| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Tombs: My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for that reply. Is he aware that his right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Scotland wrote to me on 4th November stating:
- "A review was programmed for 1996 because it was recognised that there might be a case for a more permanent scheme if outstanding results emerged".
Lord Henley: My Lords, as I believe the noble Lord will be aware, when we set up the scheme we were aware that there would be a certain amount of dead weight in such a scheme, which would attract people who were already going into engineering anyway. He will also be aware that we agreed to review the scheme after two years because that was the appropriate time. To review it after three years, when the scheme had ended, would have caused a hiccup before a new scheme came into operation, should a new scheme be considered wise. Having evaluated the scheme last year, we considered that it had not performed effectively enough in terms of attracting new engineering undergraduates. Therefore, it was not serving a valuable purpose for the considerable sums of money--about £13 million over its lifetime--which will have been spent.
Baroness Platt of Writtle: My Lords, does my noble friend agree that, as stated in Realising Our Potential, innovative engineers are the most important ingredient of wealth-creating industry? Therefore, it is important to continue to encourage, as the Top Flight Bursaries Scheme did, bright young people to go into the profession of engineering. Does he not agree that stopping the scheme gives the wrong message? Will he consider reinstating the scheme, perhaps on a modified basis, in order to continue to encourage bright young people into the profession?
Lord Henley: My Lords, I agree with my noble friend about the importance of engineering. However, in the end the prime incentives for attracting an individual into a profession will be the pay and status of that profession. I believe that my noble friend will recognise that those are not, and should not be, matters for the Government; they have to be addressed by the profession itself.
In recognising the importance of engineering, we are involved in a number of other schemes to attract engineering students in order to promote engineering generally. However, we do not believe that this scheme represents good value for money.
Lord Morris of Castle Morris: My Lords, what do the Government think they are at? There is surely no question but that there is a serious shortfall of first-rate engineering students in our universities and colleges and there has been for a long time. How do the Government now expect to attract students to the sciences--by abolishing successful incentives to students to become engineers? Is not the decision to scrap the Top Flight Bursaries Scheme just short-sighted cost-cutting, which will do nothing to meet the problem of dwindling numbers of science graduates for British industry and for the university science base?
Lord Henley: My Lords, I totally reject the rather over-stated point put by the noble Lord. Some third of all students at our universities are now studying engineering, science or mathematics. Further, that is a considerable number, as over the years we have been in power the number of people entering higher education has doubled and doubled again, which is something we can be proud of. As I made clear to my noble friend, we have done a great deal to encourage people into the engineering profession, but even the noble Lord would accept that the prime responsibility for attracting people into any given profession will be the pay and status of that profession--and those are matters not for the Government but for the profession itself.
Lord Taylor of Blackburn: My Lords, what discussions has the Minister had with the Engineering Council and other engineering associations on this subject, because they do not tell us the story that he is telling us today?
Lord Henley: My Lords, obviously we discussed the matter with the Engineering Council. I understand that it was disappointed with our decision to end the scheme,
but it has not lobbied for any reinstatement. We have discussed the matter with other colleagues in government. We have worked well and closely with the Engineering Council over the years. It has been administering the scheme and has agreed to continue to do so for the remainder of its life.Nuclear Waste: Underground Disposal
2.51 p.m.
Viscount Hanworth asked Her Majesty's Government:
- When they will be able to announce their decision regarding the application by Nirex for a site in Cumbria for the underground disposal of nuclear waste.
The Minister of State, Department of the Environment (Earl Ferrers): My Lords, Nirex has not made an application for the underground disposal of nuclear waste. Its application is to develop a rock characterisation facility. A decision will be made as soon as possible.
Viscount Hanworth: My Lords, I thank the noble Earl for that elucidating reply. Will he give us some assessment of the hazards involved in simply allowing waste to accumulate in temporary storage, as has happened over the duration of the present Administration?
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, high level waste is stored in a glass box and has to be kept above ground for some 50 years in order to cool down--rather like the Opposition, if I might say so. Intermediate level waste at sites is solid; some is set in concrete--rather like the Opposition, if I might say so--and remains dangerous for hundreds of thousands of years--rather like the Opposition, if I might say so.
The Lord Bishop of Carlisle: My Lords, in coming to a decision, will the Minister bear in mind the sustained opposition of Cumbria County Council to this proposal, opposition which has not been in any way diminished by the recently leaked memo from Dr. Holmes, which includes these words:
- "we conclude that a Basic Under Sedimentary Cover type site is inherently not characterisable to the requisite level",
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, the right reverend Prelate is right to draw attention to the opposition of Cumbria County Council. My right honourable friend the Secretary of State is writing today to those who attended the inquiry, inviting them to comment (if they have any comments) on the memorandum. He will take those comments, and the views of Cumbria County Council, into account when he makes his decision.
Lord Jenkin of Roding: My Lords, is it not a fact that nothing was disclosed in that document which was not the subject of extensive investigation and inquiry at the public inquiry? There is nothing new in it. Is not the purpose of the exercise to establish the truth about the characteristics of the rock formation? Is it not the case that if the rock formation is not suitable, the project will be abandoned, and that if the rock formation is found to be suitable, there will be another public inquiry which will go into the whole question of whether radioactive waste should be deposited there?
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, obviously there was concern when the memorandum was leaked. Therefore, it is appropriate that my right honourable friend should ask those who attended the inquiry whether they have any comments to make upon that leaked memorandum. My right honourable friend will take account of the comments that are made as well as the facts of the inquiry when he makes up his mind.
Lord Elis-Thomas: My Lords, can the Minister tell us what recent discussions he has had with the Government of the Irish Republic on this issue, bearing in mind that they made strong representations at the time of the public inquiry?
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, my right honourable friend will also take into account the views of the Irish Republic when he makes his decision.
Lord Ezra: My Lords, we must all be indebted to the noble Earl for having explained that the application currently before the Secretary of State is for a laboratory, not a depository. If the Secretary of State decided that he did not want Nirex to go ahead with the construction of the laboratory, would we then be advised of the Government's views on how the problem will be dealt with ultimately?
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, we should take one step at a time. The application is for a rock characterisation facility. If my right honourable friend the Secretary of State declines to give that consent, Nirex will have to reconsider its position and its proposals.
Lord Williams of Elvel: My Lords, is it not the case that the rock characterisation facility that is proposed will not contain at any point any radioactive waste or any other radioactive material?
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, my understanding of the position is that the rock characterisation facility will involve setting into the rock two shafts some 650 metres deep. The rock characterisation facility will be there in order to see what the rock is like and in order to set up a laboratory in order to see what the rock is like.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page