Great British Energy: Nuclear Development Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate

Lord Offord of Garvel

Main Page: Lord Offord of Garvel (Conservative - Life peer)

Great British Energy: Nuclear Development

Lord Offord of Garvel Excerpts
Tuesday 22nd July 2025

(4 days, 2 hours ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate
Lord Wilson of Sedgefield Portrait Lord Wilson of Sedgefield (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

We are talking to British producers and manufacturers of solar cells to see how we can invest in that and advance the technology on solar cells so that we do not have to rely on foreign imports. I get the noble Lord’s question on whether we are being as ethical as we possibly can be. We are building partnerships with key NGOs, including Anti-Slavery International, Rights Lab and Human Rights Watch, to ensure that civil society voices and expertise are embedded in policy design and enforcement. We need to make sure that we are not using slave labour to produce the solar cells that we will be using in this country.

Lord Offord of Garvel Portrait Lord Offord of Garvel (Con)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

The Government’s commitment to the SMR rollout is welcome, as indeed is today’s announcement on Sizewell C being given the green light. The Opposition believe that nuclear can be a significant contributor to a balanced scorecard alongside gas and renewables to give us a secure, affordable and clean energy system. Will the Government use the current Planning and Infrastructure Bill as an enabler for nuclear, to remove the often spurious and vexatious blockages of long-term planning?

Lord Wilson of Sedgefield Portrait Lord Wilson of Sedgefield (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank the noble Lord for that question. Obviously, we will do everything we can to expedite the planning process. We are very keen on infrastructure projects that are in the national interest. I want to refer to something that the noble Lord said yesterday about this Government’s approach to renewable energy. He said that it is

“anti-science, anti-jobs, anti-energy security and anti-future generation”.—[Official Report, 21/7/25; col. 92.]

As far as anti-science is concerned, I do not think that there are many eminent climate scientists who think that we are anti-science. There are 1 million jobs now reliant on green energy. Energy security is important, and that is what we want. We want more homegrown energy. That is why our investment in nuclear is important. On anti-future generation, I have three grandchildren, and if we do not do something now, they will never forgive us. It is for not just my grandchildren but everybody in this House’s grandchildren that we are doing this. We need to invest in it. We need to get the country around it. It is the patriotic thing to do.