Nuclear Energy: Scotland Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Scotland Office
Wednesday 14th October 2026

(5 days, 3 hours ago)

Westminster Hall
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.

Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.

This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record

Susan Murray Portrait Susan Murray
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank the hon. Member for your intervention.

Graham Stuart Portrait Graham Stuart (in the Chair)
- Hansard - -

Order. His intervention.

Susan Murray Portrait Susan Murray
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I apologise, Mr Stuart. I was not around in 2010. I always take situations as they are and look to the future. We have to take steps to work on where we are now and not regret what happened in the past.

A stable, reliable power supply will bring down transmission costs and household bills. Siting new small modular reactors at Hunterston and Dounreay could also breathe life back into the highlands and islands, just as oil and gas once did for the north-east. Where remote rural communities are losing their young people, a nuclear site brings the jobs and investment that gives them a reason to stay.

We have seen what happens when a country turns its back on nuclear. Germany took an approach—much like the SNP’s—of decommissioning and deindustrialising, and has gone from exporting 26 terawatt-hours of electricity a year to importing 22 terawatt-hours and relying on coal-powered plants. Now, more than ever, we have a responsibility to protect our environment. Personally, I would rather follow the lead of France than shy away from nuclear. France chose to invest in a low-carbon energy supply, and that has paid off. French households pay around a quarter less for their electricity than households in the UK, and the communities that host nuclear plants have seen the direct benefits in childcare, transport, hospital upgrades and affordable housing.

Scotland could see the same—well-paid jobs, new house building, increased tax revenue and real community benefit, giving people a future and good, well-paid and secure jobs—but the SNP says no. At a time when Scotland faces chronic housing shortages, bus services have been cut by a sixth in just five years, Scots pay some of the highest electricity prices in Europe and remote and rural areas pay exorbitant energy charges, the SNP refuses to even consider such a clear solution.

--- Later in debate ---
None Portrait Several hon. Members rose—
- Hansard -

Graham Stuart Portrait Graham Stuart (in the Chair)
- Hansard - -

We will begin with speeches of four minutes. If everyone is disciplined, everyone will get four minutes.

--- Later in debate ---
Lillian Jones Portrait Lillian Jones (Kilmarnock and Loudoun) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stuart.

Graham Stuart Portrait Graham Stuart (in the Chair)
- Hansard - -

Sorry to interrupt, but I will call the Front Benchers at 5.23 pm, so if you wish to share your time with your colleague, that would be helpful.

Lillian Jones Portrait Lillian Jones
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I congratulate the hon. Member for Mid Dunbartonshire (Susan Murray) on securing this important debate.

Scotland has a proud heritage, skilled workers, vast renewable resources and the North sea, but to make the most of those strengths we need an energy policy that is ambitious, practical and focused on the future. Can we really believe that Hunterston B has now ended generation, with no plan to build the next generation of new nuclear? For almost 46 years, that nuclear power station provided reliable, low-carbon electricity to Scotland. At its peak, Hunterston B generated enough electricity to power almost 2 million homes a year. Over its lifetime, it produced just under 300 terawatt-hours of electricity—enough to power every home in Scotland for more than 30 years—while avoiding more than 100 million tonnes of carbon emissions. It supported around 500 jobs and 250 contractors and made a major contribution to Ayrshire’s economy. That is a remarkable legacy, as is that of Torness, which is now the most productive clean power asset in Scotland’s history. Since coming online in 1988, it has generated more than 300 terawatt-hours of clean electricity—enough power for every home in Scotland for around 36 years. It also helped to avoid more than 100 million tonnes of CO2 emissions.

Those are not just statistics; they demonstrate what nuclear power has delivered, and can continue to deliver, for Scotland. Yet Scotland has no new nuclear power station under construction and no future plan. That matters, because nuclear and renewables should not be presented as alternatives—Scotland needs both. Wind power is one of our greatest strengths, but wind does not blow every hour of every day. Nuclear provides dependable, low-carbon electricity alongside renewables. For families and businesses in my constituency and right across Scotland, energy security matters. We have all seen how global events can send our energy prices soaring. More secure domestic generation can reduce our exposure to those shocks and give families and businesses greater certainty.

It is about jobs, too. Hunterston and Torness demonstrated that nuclear investment can deliver highly skilled, unionised jobs, apprenticeships, engineering expertise and opportunities for local supply chains. We should build on that, not turn our backs on it. We should back offshore wind and invest in new technologies, and look seriously at a new generation of nuclear power.

That is the balanced approach that Scotland needs, but the Scottish Government’s energy strategy is nearly three years late. Families and businesses across Ayrshire need certainty now. They want to see new investment in new nuclear energy. Plainly speaking, they want to see the creation of Hunterston C. Hunterston showed us what is possible. Torness is showing us that it is still possible. Scotland needs the ambition to build the next generation of new nuclear. The Scottish Labour party and the UK Labour Government are ready to work with the SNP Government to deliver energy certainty, investment and ambition for our communities and young people. Will the SNP Government drop their ideology on nuclear to help Scotland’s energy future? That is the question.

Graham Stuart Portrait Graham Stuart (in the Chair)
- Hansard - -

I call the final Back-Bench speaker, Elaine Stewart, with a two-minute time limit, I am afraid.

Elaine Stewart Portrait Elaine Stewart (Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Thank you, Mr Stuart. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. I thank the hon. Member for Mid Dunbartonshire (Susan Murray) for securing this important debate.

Generations of Scots working in the Ayrshire coalfields once powered this country. As we look to the next generation of clean, reliable energy, Scotland needs to grasp the opportunity of nuclear power to help power our nation once again. Investing in nuclear is not an argument against wind power or renewables. Scotland has extraordinary renewable potential, and wind and solar remain central to our energy future, but when the wind does not blow—although that is not too often in my area—we need reliable power to back it up. Nuclear does not replace renewables; it complements them.

While the UK Government move ahead with major new nuclear investment, the Scottish Government are refusing to act. That inaction has cost us, and we are exposed to volatile gas markets, more dependent on imported fuels and more vulnerable to foreign conflicts thousands of miles away that drive up our bills at home.

This is not just about energy security; it is about jobs and fairness. When coalmining declined, it took jobs and investment with it, and too many communities like mine still feel that loss today. Scotland has missed out on nearly 5,000 jobs, with skilled Scots workers travelling south instead of working at home. Those are not just jobs; they are apprenticeships for our young people, opportunities for the supply chain and decades of stable, well-paid employment.

That also matters for our clean energy goals. We are committed to ambitious decarbonising targets, and nuclear is a proven low-carbon technology that can help us get there without relying on gas. Countries have achieved the fastest, most reliable—

Graham Stuart Portrait Graham Stuart (in the Chair)
- Hansard - -

Order. I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, Jamie Stone.

--- Later in debate ---
Douglas Lumsden Portrait Douglas Lumsden
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

That is a brilliant point, because we would probably be building new nuclear power stations where the grid already is. We already have the grid connection at Hunterston and at Torness. It is exactly why we should be backing new nuclear.

It is clear that the SNP’s effective ban on new nuclear power is holding Scotland back, in terms of both our energy transition and our economy. Right now, Scotland has the most expensive and vulnerable grid in the UK, and much of that is down to the fact that the SNP has turned its back on nuclear. When I was an MSP, I was fortunate enough to visit Hunterston B. What a wasted opportunity that is. It has the grid connection and the space—it is all there; it just needs the political will to make it happen so that we can have Hunterston C.

As we progress to sourcing more and more of our energy from renewables such as wind, the problem of intermittency will only get worse. The irony is that the SNP’s irrational opposition to new nuclear means that a future Scotland would be completely reliant on English nuclear power when the wind does not blow and the sun does not shine. Luckily, we have a UK grid, so we share the power with our neighbours, and Scotland will not face blackouts because of SNP failures. But while our shared grid means that Scotland will not miss out on imported nuclear energy, thanks to the SNP’s blind opposition we are missing out on thousands of jobs and billions of pounds of investment.

During my visit to Hunterston, I met the young graduates and apprentices there. It was heartbreaking to hear that, to have a future in nuclear, they were going to have to move away from Scotland—talented young people in highly paid jobs moving away because of the SNP’s dogma. It is interesting to hear that one in 10 people at Hinkley Point C are Scots.

What makes the SNP’s luddite approach totally senseless is that people in Scotland want new nuclear. We have heard it again this afternoon. Sixty per cent of the Scottish public are in favour of building new nuclear power stations to replace those being decommissioned. East Lothian, Dumfries and Galloway and Highland councils have all called for new nuclear development. Many of the jobs and much of the investment that could be generated by new nuclear would go to some of Scotland’s most deprived communities. We are in desperate need of thriving local industries, yet the SNP, which loves to talk about devolution, has overruled those local wishes.

For far too long, the SNP has weaponised devolved powers over planning to block new nuclear, which of course is a reserved issue. The SNP’s bizarre opposition to this clean and consistent energy goes against science, against all common sense and against the wishes of the Scottish public. The clear cross-party consensus from the Scottish MPs in the Chamber—apart from the hon. Member for Alloa and Grangemouth (Brian Leishman) and the SNP, of course—shows just how backward John Swinney’s position really is.

I thank all hon. Members for their contributions to this important debate. I very much hope that nuclear energy will have a bright future in Scotland. If we are to transition beyond fossil fuels in the long term, nuclear will be a vital part of our energy mix. Scotland must not miss out as a result of the SNP luddites.

Graham Stuart Portrait Graham Stuart (in the Chair)
- Hansard - -

If the Minister wishes to finish at 5.43 pm, she will be able to give the proposer of the debate two minutes to wind up.