Global site tag (gtag.js) - Google Analytics MP: Sir Edward Davey debate extracts from Nuclear Power: Toshiba (Mon 12th Nov 2018)

Nuclear Power: Toshiba
Sir Edward Davey Excerpts
Monday 12th November 2018

(1 year, 4 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate
Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
Greg Clark Portrait Greg Clark - Parliament Live - Hansard

We have a substantial pipeline of new energy projects, as a number of hon. Members have made clear. When it comes to the Moorside site in Cumbria, it was always available to developers to leave it. It will now revert to the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority. It will be open to developers to come forward to make proposals. However, whether with nuclear or other sources of clean power, we have a substantial pipeline of new projects coming forward to add to our energy supplies.

Sir Edward Davey Portrait Sir Edward Davey (Kingston and Surbiton) (LD) - Parliament Live - Hansard
12 Nov 2018, 4:30 p.m.

When I was doing the Secretary of State’s job, there were plenty of such setbacks and delays to new nuclear, and they really worried me. I was worried about how we would keep the lights on in the 2020s and 2030s, given that the forecasts were reliant on so much new nuclear, so I looked at contingencies, particularly tidal lagoon power. Will he now reverse his views on tidal lagoon power and look at it quickly, because it can provide the firm reliable power that new nuclear offers and be built much more quickly than a new nuclear power station?

Greg Clark Portrait Greg Clark - Parliament Live - Hansard
12 Nov 2018, 4:30 p.m.

The right hon. Gentleman is correct in noting that the scale of such projects means the companies proposing them need to have a plan that is financeable and, in this case, a source of technology that is available. I repeat what I said at the beginning, which is that the Westinghouse subsidiary of Toshiba went into chapter 11 bankruptcy. On the tidal lagoon project, I am in favour of diverse sources of energy—that is clear—but we have to recognise value for money for taxpayers and consumers. The Swansea tidal lagoon proposal was so far out of being able to be financed that it was not value for money for either the taxpayer or bill payers.