10 Safety of nuclear installations
| Committee's assessment
| Politically important
|
| Committee's decision
| Cleared from scrutiny (resolution of the House of 20 January 2014); further information now received
|
| Document details
| Directive to establish a Community framework for the nuclear safety of nuclear installations
|
| Legal base
| Articles 31 and 32 Euratom; consultation; QMV
|
| Department
| Energy and Climate Change
|
Summary and Committee's conclusions
10.1 Although the overall safety record
of nuclear power plants within the EU is good, the European Council
decided in the wake of the Fukushima accident that the EU should
review its legislation in this area. This led the Commission to
produce in June 2013 a draft Council Directive, which the
Government regarded as unduly prescriptive and as encroaching
on the responsibilities of Member States. That draft was subsequently
adopted as this formal proposal for a Council Directive, which
thus gives raise to very similar concerns. In view of this, we
recommended it for debate in European Committee A (which duly
took place on 20 January 2014).
10.2 We have recently been informed
by the Government that agreement has been reached in the Council
on a text which now meets all the UK's concerns, and in particular
respects the current balance of competence between the Commission
and Member States, without presenting any new or unnecessary burdens
for the nuclear sector.
10.3 As this proposal deals with
an area of some importance, we think it right — notwithstanding
the clearance provided by virtue of the debate in European Committee
in January 2014 — to draw the latest position to the attention
of the House, and in particular the fact that the text agreed
by the Council meets all the UK's earlier concerns.
Full details of the
document: Draft Council Directive
amending Directive 2009/71/Euratom establishing a Community framework
for the nuclear safety of nuclear installations: (35408), 15030/13+
ADDs 1-4, COM(13) 715.
Background
10.4 Although the responsibility for
the safety of nuclear installations rests with Member States,
Article 30 of the Euratom Treaty provides for the protection of
the health of workers and the general public against ionising
radiation, and the relevant provisions are set out in Council
Directive 96/29/Euratom. Also, after the European Court of Justice
had ruled that the Community also shared competences with the
Member States in areas covered by the Convention on Nuclear Safety,
the Council eventually adopted Directive 2009/71/Euratom, which
requires Member States to have an appropriate national legislative,
regulatory and organisational framework for licensing nuclear
installations, and for nuclear safety supervision and enforcement.
10.5 Although the overall safety record
of the nuclear power plants within the EU is good, the European
Council decided in March 2011, in the wake of the Fukushima accident,
that these should each be subjected to a "stress test",
and that the EU should review its nuclear safety legislative framework.
This led the Commission to produce in June 2013 a draft
Council Directive,[52]
which would apply to all stages in the lifecycle of nuclear installations,
and seek to strengthen the role and effective independence of
the national regulatory authorities; enhance transparency on nuclear
safety matters; introduce new general nuclear safety objectives
and requirements, addressing specific technical issues, such as
the siting of nuclear installations, hazard assessment and design
review; reinforce monitoring and exchange of experiences, by means
of a European system of peer reviews; and establish a means for
developing EU-wide harmonised nuclear safety guidelines.
10.6 As we noted in our Report of 17
July 2013, the Government said that, where there was robust evidence
to support change, it would work to achieve this, but that this
proposal demonstrated insufficient evidence to support the need
for legislative changes. Instead, it would add considerable prescription
to the existing arrangements, and hence appeared to be inconsistent
with the role of Member States as contemplated by Article 33 of
the Euratom Treaty in relation to implementation of Directives.
More specifically, the proposal would result in an increased role
for the Commission; appeared to be politically, rather than safety,
driven; and could undermine the independence of national nuclear
safety regulators.
10.7 In October 2013, the Commission
adopted its earlier draft as this formal proposal for a Council
Directive, and, as the Government's Explanatory Memorandum made
clear, this gave rise to very much the same considerations as
regards the degree of prescription and the encroachment on matters
properly falling within the competence of Member States. Also,
the impact assessment provided by the Commission failed to highlight
the fact that no EU nuclear power plant had had to be closed down
as a result of safety concerns, or to demonstrate the benefits
of the proposed change to the Nuclear Safety Directive.
10.8 We commented in our Report of 20
November 2013 that the Commission remained wedded to an approach
which contained a number of elements of significant concern, and
still proposed to impose on Member States in an area of considerable
political and environmental importance constraints regarded as
unacceptable by the UK. In view of this, we said that the proposal
raised issues which it would be right for the House to consider
at an early opportunity, and we therefore recommended it for debate
in European Committee A (which duly took place on 20 January 2014).
Minister's letter of 24 June 2014
10.9 We have now received from the Parliamentary
Under-Secretary of State at the Department for Energy and Climate
Change (Baroness Verma of Leicester) a letter of 24 June 2014,
in which she says that negotiations at official level have now
been concluded, and that it is envisaged that the Council will
adopt the proposal on 8 July.
10.10 The Minister also says that all
of the UK's redlines have been addressed as a result of these
negotiations. In particular, the amendments to the Directive are
restricted to making explicit what was implicit in the 2009 Directive;
the current balance of competence between the Commission and Member
States has been respected; and the amended Directive does not
present any new and unnecessary burdens for the nuclear sector.
At the same time, she notes the amended Directive will enable
Member States to better deliver the objective of continuous improvement
to nuclear safety standards and also introduces a system of peer
review — not too dissimilar to the EU Stress test —
which will be led by Member States to ensure the sharing of knowledge
and the consideration of technical issues that will help ensure
nuclear safety.
10.11 The Minister concludes by saying
that, due to the success of the negotiations, she expects that
the UK will be able to implement the amended Directive without
the need to make any significant changes to its regulatory regime.
Previous Committee Reports
Twenty-third Report HC 83-xxi (2013-14),
chapter 1 (20 November 2013).
52 (35063) 11064/13: see Twelfth Report HC 83-xii
(2013-14), chapter 2 (17 July 2013). Back
| 
