SNP Government accused of 'dereliction of duty' over nuclear power snub
The SNP Government has been accused of a "dereliction of duty" after failing to carry out any analysis of the potential economic benefits of building new nuclear power stations in Scotland.
Nationalist ministers have also so carried out no research on the economic impact of decomissioning the two remaining nuclear plants north of the Border.
The SNP has long been opposed to nuclear energy and has instead pushed for greater investment in renewables. The UK Government has taken a different approach and recently announced a £14.2 billion investment to build the Sizewell C reactor in Suffolk.
The GMB union is now urging the Scottish Government to reconsider its ban on new nuclear power to help meet net zero targets, deliver secure energy and create thousands of well-paid jobs.
Louise Gilmour, GMB Scotland secretary, branded the failure of the Scottish Government to properly analyse the potential economic benefits of nuclear energy 'a dereliction of duty.'
She said: 'New nuclear can help provide a baseload of safe, clean and secure energy while creating thousands of good, skilled, unionised jobs in Scotland. The Scottish Government's refusal to discuss the potential benefits in public is one thing but to discover it is not even analysing them in private seems beyond belief.
"To allow ministers' ideological opposition to nuclear energy to block analysis of its potentially huge economic benefits is a dereliction of duty.'
She spoke out after the union asked the Scottish Government for its analysis of the economic impact of decommissioning the Hunterston nuclear plant, in Ayrshire, now underway, and Torness, in East Lothian, where decommissioning is due to begin in 2030.
It also asked for the analysis of the economic benefits linked to the potential expansion of new nuclear stations in Scotland. In response, to the request submitted under Freedom of Information legislation, the union was told: "The Scottish Government does not have the information you have requested."
Gilmour, GMB Scotland secretary, said the need for Holyrood ministers to end their opposition to nuclear power has become even more urgent after the UK Government recently announced £14 billion investment in a new plant at Sizewell C.
Meanwhile, the nuclear plant being built at Hinkley Point C in Somerset is estimated to have created 1,600 jobs for Scots workers and the awarding of almost £300m of contracts to Scots firms.
Analysis by the GMB suggests suggests four small modular reactors (SMRs) could create up to 800 jobs generating £60million a year in wages. At Torness, two new reactors would create up to jobs for 1,000 workers being paid £90m annually.
Sarah Boyack, Scottish Labour energy spokeswoman, said: "Scottish Labour has been clear that we will end the SNP's ideological opposition to nuclear power that is holding Scotland back and blocking the creation of high-quality jobs.
"At the stroke of a pen, the SNP could unlock billions of pounds of investment. And yet, we now learn that the Scottish Government hasn't even bothered to carry out an analysis of the benefits that nuclear energy would bring.
"Only Scottish Labour has the vision to set a new direction for Scotland which maximises the opportunities available through clean energy and economic growth."
A Scottish Government spokesman said: "The Scottish Government is focussed on supporting growth and creating jobs by capitalising on Scotland's immense renewable energy capacity rather than expensive new nuclear energy which takes decades to build and creates radioactive waste which is difficult and costly to dispose of.
"Significant growth in renewables, storage hydrogen, carbon capture and decommissioning are key opportunities for our future energy workforce in Scotland – with independent scenarios from Ernst and Young (EY) showing that with the right support, Scotland's low carbon and renewable energy sector could support nearly 80,000 jobs by 2050."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
an hour ago
- Times
SNP transition fund spends £43m on just 110 jobs for oil workers
A fund designed to protect North Sea oil and gas workers from the SNP's net zero drive created just 110 new jobs despite spending £43 million, a new report has found. An analysis of the first two years of the Scottish government's Just Transition Fund, which is set to cost taxpayers half a billion pounds over a decade, found that it had 'safeguarded' only another 120 further existing roles. The policy, announced by Nicola Sturgeon in 2021, was intended to ensure that new green jobs are created for workers whose livelihoods depend on fossil fuel industries. A report commissioned by the Scottish government found the scheme, which backed 24 projects such as a 'sustainable' whisky distillery, an eco-tourism firm and new tidal energy research projects, could be 'a successful catalyst for economic and environmental change'. However, critics claimed that it had delivered only a 'paltry return' after the SNP repeatedly vowed that it would ensure that North Sea workers do not end up on the scrapheap as part of its plans to wind down the oil and gas industry and replace it with clean energy industries. The North Sea oil and gas industry is estimated to directly employ around 30,000 people and supports a further 100,000 indirectly. The Scottish government has said it wants to hit net zero by 2045 — five years ahead of the rest of the UK — and is sticking to the target despite repeatedly failing to hit, and then scrapping, interim targets. The analysis, carried out by the research firm Blake Stevenson Ltd, found that 47 jobs had been created through the Social Enterprise Just Transition Fund, which include positions in 'green skills training'. A handful of others were created through a nature restoration project based around the River Findhorn and an 'adventure tourism' firm. However, the report warned that many of the roles were 'temporary, project-based, or contingent on further investment' and 'may not transition into lasting opportunities'. Douglas Lumsden, the Scottish Tory net zero spokesman, said: 'This paltry return will do nothing to allay the fears of tens of thousands of highly skilled workers in Scotland's oil and gas sector. 'They know the SNP and Labour are taking a wrecking ball to their industry and this report confirms they have not got a clue how to properly protect jobs for the future. 'Taxpayers will be rightly thinking their money has typically been squandered by the SNP who must urgently shift from their current reckless approach if we are to achieve an affordable transition.' The fund was created as a counter to claims that the SNP's net zero policies, which were enthusiastically championed under Sturgeon, would cost thousands of jobs and cause devastation to the north east economy. The SNP has repeatedly claimed that it will ensure the push to net zero does not mean that communities suffer in the same way as others did under deindustrialisation under Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s. When the just transition fund was announced, ministers said they would target investment to help create 'good, green jobs' to replace those that would be lost in the North East and Moray. According to the report, the fund has also helped to leverage £30 million in private sector investment and £4.7 million from the public sector or charities. It claimed that initiatives funded by the scheme were also responsible for the training of 750 people. The report said that while the fund 'has been a successful catalyst for economic and environmental change' in the area, 'several administrative and logistical challenges have emerged'. These include uncertainty over long-term funding, confusion over the application process and a lack of clarity over funding criteria. The report said: 'Many projects remain in early stages, making it difficult to fully assess employment outcomes, carbon savings, and long-term economic benefits.' Gillian Martin, the climate action secretary, said: 'This independent report demonstrates our Just Transition Fund is a catalyst for economic growth. With £75 million allocated to the fund since 2022, the expert report makes clear it has supported job creation and re-skilling, empowered communities, catalysed private investment and initiated innovation in green technologies. 'Thanks to the Just Transition Fund, more than 230 jobs have been created and safeguarded, 750 training places opened up and over £34 million in additional investment secured in its first two years. These are the initial impacts of the fund and we are confident that job numbers, investment leveraged and other key outputs will increase as projects continue. 'This is just one example of how this government is supporting Scotland's valued and highly skilled oil and gas workers, who are at the very heart of the just transition to net zero — despite the fact that decisions on offshore oil and gas licensing, consenting and the associated fiscal regime, are all matters that are currently reserved to the UK government.'
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Ian Blackford: SNP must offer Scots a bold economic plan
Mr Blackford warned that the dire state of the UK's public finances would have direct consequences for Holyrood, whose budget is heavily dependent on decisions taken at Westminster. Read more: 'For the SNP Government, whose budget is largely based on Barnett consequentials, it means an ongoing squeeze on real-terms spending,' he wrote. 'The 2026 election will largely focus on devolved responsibilities, but the capacity to deliver over the next Parliament will be constrained by the UK financial settlement.' Mr Blackford said the scale of the UK's fiscal challenge was stark. The tax burden continues to rise, with the UK Government's own forecasts suggesting the tax-to-GDP ratio will hit 37.7% by 2027–28 — the highest level seen in peacetime Britain. The Office for Budget Responsibility has said this could rise to 38% later in the decade. Yet despite the record tax take, the UK Government is still struggling to balance the books. Public sector net debt now stands at £2.87 trillion — around 96.4% of GDP — the highest May debt-to-GDP ratio in modern times. Servicing that debt costs more than £100 billion a year, or roughly 3.9% of GDP. All of this is adding to the pressure on Chancellor Rachel Reeves, who has committed to not borrowing to fund day-to-day public spending, and to get debt falling as a share of GDP by 2029–30. She has limited choices following last week's U-turn on the welfare bill, which wiped out a projected £5bn saving. Labour has insisted it will keep its election promises not to increase income tax, National Insurance or VAT, but Ms Reeves has reportedly told Cabinet colleagues further hike may now be necessary in the Autumn Budget. According to the Institute for Fiscal Studies, the Chancellor may ultimately need to find an additional £25bn to £30bn by 2028 to avoid imposing deep cuts to public spending. Mr Blackford said there little chance of Ms Reeves scrapping her fiscal rules, and borrowing more. 'The financial markets will punish the Chancellor if she tries to increase borrowing, and she knows this,' he wrote. 'Put simply, the financial markets will largely determine the fate of the Chancellor and our fiscal future.' The prospect of a new Chancellor who might change the borrowing rules has already spooked the markets. When Ms Reeves was seen crying in the Commons at Prime Minister's Questions — after Sir Keir Starmer refused to back her — the pound fell against the dollar and the euro, while gilt yields soared. Rachel Reeves wipes away a tear during PMQsMr Blackford, a former investment banker, said: 'International comparisons make clear that investors impose a risk premium on UK debt. The current 10-year UK Government gilt yield is 4.5%. In Germany, it is 2.6%. In Switzerland, a modest 0.4%. Our neighbour Ireland has a rate of 2.8%. 'We are paying a price for the perception of investors of a lack of financial competence. We make jokes about Liz Truss and her cataclysmic approach to financial management, but her predecessors and successors hardly earn an A-plus.' Mr Blackford said the result would be a period of sustained pressure on public services across the UK, including in Scotland. 'For the public, the catastrophic failure to deliver an economic policy that supports sustainable growth has meant declining living standards,' he wrote. 'The last Westminster Parliament was the first in the post-war period during which living standards fell. I would not bet on this Parliament delivering a different outcome.' He also warned of the UK's limited ability to cope with any future economic shocks. 'Heaven help us if we face another external shock, given UK PLC's balance sheet. I shudder to think how the UK could finance another Covid-style crisis.' However, the bleak picture, he said, presented the SNP with an opportunity. 'Politics ought to be about hope. The SNP can seize the opportunity to paint a landscape showing how things could be different in Scotland,' he wrote. 'I have previously argued for the establishment of an industrial council. It is much needed. Or, if one is not to be established, the SNP at the very least needs to set out how it will drive a step change in investment, jobs and growth. 'We have the opportunity to drive economic opportunity from our massive potential in green energy — not green energy in itself, but using that power to create a sustainable green industrial future, building on our strategic opportunity to create a competitive advantage from affordable green energy. 'Doing our bit for net zero while creating the circumstances for a sustainable increase in economic growth.' Ian Blackford called on the SNP to look at establishing an Industrial CouncilMr Blackford argued that Scotland's ability to achieve this economic renewal was inextricably linked to the case for independence. 'When we talk about independence, it is not about an abstract concept. It is about transforming life chances. More of the same within the UK — low growth and public services under pressure — can be broken. 'The SNP needs to spell out how it can change the landscape and unlock economic growth by harnessing our natural resources and, of course, our human capital. There is a better way. It is up to our leaders to chart it.' Read more: Currently, around one-third of Scotland's budget comes via the Barnett formula, meaning UK Government spending decisions directly influence Holyrood's funding envelope. Last month, Ms Reeves set out her spending plans for the next three years, with the Scottish Government due to see a £9.1bn increase in funding during that period. A breakdown of the spending, released yesterday by the UK Government, showed that included a £5.8bn rise in health spending. Education consequentials were worth £2.1bn, while justice spending added £451m, housing and local government £380m, and transport £807m. Scottish Secretary Ian Murray hailed the increase, saying: 'The UK Government's Plan for Change has delivered the largest real terms settlement for the Scottish Government since devolution began in 1999, and ensured a definitive end to austerity in Scotland with £9.1bn more for the Scottish Government until the end of the decade. 'That's £9.1bn over and above record real terms budgets. 'That's more money than ever before for the Scottish Government to invest in Scottish public services like our NHS, police, housing and schools. 'It is for the Scottish Government to determine how it spends this money. 'It is notable, however, that almost £6bn of additional funding has been generated by health spending, and over £2bn has been generated by spending on education. 'Many Scots will expect to see better outcomes in their schools and hospitals given this record funding.' However, Scottish Finance Secretary Shona Robison said the settlement still left Scotland short-changed. 'The UK Spending Review document sets out in black and white that our funding for day-to-day spending is set to grow by only 0.8% over the next three years, compared with 1.2% average growth for UK Government departments,' she said. 'This will short-change us by £1.1bn. 'What's more, we face an estimated £400m shortfall from the UK Government's failure to fully fund their employer National Insurance increase.'
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Blackford: The markets are in charge now, not the Chancellor
We can debate how we got here. However, the harsh reality is that the Chancellor has the responsibility to chart a course off the current path. Given spending commitments and the lack of fiscal headroom, tax rises are coming again. Indeed, we now know that Rachel Reeves has told the Cabinet this. The pattern of the last few years is recurring, although tax rises cannot be matched by another increase in borrowing. The financial markets will punish the Chancellor if she tries to increase borrowing, and she knows this. Put simply, the financial markets will largely determine the fate of the Chancellor and our fiscal future. The consistent increase in tax and borrowing over the last 17 years is not sustainable. The party is over. We had the spending. Get set for the financial hangover. The Government's own forecasts suggest tax will rise to 37.7% of GDP by 2027–28, the highest tax-to-GDP ratio of all time. Higher and higher is not a compelling mantra. We ought to be focusing on how to turbocharge economic growth as a source of tax receipts, using growth receipts to invest in public spending and, over the longer term, seeking to pay down debt. What is missing is a material programme to drive up growth and investment. Where is the sense of urgency that recognises an acceleration of growth over a sustained period is the only way of improving finances and allowing for the investment in public services we all want to see? It is the lack of consistent, material economic growth over the last 17 years that led to increased Government spending as a shock absorber for the financial crisis, Covid, and the impact of the cost of living. That is what has resulted in today's high-debt, high-tax outcome. Heaven help us if we face another external shock, given UK PLC's balance sheet. I shudder to think how the UK could finance another Covid-style crisis. When Labour was last in power from 1997 to 2010, reasonable economic growth allowed for public sector investment to grow without increasing Government spending as a percentage of GDP. Indeed, the ratio fell from 37.4% of GDP to 36.3% of GDP between 1997 and 2007. The financial crisis of 2008 saw the Government having to stand behind the financial system, and by 2010 the debt ratio had increased to 70.3%. It has climbed continuously since, reaching 96.4% in May 2025, a record for any May, up from 95.9% the previous year. Never mind the ratio. Our debt now sits at a mouth-watering £2,867 billion and results in debt servicing costs of over £100 billion. That is a lot of cash that could have been invested in public services. International comparisons make clear that investors impose a risk premium on UK debt. The current 10-year UK Government gilt yield is 4.5%. In Germany, it is 2.6%. In Switzerland, a modest 0.4%. Our neighbour Ireland has a rate of 2.8%. We are paying a price for the perception of investors of a lack of financial competence. We make jokes about Liz Truss and her cataclysmic approach to financial management, but her predecessors and successors hardly earn an A-plus. The financial markets have delivered their judgment on UK PLC. We are all paying the price. High interest rates crowd out public spending and also have a knock-on effect for business borrowers. The UK pays a premium and a higher cost of capital — additional costs that feed into higher prices. If I were the Chancellor, I would be concentrating not just on the budget for the coming year but on addressing the structural weaknesses that are self-evident in the UK. Hoping for growth will not do. For the public, the catastrophic failure to deliver an economic policy that supports sustainable growth has meant declining living standards. The last Westminster Parliament was the first in the post-war period during which living standards fell. I would not bet on this Parliament delivering a different outcome. It is little wonder the Tories paid a price at the UK General Election. But what next if Labour fails to deliver in this Parliamentary cycle? With an increasingly discontented population, the potential for populist parties is plain to see. The rise of Reform ought to worry all of us in the mainstream parties. The threat of a Reform government cannot be discounted. What does this mean for Scotland? For the SNP Government, whose budget is largely based on Barnett consequentials, it means an ongoing squeeze on real-terms spending. The 2026 election will largely focus on devolved responsibilities, but the capacity to deliver over the next Parliament will be constrained by the UK financial settlement. Politics ought to be about hope. The SNP can seize the opportunity to paint a landscape showing how things could be different in Scotland. I have previously argued for the establishment of an industrial council. It is much needed. Or, if one is not to be established, the SNP at the very least needs to set out how it will drive a step change in investment, jobs, and growth. We have the opportunity to drive economic opportunity from our massive potential in green energy. Not green energy in itself, but using that power to create a sustainable green industrial future — building on our strategic opportunity to create a competitive advantage from affordable green energy. Doing our bit for net zero while creating the circumstances for a sustainable increase in economic growth. When we talk about independence, it is not about an abstract concept. It is about transforming life chances. More of the same within the UK — low growth and public services under pressure — can be broken. The SNP needs to spell out how it can change the landscape and unlock economic growth by harnessing our natural resources and, of course, our human capital. There is a better way. It is up to our leaders to chart it. Ian Blackford was SNP MP for Ross, Skye and Lochaber from 2015 to 2024, and served as the party's Westminster leader from 2017 to 2022.
