---

Nuclear Industry

That is a pity, Mr. Cook, because I would certainly be happy to accord you that status, knowing the role that you perform. I said earlier that I had come to the House opposed to nuclear power generation. I have been involved for many years in the oil and gas industry, as secretary of the offshore oil and gas industry group in this House. I was chairman of the chemical industry group and a member of PRASEG—the parliamentary renewable and sustainable energy group. I was challenged to review my position by some people who felt that the climate change and security supply issues were on the horizon—at that time, four or five years ago, they were not quite so prevalent. They were reacting to what seemed to be the Government’s abandonment of the future of nuclear with the 2003 energy review, in the same way that the United States abandoned its capacity to build nuclear power, mainly because of some large problems in the industry worldwide when people were not taking climate change seriously. I set myself some tasks and asked myself five questions, one of which was whether nuclear energy generation was avoidable. If people are interested enough they can find in the publication Nuclear Future, volume 2, No. 5, an article that I wrote following a debate in the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology Committee, in which I argued strongly that nuclear power was not only necessary but unavoidable if we were serious about saving our planet and contributing to the continued growth of people’s energy needs, even with the amelioration offered by energy-saving policies or generation from other renewable sources such as wind, wave and tidal. In Scotland, we have the blessing of hydro power, which some countries do not have. I was pleased that the Select Committee took up the issue again and I compliment the Chairman on the excellent and thorough report. It is a pity that he was not the guiding hand when the 2003 review was under way, as we might not have been carried away by the siren voices that were being heard loudly then that we should take the route of other countries and abandon a low-carbon fuel which, unlike fossil fuels, does not generate other by-products that are equally damaging to the atmosphere and the future of our planet.