Our Energy Minister, Amber Rudd, has written a public letter (i.e. press release) that states that one benefit of Hinkley C is that ” … it will power homes for 60 years … and we are only paying for 35″.
Oh, Amber, Amber, your innocence pains Owl!
In year 36 (if we ever get there) EDF and Chinese investors will almost certainly suddenly find massive unanticipated and unplanned-for major difficulties that will, sadly, mean that Hinkley C must close.
That’s politics, Amber.
RLIN/BRUSSELS, April 20 (Reuters) – Germany has asked Belgium to take two nuclear reactors temporarily off the grid while questions about their safety are cleared up, an unusual diplomatic move that underscores German concerns about the plants.
Production at Belgium’s Tihange 1 nuclear reactor was halted for about 10 days in December because of a fire. Staffing has also been reduced to minimise the risk of unauthorised personnel gaining access to the plants after the November attacks on Paris and the March attacks on Brussels.
Environment Minister Barbara Hendricks said on Wednesday that the decision to request another shut down of the Tihange 2 and Doel 3 reactors came after Germany’s independent Reactor Safety Commission advised that it could not confirm the reactors would be safe in the event of a fault.
Deputy Environment Minister Jochen Flasbarth telephoned the Belgian Interior Minister on Hendrick’s behalf on Tuesday to request a shutdown pending further safety investigations. Officials did not specify a timeframe.
The core tanks at the 33-year-old Doel 3 and Tihange 2 reactors were built by Dutch company Rotterdamsche Droogdok Maatschappij, which has also built reactors in other countries.
The two reactors, both with about a gigawatt of capacity, were closed in 2012 and again in 2014 after a brief restart, after inspections unveiled tiny cracks in their core tanks.
But the Belgian regulator authorised a restart in November 2015 after finding that the cracks were hydrogen flakes trapped in the walls of the reactor tank and had no unacceptable impact on the plant’s safety.
“I consider it right that the plants are temporarily taken offline at least until further investigations have been completed. I have asked the Belgian government to take this step,” Hendricks said in a statement.
She added the move would send a strong signal to reassure Germany and show that Belgium is taking the concerns of its neighbours seriously.
Belgian nuclear regulator FANC expressed surprise at the German minister’s remarks, saying in a statement that it had explained the issue with the reactors at a meeting of international experts.
“The nuclear reactors at Doel 3 and Tihange 2 fulfil the highest security standards,” the agency added.
Spurred by the disaster at Japan’s Fukushima plant in 2011, Germany pledged to abandon nuclear power generation completely by 2022 in favour of other power sources.
Hendricks’ comments are the highest profile criticism of the Belgian nuclear reactors so far in Germany, with the region around Aachen and the state of North Rhine-Westphalia having previously voiced concern.
Last week, the state of North Rhine-Westphalia said it would join a lawsuit brought by the Aachen city region against the Tihange 2 reactor, which is roughly 65 kilometres (about 40 miles) away from the west German city.
Germany has long been nervous about the safety of the reactors and a working group of officials met earlier this month to discuss the issue. Flasbarth told reporters talks with Belgian authorities had been constructive.
He added the decision to make the request had not been taken lightly and that Germany would give the Belgian government time to respond.”
(Reporting by Caroline Copley; Editing by Ruth Pitchford)
There are significant accountability implications arising from ‘devolution deals’ which central government and local areas will need to develop and clarify, the National Audit Office has said.
In a report, English devolution deals, the spending watchdog said these implications included “the details of how and when powers will be transferred to mayors and how they will be balanced against national parliamentary accountability”.
The NAO noted that the ten deals agreed so far involved increasingly complex administrative and governance configurations.
It stressed that, as devolution deals were new and experimental, “good management and accountability both depend on appropriate and proportionate measures to understand their impact”.
The watchdog said that to improve the chances of success, and provide local areas and the public with greater clarity over the progression of devolution deals, central government should clarify the core purposes of the arrangements as well as who will be responsible and accountable for devolved services and functions.
Central government should also ensure it identifies and takes account of risks to devolution deals that arise from ongoing challenges to the financial sustainability of local public services, the NAO added.
HM Treasury and the Cities and Local Growth Unit are responsible for managing the negotiation, agreement and implementation of devolution deals on behalf of central government as a whole.
Amyas Morse, head of the National Audit Office, said: “Despite several iterations of deals, the Government’s approach to English devolution still has an air of charting undiscovered territory. It is in explorer mode, drawing the map as it goes along.
“Some of the opportunities and obstacles are becoming clearer, but we still do not have a clear view of the landscape or, crucially, an idea of the destination.”
Morse added: “Devolution deals provide important opportunities to reform public services. As with any experiment, some elements will work better than others. As we have said before, it is in the interests of both local areas and the government to know which programmes have the biggest impact for the money invested. Localism is not a reason for failure to learn from experiences or to spread best practice.”
Responding to the NAO report, a Local Government Association spokesman said: “Councils are working hard on implementing agreed deals and are working with government to finalise those deals which are still to be signed.
“It is imperative that the momentum is maintained to secure deals, especially in non-metropolitan areas whose economic potential is just as significant as that of big cities.”
“In terms of accountability, devolution has the potential to improve the democratic process by allowing decisions to be made closer to local people to best meet their needs. But councils should be free to put in place the appropriate model of governance for their communities and not have a ‘one-size-fits-all’ model imposed on them where significant new responsibilities are devolved.”
The LGA spokesman added: “The report rightly recognises the possible complications arising from differing geographies for service delivery and councils, particularly for the recently announced sustainability and transformation plans. Councils and their partners will continue to take a pragmatic approach to designing and delivering services that best meet the needs of their communities.
“We support the study’s findings that devolution needs to be accompanied by fair and sustainable funding by Whitehall to manage risk and ensure devolved areas can run services successfully.
“This will help to ensure that the opportunities provided by devolution – delivering economic growth, building more homes, creating jobs and a skilled workforce, and joining up health and care services – will be actively embraced by both local and central government.”
Owl has today alone read three articles about “Devon and Cornwall” but reads none at all (except when discussing devolution) “Devon and Somerset”.
Given the focus of our LEP on Hinkley C, would it not have been a better fit for one LEP to represent Devon and Cornwall and for Somerset to link northwards towards Bristol and Gloucestershire?
This now means that Cornwall goes it alone as a single parent and Devon is forced into an arranged marriage with Somerset!
There are a massive number of synergies between Devon and Cornwall but none between Devon and Somerset except the M5 and A303.
Who drew the lines and got us underwriting Hinkley C and its infrastructure with Somerset instead of concentrating on urban regeneration, tourism, rural infrastructure and environmental stewardship with Cornwall?
This is what can happen if “growth” is your only objective and these are the solutions being touted by our LEP for our local Growth Point.
“After he became Kansas governor in 2011, Sam Brownback slashed personal income taxes on the promise that the deep cuts would trigger a furious wave of hiring and expansion by businesses.
But the “shot of adrenaline” hasn’t worked as envisioned, and the state budget has been in crisis ever since. Now many of the same Republicans who helped pass Brownback’s plan are in open revolt, refusing to help the governor cut spending so he can avoid rolling back any of his signature tax measures.
If Brownback won’t reconsider any of the tax cuts, they say, he will have to figure out for himself how to balance the budget in the face of disappointing revenue.
The governor argued that Kansas had to attract more businesses after a “lost decade” in the early 2000s, when private sector employment declined more than 4 percent.
The predicted job growth from business expansions hasn’t happened, leaving the state persistently short of money. Since November, tax collections have fallen about $81 million, or 1.9 percent below the current forecast’s predictions.
“We’re growing weary,” said Senate President Susan Wagle, a conservative Republican from Wichita. While GOP legislators still support low income taxes, “we’d prefer to see some real solutions coming from the governor’s office,” she said.
Last month, Brownback ordered $17 million in immediate reductions to universities and earlier this month delayed $93 million in contributions to pensions for school teachers and community college employees. The state has also siphoned off more than $750 million from highway projects to other parts of the budget over the past two years.
Lawmakers are worried about approving any further reductions in an election year. All 40 Senate seats and 125 House seats are on the ballot in November.
Democrats have long described Brownback’s tax cuts as reckless. Republican critics want to repeal the personal income tax break for farmers and business owners to raise an additional $200 million to $250 million a year.
Debate over the next budget will intensify after lawmakers return from a recess later this month. They could follow through on their threat by adjourning without making specific reductions and leaving the governor with the authority to do so. He faces fewer repercussions because he will not appear on the ballot again before leaving office in January 2019.
Brownback rejected earlier calls to scale back the tax cuts and shows no signs of backing down.
He declined to be interviewed about the lawmakers’ unusual demand until new revenue projections are released Wednesday. Spokeswoman Eileen Hawley said the governor will release proposals afterward for balancing the budget, but, “a plan to raise taxes on small businesses or anyone else will not be among them.”
Brownback blames the economic sluggishness — the state ranked 43rd in total personal income growth in 2015 — on slumps in agriculture, energy production and aircraft manufacturing.
Deafening silence …
There is still time to book for the one in Exeter on 27 April
36 sessions of which only 8 have so far been booked.
We must go forward they say – but don’t appear to know which forward is. And they don’t seem to have any idea what they are signing up for. Neither do they appear to know just how an LEP with no NHS membership or background, or even a dedicated budget, or without any proven track record on health-related funding might improve things.
But it won’t stop them puffing it up or voting for it! Read and weep – yet again. If anything proves the sheep mentality of our majority party councillors, this is the cast-iron evidence:
“If successful, The Heart of the South West (HOTSW) deal will see powers devolved from the Government to a new combined authority made up of 19 local authorities in Devon and Somerset.
It is hoped devolution will attract more investment to East Devon, leading to 163,000 new jobs in the South West, as well as faster road and rail journeys to the region and wages higher than the national average by 2030.
The matter was up for discussion when it went before members of EDDC’s cabinet last week.
Councillor Jill Elson said she had concerns about the democratic value of the deal and how much input constituents would have. She added: “If you have 19 leaders for all the councils making the decisions, how is that going to be disseminated to the elected members of all the various councils and their residents?”
Cllr Elson said there was also an issue with the health budget, because nobody knew how much it was going cost.
“Older populations need more and more care – whether they are at home or in homes, it is not going to be financially viable because at the moment there are not enough community care workers to actually have people in their own homes,” she added.
“There is one whole ward at the Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital of people just waiting to come out because Devon County Council cannot provide the service – the council is going to be left with some real problems, as is the NHS.”
Cllr Elson said nobody seemed to know how the skills shortage issue would be addressed either.
“The one thing we are missing is a national vocational qualification for those residents who do not have an English degree, but are very good electricians, plumbers and so on,” she said.
Cllr Andrew Moulding, deputy leader, said it was not known exactly what was going to be negotiated, but there would be a period of negotiation and bosses would get the details they needed.
He added one of the deal’s main aims was to improve productivity and that would come by getting younger people involved in learning the right skills earlier on, which in turn would lead to more apprenticeships.
Cllr Moulding said there was a vast need to improve healthcare.
“If that can be done by bringing it down to a level where we can really get to grips with healthcare in this region, to me that has to be a benefit over what we have at the moment,” he added.
“I think we should grasp this opportunity. We want to get more control over our own decisions, rather than leaving them with the Government. If this can be done at a more regional level, then I welcome it.”
Cllr Mark Williamson said: “We should go into this positively, looking at it as an opportunity for East Devon and our residents.It will hopefully mean we can deliver a better service.”
Cllr Eileen Wragg added: “Everything needs much fairer funding and we will only get a chance to influence this if we go forward with this.”
The next step of the process will be for EDDC to nominate a representative who will then join 18 others from similar authorities at briefing sessions on the devolution proposals.
…”LEPs need to keep their private sector representation under review, and strengthen their relationship with local business organisations and local authority economic development teams, to ensure that plans and priorities reflect local business and interests. …
… LEPs should assess the social and environmental implications of decisions as part of their project appraisal processes. …
… The Local Growth Deals that have been agreed focus on transport and infrastructure aimed at unlocking employment and housing development. These appear quite generic in nature, with only a relatively small proportion of projects directed towards supporting priority growth sectors. Funding is also focused on principal urban areas and main transportation corridors. The resources secured and allocated by LEPs are being directed more towards areas of opportunity rather than need. …
… The relationship between local authorities and LEPs appears to be led at a corporate level and is largely resourced from economic development teams of upper tier authorities. There is little direct involvement of local authority planners with the work of LEPs and their awareness of LEPs’ activities is typically low (the exception is the West of England LEP, where the West of England Partnership has helped to bring forward additional joint working). …
… From the perspective of local planning authorities, LEPs are not seen as having a significant role to play in sustainable development given their clear remit around local economic growth. This stands in contrast to the work of the former South West RDA, which had a significant focus on environmental and social dimensions. …”
“A Conservative MP has likened a proposed directly elected mayor for Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire to a “Gauleiter”, a regional Nazi party leader in 1930s Germany.
Sir Henry Bellingham, MP for North-West Norfolk, made clear his opposition to the plan, which is designed to devolve greater power to the regions.
“What we don’t need is a really expensive, costly elected mayor with a fourth tier of local government,” he told local TV.
His comments were criticised by Conservative councillor John Fuller, the leader of South Norfolk Council, who claimed it was “wrong” to compare East Anglian devolution with Germany under Nazi rule” …
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/east-anglia-mayor-to-nazi-official-a6985661.html
Plans for directly elected mayor for Cambridgeshire, Norfolk and Suffolk ‘flawed’
“Plans for three counties in East Anglia to have a directly elected mayor with devolved powers are flawed, the Norfolk councillor leading negotiations admits.
George Nobbs, Labour leader of Norfolk County Council, has opened an official debate on plans for devolved powers.
The mayor would look after transport, strategic planning and skills training in Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire.
MPs across the three counties have criticised the plans, but Mr Nobbs said negotiations should continue.
He admitted proposals in their present form were flawed but said “there are lots of things to be said for this scheme and lots of things to be said against it”.
Liberal Democrat Group leader Marie Strong questioned the need for a directly elected mayor.
“We were told the role of mayor was optional; when did it become compulsory?” she asked.
Mr Nobbs replied: “We were told by ministers it’s that or nothing.”
Conservative group leader Cliff Jordan said the plans so far had generated “a lot of confusion”.
The plan is for the mayor to be chosen by voters in the three counties in May next year. He or she will have the power to increase business rates to fund infrastructure projects.
The mayor will be answerable to a cabinet made up of nominees from the 23 local councils.
Some Conservative MPs from the region have said the idea of an elected mayor is not popular with many people, while others said the money on offer – £1bn over 30 years – was not much.
The Department for Communities and Local Government said: “We are committed to the deal and will continue to work with all the councils. Councils in East Anglia have until June to decide if they want to take part in this historic opportunity.”
“The South West private sector’s economy has had one of the weakest rises in the UK, a report has revealed.
According to PMI survey data, business activity expanded at the slowest rate since April 2013, and growth was weaker than all other UK regions surveyed except Scotland and the North East, which both saw contractions.
The South West also registered a smaller rise in new business, and a further decline in backlogs.
However, employment growth has remained relatively solid in the region compared with others.
The seasonally adjusted Lloyds Bank Commercial Banking South West Business Activity Index fell to a 35-month low of 51.2 in March, from 52.6 in February. …
… The underlying weakness of business conditions in the private sector was emphasised by data on new business inflows, which increased only fractionally in March. In line with the trend for activity, the South West registered the slowest growth among the ten regions to record expansion.”
Our LEP is dedicated to growth in the South West. Millions of pounds is routed via our LEP to promote growth.
Something isn’t working.
As part of the government’s assurance framework, each local enterprise partnership has a nominated local authority that acts as its accountable body, and
Somerset County Council
(the Council) is the accountable body for the Heart of the South West LEP.
Alternatively you may bring any matter concerning the LEP to the attention of the Somerset County Council’s external auditor.
For this Council, the appointed auditor is
Grant Thornton UK LLP.
The engagement lead for the audit is
Peter Barber
peter.a.berber@uk.gt.com
0117 305 7897.
For Local Authorities, some rules are in this government publication:
“Accounting Officer Accountability System Statement for Local Government and for Fire and Rescue Authorities”
Click to access 150320_-_LG_and_Fire_Accountability_System_Statement_-_2015__final_.pdf
For the Local Growth Fund, this government publication covers some of the rules:
“Accounting Officer: Accountability System Statement for the Local Growth Fund”
Click to access bis-15-183-Accountability-systems-statement.pdf
Should you as an elector wish to examine the accounts of ANY local authority, the National Audit Office has produced a very helpful guide abour your rights:
“Council accounts: A guide to your rights”
(With apologies to Dorothy, the Wizard of Oz and Kansas.
… was how the EDDC Chief Executive, Mark Williams, described the document he presented to Cabinet members at Knowle this evening. Well, he should know … .
Hinkley Point: China incorporates seven London-based firms:
Beijing’s growing confidence in its plans to help build new reactors at Hinkley in Somerset and Bradwell in Essex has been underlined by the recent incorporation of seven new Chinese nuclear-related firms in London.
It appears, however, that an agreement between China and its partner EDF of France to develop the first new reactors in Britain for 20 years has still not been signed.
Beijing’s creation of so many new businesses could further alarm those concerned at the degree of complexity surrounding the £18bn Hinkley scheme.
“Documents from Companies House show the recent listing of General Nuclear System Limited and Bradwell Power Holding Company alongside more opaque entities such as Libra International and Sagittarius International.
All seven companies use the same Stratton Street address in Mayfair, west London used by the state-owned China General Nuclear Power Corporation. They also have the same director, Zhu Minhong, the public face of China’s nuclear power business in Britain.
Zhu appeared with Vincent de Rivaz, the chief executive of EDF Energy, before parliament’s energy and climate change committee 10 days ago, and stressed China’s optimism about building nuclear power plants in Britain.
A spokesman for China General Nuclear Power Corporation, where Zhu is a general director for the UK, said he could not immediately explain why so many new UK-based businesses had been established or their exact purpose.
The Chinese company announced at a highly publicised signing ceremony in London last October that it would be taking a one-third share in Hinkley Point C alongside EDF, and that it also planned to construct and operate its own locally designed reactors at Bradwell.
Despite heads of agreement being signed off during the visit of the Chinese president, Xi Jinping, EDF and China Nuclear had still not completed the final legal documents in February as the wider Hinkley go-ahead remained stalled while the French power company demanded more financial support from Paris.
EDF declined to spell out exactly what the current situation was, but referred to the statements Zhu made at the select committee when he said: “We have agreed the package deal in terms of the heads of terms. We then spent our time to translate the heads of terms into long-form. What I can say today is that our discussions [are] practically completed.”
Peter Atherton, a utility analyst at Jefferies investment bank in London, expressed concern about the complexities of the wider Hinkley programme, noting that EDF had spoken of having “thousands and thousands” of pages of legal documents to be signed off with it Chinese counterparts.
“Complexity is itself a warning that this project is likely to run into some kind of problem. Often when you have a major infrastructure project that runs into problems, say the [London] tube PFI, complex contracts have added to the risk and uncertainty over who bears the responsibility for which costs.
“I would be staggered if anyone in government could tell you where exactly the risk lay [with regard to Hinkley].”
The Department of Energy and Climate Change said: “Hinkley Point C is a major infrastructure project which will boost our energy supply and our economy, bringing in billions of pounds of investment into the UK and creating 25,000 jobs during construction.
“A deal of this scale is by its nature complex, but we are clear on the construction and financing risks, which fall firmly on the developer rather than bill payers.”
Originally advertised for 6 April 2016 at the Fresha cafe in Sowton, Exeter, the link now takes you to a completely different date (Wednesday 27 April). No explanation – no notice of how or why the date has had to be changed.
However, rather than 28 slots for “business advice” of which two had been taken last week, there are now 32 – with extra slots with a taxation expert. All 32 slots are currently available for booking.
Come on you businesses, get that advice from these unidentified experts, otherwise this will look like a very expensive (6 experts each being paid for at least a morning’s work) damp squib on the part of the LEP.
So, healthcare for Devon, Somerset, Torbay and PLYMOUTH is to be devolved to the new LEP.
Torbay already has its own integrated care scheme:
Now, Plymouth gets its own (different) system financed by business rates.
How do you devolve two devolved systems to a new over-arching system – where only one person on the 20-member LEP has a health background?
Re-inventing the round wheel to make it square in the name of efficiency, or perhaps growth – who knows?
“Plymouth has been chosen to pilot the Government’s new devolved health funding model, as the city’s public health chief takes a leading role in the national roll-out.
Following a meeting between MPs and Public Health England (PHE), the city has been chosen as one of the first in the country to fund health services using only income from business rates.
Plymouth’s director of public health, professor Kelechi Nnoaham, will also sit on PHE’s national planning team for the initiative to help monitor the impact of the new system.
The announcement marks the latest stage in the Government’s efforts to devolve revenue-raising powers. Councils have already expressed concerns about the impact of cuts to central grants and plans to fund services solely through locally-generated taxes.
Plymouth is already among the lowest-funded authorities in terms of public health grants, with an average spend per person of £47. But the council suggests prof. Nnoaham’s place on the national panel for the scheme will ensure the city’s interests are represented.
The council has been campaigning for fairer funding for public health in Plymouth for some time and has been lobbying at the highest level,” a spokesman said.
“The unfair funding of public health was also highlighted by the Plymouth Fairness Commission.
“Our director of public health will be able to represent the interests of cities such as Plymouth. He has a strong professional reputation and will be able to ensure Plymouth influences national policy.”
The meeting with PHE chief executive Duncan Selbie was arranged by Plymouth Moore View MP Johnny Mercer. Mr Mercer has been campaigning on the issue of public health funding since his election in May, describing the local variation in grants – which sees some councils receive up to £185 per person – as “outrageous”.
He said he was “delighted” that Plymouth would have an opportunity to shape the new system at a national level.
“Public health funding was one of the first things I picked up on after being elected last year,” he said. “I wrote my first letter to Jane Ellison MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary for Public Health, in June and have attempted to keep up the pressure in correspondence and on the floor of the House ever since.
“I think we still have a lot of work to do, but I am delighted we have the opportunity to influence thinking around business rates retention in respect of public health funding. And frankly, I could not think of a more intelligent and impassioned advocate than Kelechi.”
http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/new-public-health-pilot-address-Plymouth-s/story-29033918-detail/story.html
Devolved Powers
Report to the Communities Secretary and to the Minister of Housing and Planning – Local Plans Expert Group
This is a 56 page report with a lot of detail on the problems of drawing up a Local Plan.
One paragraph makes an interesting point: how can a devolved area set extra housing targets if one or more of the subsidiary councils have not completed their Local Plans?
In many cases Inspectors add thousands of houses to suggested totals – which completely skews LEP extra numbers.
“S21. From the outset of our appointment, LPEG has been interested in the potential for voluntary joint planning provided by the current round of bids for devolved powers, which cover a large majority of the country.
Devolution provides the best opportunity for bottom-up joint planning but bids tend to focus on economic growth rather than housing and we have strongly recommended to Government that it attatches precise conditions to any successful devolution bid, requiring a commitment to plan positively to meet objectively assessed housing needs and a commitment to produce a plan for the combined area.
We further recommend that individual authorities within a combined authority area should receive sign off from the combined authority that their emerging plan addresses the Duty to Cooperate before their plan can progress.”
“When the Conservatives won last year’s election most voters had no clue that George Osborne was about to unleash an anti-local democracy, unelected regional quango genii from the bottle.
Having been trusted with more than 30,000 votes, the East Devon Alliance has done all we can to flush this out into the open. Most recently we discovered that the National Audit Office (NAO), the respected Government Watchdog, were conducting a study, this spring, into accountability and value for money in the ever more powerful “Local Enterprise Partnerships’.
As the NAO web site invited comment, we thought it would be helpful if we put forward a view on how Devolution was perceived to be proceeding from a local perspective rather than from Whitehall or the Establishment.
We feel that at present, flying a false flag of devolving more power to the regions, the LEPs are proceeding in a way that is unaccountable, lacks transparency and is likely to have a negative impact on democracy.
Realising our input might arrive in the final stages of compiling the report we also copied it to the Chair of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC), Meg Hillier MP. NAO reports are reviewed by the PAC.
In the event the NAO have come to similar conclusions to us.
If Mr Osborne is hell-bent on his ill-conceived scheme and Parliament is unwilling to trim his sails it is now up to local councillors to do the thinking for him.”
“At Talbot the government appears to have assumed, even at the eleventh hour, that Tata would not dare to walk away from its UK steel business. It was a bad bet, thus the undignified scramble to get the business secretary back from Australia to explain what government intervention in the steel industry might mean, and cost.
But let’s not ignore the other industrial drama involving vast sums, thousands of jobs and a key plank of government strategy. Yes, it’s Hinkley Point, where the UK’s energy policy for the 2020s rests on the premise that French state-backed outfit EDF really will build a £18bn nuclear station in Somerset that will open in 2025 to supply 7% of our electricity.
This bet is looking weaker with every passing week. In the latest instalment, a group of EDF engineers have written a paper arguing that 2027 is the earliest “realistic” opening date. Meanwhile, EDF’s board has not been able to bring its rebellious unions to heel. As we report, Christian Taxil, an employee board member representing the CFE-CGC union, has called for the project to be postponed.
EDF can – and did – dismiss these tales as fluff. The engineers’ paper was not taken to the board, the company argues, and unions’ opposition to Hinkley is long-standing.
The UK government, on the other hand, cannot afford to be so blasé. EDF’s ability to give a final thumbs-up on Hinkley rests on the French government’s willingness to refinance the company. French ministers may not be so relaxed about the latest outbreak of dissent in EDF’s ranks. Come May, the latest “deadline” for a final investment decision, nobody can be truly confident about what will happen.
If the result is abandonment, the UK government cannot plead it wasn’t warned. Hinkley’s chief obstacle has always been simple and formidable – the fact that its European pressurised reactor design is unproven and similar projects in Normandy and Finland are years behind schedule. It would not be surprising if the project expires from exhaustion.
The key requirement for the UK is to have a plan B. The good news is that it should not be difficult to design an alternative energy strategy to meet the capacity crunch in the 2020s; it could be more gas-fired stations, or smaller and proven nuclear reactors. The bad news is that there little to suggest ministers are on the job.”
East Devon Watch 