Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

New Nuclear Sites

Wednesday 26 November 2025 · 3 questions

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

At a glance

Answered 0 Partly answered 3 Not answered 0

Key points

  • Ministerial discussions with the SNP Government over nuclear sites at Torness, Dounreay, and Hunterston have been urged for reconsideration.
  • Connecting renewables to the grid requires significant expense, and the sites of Hunterston, Torness, and Dounreay are suitable for new nuclear power stations.
  • The SNP's argument against new nuclear focuses on cost, but emerging technologies like small modular reactors offer potential for reduced costs.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Peter Bedford Con Mid Leicestershire
Context

The Scottish Government opposes new nuclear projects, citing ideological reasons. This opposition affects the consideration of Torness, Dounreay and Hunterston for future nuclear projects.

Question

What discussions has the Secretary of State had with the SNP Government in Scotland, whose luddite approach and ideological blinkers prevent Torness, Dounreay and Hunterston from being considered for future nuclear projects—and all the jobs and investment that go with them?

Answer from The Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr Douglas Alexander)

This at least seems to be an occasion for which there is genuine cross-party consensus. Not only have we urged a different approach from the Scottish Government—and I do so again—but my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero has already asked Great British Energy Nuclear to begin assessing Scotland’s capability for new build nuclear sites.

Partly answered

How: Urging A Different Approach, Not Providing Specific Details On Discussions

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Get updates like this by email
Q2 Geoffrey Clifton-Brown Con North Cotswolds
Context

Renewables require significant investment to connect to the grid. Former nuclear sites like Hunterston, Torness and Dounreay could be suitable for new nuclear power stations.

Question

Would the Secretary of State not agree that connecting renewables to the grid requires considerable expense, and would not the former nuclear sites of Hunterston, Torness and Dounreay make very suitable sites for new nuclear power stations, from which the Scottish people have benefited hugely in the past?

Answer from The Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr Douglas Alexander)

Of course, we would welcome the opportunity for advanced modular reactors, small modular reactors or new build nuclear at the Torness site, but the EDF management there says that the opposition from the Scottish Government is preventing equivalent investment of the kind that was recently announced for Torness’s sister plant in Hartlepool.

Partly answered

How: Stating Preference, Mentioning Edf Management'S View

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Get updates like this by email
Q3 Alison Griffiths Con Bognor Regis and Littlehampton
Context

SNP argues against new nuclear due to high costs. The Secretary of State is asked about the potential for reduced costs in small modular reactors.

Question

A key plank of the SNP’s dogmatic argument against new nuclear is cost. Will the right hon. Gentleman find a quiet moment—perhaps when the winds fall light and the turbines stop—to point out to them to reduced costs of small modular reactors?

Answer from The Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr Douglas Alexander)

Of course, new technologies are emerging, as the hon. Lady recognises. We are delighted that Rolls-Royce is one company leading that new wave of nuclear technology. We do not even need to look to the future; we can look to the most recent past for occasions when the wind does not blow and the sun does not shine in Scotland.

Partly answered

How: Acknowledging New Technologies, Referencing Past Instances

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Get updates like this by email