Greenpeace mounts legal challenge to nuclear plans

Greenpeace has launched a High Court challenge to the government's proposal to open the door to a programme of new nuclear power stations.

The green pressure group has argued that the government's recent energy review was "legally flawed".

Meanwhile, ministers have also been warned that they could face legal action on a second front. Countryside campaigners have told the government that moves to streamline the planning regime to speed-up consents for new nuclear stations could also be the subject of a court challenge.
 
Greenpeace has lodged legal papers in London’s High Court arguing that the government has yet to carry out the "full public consultation" it had committed to undertake before deciding to back a new-build nuclear reactor programme.

According to Greenpeace, the energy review failed as a "full public consultation" because it did not resolve key issues such as dealing with a new generation of nuclear power stations, such as dealing radioactive waste, financial costs and the design of reactors.

Sarah North, head of Greenpeace's nuclear campaign, said: "The government promised a full public consultation before giving the green light to a dangerous new set of nuclear power stations, yet they have absolutely failed to do this."

The Department of Trade and Industry, which masterminded the energy review, has shrugged off the Greenpeace move. "The Government maintains that the 2006 Energy Review report is supported by the necessary consultation processes, and considers the Greenpeace legal challenge to the report is without merit".
 
Meanwhile, the Campaign to Protect Rural England has complained that the government's proposals to streamline planning procedures for new nuclear power stations would drastically reduce local people's right to voice their opposition at a public inquiry.

CPRE planning campaigner Amanda Bruse said: "These proposals risk igniting public opposition to new nuclear power stations. And they may be open to the challenge of restricting human rights."

She added: "The government is in danger of undermining the role of the planning system by restricting public involvement in major decisions. If people can't give their views at a public hearing, public confidence in decision-making will be lost. By shutting people out of decisions on the biggest, most damaging developments the government is storing up trouble for itself."

The CPRE has pointed out that many of the nuclear sites in the running for new reactors are in or close to areas designated for special protection under European legislation and will need individual assessment.

A spokesman for the DTI denied the government wanted to undermine the planning system: "We will be consulting as widely as possible to ensure that we get the framework right. Our proposals are simply trying to ensure that local planning inquiries stay focused on the local issues not re-debating national policy. We believe that public inquiries have a valuable role to play and are not seeking to undermine them."

More information from the CPRE website

Visit the Greenpeace website

Roger Milne

12 October 2006