the National Policy Statements is going to have to be revisited in a new Parliament.   As you say, I would expect DECC to publish a report on the consultation on the various draft NPSs with at least a summary of the consultation responses received.   They will have to be careful to show that they have listened to the consultation as if it appears to be flawed they may be open to judicial review (as they were over the first decision to ‘go for nuclear’ a few years ago).

Far more significant however is the decision of Horizon to put back their plans by three years.  I think that is a real testimony to the strength and effectiveness of the campaign that you and others have run.  The company says it did not want to pursue both of its sites at the same time (which I find rather implausible) but I think in practice this is a recognition of the strength of the arguments against a new station at Oldbury.

Best wishes,

Steve W.

----- Original Message -----

From: reg illingworth

To: steve@stevewebb.org.uk

Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2010 5:17 PM

Subject: Re: ECCC report on the draft National Policy Statements for Energy published today

Dear Steve

I am sure you have already seen the report published by the Energy and Climate Change Committee today.

On the positive side the report acknowledges some of our more general concerns relating to the nuclear energy policy (eg waste management). If you havent already seen it, you may also be interested to see the attached response to the NPS from CoRWM which confirms the total lack of any progress in identifying a suitable site for a GDF. I really can not see how the government can seriously consider building these power stations until they have somewhere to dispose of this waste and fail to understand why this community should have to host this waste for up to 160 years.

I was also pleased to see that the report recommends a specific requirement for applicants to conduct full life-cycle carbon assessment, presumably with nuclear this will therefore include the construction, running and decommissioning of the power stations as well as the mining and transportation of uranium and the storage and transportation/disposal of waste. These assessments will, I am sure, make interesting reading when put together and if done correctly may well show nuclear to be much less climate friendly than the government seems to think it is! I am amazed that such studies havent already been undertaken by the government in deciding this policy in the first place!

We are, however, extremely disappointed to see that the ECCC do not appear to have even acknowledged the written response to the NPS submitted to them by our group!

I attach below a copy of an email we sent to the ECCC with our submission, which clearly explained the reasons why our response had not been submitted within their time scales. Despite previous assurances that the ECCC would still review the responses submitted to the DECC within their consultation process, this does not appear to have happened. Our email was acknowledged by the clerk (see also email below).

The ECCC report does not even recognise the specific concerns of this community and we are therefore once again left with the distinct impression that no one is listening.

The question is what will happen next? presumably the DECC will review all the responses received from their consultation and publish some sort of report with copies of all responses etc. I also assume that this will be done before they take the draft NPS to a full debate? Otherwise there would seem to have been no point whatsoever in consulting this community at all and I cant see how parliament can take a democratic decision without this information. I wonder if you could clarify this for us.

Bearing in mind the response sent in to the DECC by SANE and the responses submitted by South Glos Council, Oldbury and Rockhampton Parish Councils and Thornbury Town Council (I assume you have copies but let me know if you need them) together with all the numerous other public submissions, surely we have some affect on this Policy Statement that has such a huge affect on this community?

Given that this now appears to be a matter to be decided in parliament, I think there is nothing more we can do except leave this in your hands! Please do let us know if there is anything else you feel we can do, all ideas welcome!

Kind regards

Reg Illingworth

---

From: "WRIGHT, Jonathan"
To: REG ILLINGWORTH
Sent: Wednesday, 24 February, 2010 14:32:46
Subject: RE: Parliamentary Scrutiny of the DECC NPS for Energy

Dear Reg,

Thank you very much for your email. Your group’s response was not attached though so please re-send.

As you say, our deadline for evidence and our evidence sessions have all passed but the information sounds relevant and I will forward it to the Clerk in charge of the inquiry.

Kind regards,

Jonathan Wright

From: REG ILLINGWORTH [mailto:reg.illingworth@btinternet.com]
Sent: 24 February 2010 14:17
To: Energy and Climate Change Committee
Cc: MORLEY, Elliot; ANDERSON, Dave; CHALLEN, Colin; DORRIES, Nadine; HENDRY, Charles; JOHNSTON-JONES, Danielle; JOHNSTON-JONES, Danielle; MAIN, Anne; MALLABER, Judy; ROBERTSON, John; Robert Smith2; TIPPING, Paddy; TURNER, Desmond MP; WEIR, Michael; WHITEHEAD, Alan
Subject: Parliamentary Scrutiny of the DECC NPS for Energy

To ecc@parliament.uk

Copy to :

Rt Hon Elliott Morley MP morleye@parliament.uk
David Anderson MP andersonda@parliament.uk
Colin Challen MP colinchallenmp@parliament.uk
Nadine Dorries MP dorriesn@parliament.uk
Charles Hendry MP hendryc@parliament.uk
Julie Kirkbride MP johnstonjonesd@parliament.uk
Anne Main MP maina@parliament.uk
Judy Mallaber MP mallaberj@parliament.uk
John Robertson MP robertsonjo@parliament.uk
Sir Robert Smith MP robert.smith.mp@parliament.uk
Paddy Tipping MP tippingp@parliament.uk

Dr Desmond Turner MP turnerd@parliament.uk
Mike Weir MP weirm@parliament.uk
Dr Alan Whitehead MP whiteheada@parliament.uk

Re: Energy and Climate Change Committee Parliamentary Scrutiny of the DECC National Policy Statements for Energy

I am the Chairman of a group of local residents living close to the site known as 'Oldbury' nominated in EN6 for a new nuclear power station. Please note the site designated is actually in the village of 'Shepperdine' some 2.5km north of Oldbury. Our group is therefore known as Shepperdine Against Nuclear Energy and details are explained in the email I sent you last week, copied below together with my contact details etc. A further copy of the response from our group is also attached.

I am sure you are aware that the DECC public consultation on the NPS has been undertaken at the same time as your own scrutiny and that the DECC consultation deadline for responses was only a couple of days ago. Although we were made aware that your own consultation closed on the 15th January, we had been told that you would still review responses received by the DECC by their deadline.

As explained in our response attached, the DECC public exhibition and meeting in relation to the Oldbury site was undertaken only a few weeks ago and this community has therefore had very little time to respond properly to their consultation. As stated in our response on page 2 at point 6. this  "has been far too late for us to make any contribution to the Parliamentary Scrutiny Committee for Energy and Climate Change (ECCC), unlike many of the other nominated sites".

Although we have asked the DECC to ensure that you are aware of our concerns, I am very worried that time may not permit this, given that I understand that your own deadlines are only a few weeks away. I am therefore asking that the Energy and Climate Change Committee kindly take into account the little time we have had to respond, review our written response attached and take our concerns in to account as a part of your scrutiny process.

I would be grateful if you would kindly acknowledge receipt of this email. If you need any further information from us to enable you to consider our response, please do let me know.

Regards

Reg Illingworth

Chairman Shepperdine Against Nuclear Energy