Disappointing news on the Supreme Court Appeal. 14.05.24

Together Against Sizewell C LTD are extremely disappointed to advise that our application for an appeal hearing at the Supreme Court has been denied. However, the fact remains the same – Sizewell C, which is situated in the driest drought-prone region of the country, still has no guaranteed sustainable mains water supply essential for its slated 60 years of operation and the full environmental impacts of getting mains water to the site are yet to be assessed. Although it may have been deemed lawful to build a nuclear power station without a mains water supply and whose sister project, Hinkley Point C, is now expected to cost £46 billion, one must not only question the UK’s planning system but also this government’s logic to have already ploughed £2.5 billion of taxpayer funds into a project as risky as Sizewell C.

Those following our journey through the courts may recall our Ground 6 argument that the Secretary of State “acted irrationally in concluding the site would be clear of nuclear material by 2140…”. Despite that claim being dismissed in the High Court, TASC’s position has now been vindicated by SZC Ltd admitting, during East Suffolk Council’s (ESC) review of the applications to discharge DCO Requirements 12 and 19, that 2160 is the expected date for spent fuel to be removed from site. SZC Ltd only admitted to the 2160 date after pressure from ESC which in turn was because of TASC’s representations to ESC – it is somewhat disconcerting that it has taken the persistence of a campaign group to establish the full lifetime of the SZC nuclear site and we questions why, during the DCO examination, our argument over the full lifetime of the site was not supported by the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) and Environment Agency, our chief nuclear regulators. TASC have taken this matter up with the planning inspectorate.

TASC are appalled that the ONR recently granted a Nuclear Site Licence (NSL) for Sizewell C, sited on one of Europe’s fastest eroding coastlines, (see our press release). This is despite the flood risk modelling and therefore the site safety case having only been carried out to 2140, even though the ONR are aware spent fuel will remain on site till at least 2160, and the final design of the sea defences has been scoped out of the NSL assessment. Prior to the grant of the NSL, TASC wrote to the ONR expressing our concerns.

TASC are extremely grateful to all those who have continued to support our campaign, we could not have got this far without you.

The uncertainties around funding, lack of permits and growing local opposition offer many opportunities which we are exploring. TASC are reviewing our options, and we are certainly not giving up.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Pete Wilkinson, TASC’s deputy Chair, has recently had an article about Sizewell C published in the East Anglia Bylines magazine LINK

“The tragedy is that nuclear is now a redundant technology which takes too long to come to our climate-change rescue and is not fit to be in the front-line of defence against climate change. It does not represent a plan of great urgency to meet the accelerating existential threats of climate change.”

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

22.01.24

Excellent news! Our legal team recommend we fight on and apply to take the legal challenge against Sizewell C to the Supreme Court.

Together Against Sizewell C (TASC) joined with supporters Stop Sizewell C and Suffolk Coastal Friends of the Earth to issue a joint statement:

 “With Ministers greenlighting deeply flawed Sizewell C, despite no identified operational water supply, no acceptable design of sea defences necessary to keep the site safe for 100-plus years, ignoring warnings of climate change related extreme weather events and the need to build resilient and sustainable infrastructure, we are delighted our legal team are taking the Sizewell C fight to the Supreme Court. It is the government’s decision to drive a bulldozer through East Suffolk by triggering Sizewell C’s construction when it has no nuclear site licence, no Final Investment Decision or transparency about how much the project will cost or who might pay for it, that has forced us to take our case to the highest court in the land.”

Unfortunately, we again need your help and call on your support as we strive to raise the £8,000 needed to cover this stage of the legal proceedings. We really could not have got this far without your generosity and are extremely grateful for any contribution you can make to help us meet these costs – see our Crowd Justice fundraiser.

The Leigh Day Press Release 22nd January 2024 follows:-

Campaigners apply for Supreme Court appeal in fight against Sizewell C Nuclear Power Station
Undeterred campaigners will fight on and bid to take their legal challenge against the Sizewell C Nuclear Power Station to the Supreme Court.

Together Against Sizewell C Limited (TASC) is refusing to admit defeat after Court of Appeal judges ruled that the issue of a permanent water supply and public interest in the development was not enough to derail the project in law.
TASC went to the Court of Appeal after its judicial review of then Business Secretary Kwasi Kwarteng’s 2022 decision to give development consent to the 3.2 gigawatt power station was dismissed. Mr Kwarteng gave permission for the power station against the advice of the planning Examining Authority and TASC brought a range of arguments about the need for a water supply to make the project sustainable in the Suffolk Coast and Heaths Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

Now, represented by the environment team at law firm Leigh Day, plus barristers David Wolfe KC (Matrix), Ashley Bowes (Landmark) and Ruchi Parekh (Cornerstone), TASC has applied to the Supreme Court for permission to bring an appeal.

TASC says it is clear a desalination plant will be needed to guarantee a permanent water supply of two million litres per day for Sizewell C. However, the environmental impact of acquiring such a supply was not included in the planning application for the nuclear power plant and therefore was neither assessed nor taken into account by the Business Secretary.
TASC said the issue of a water supply should not have been treated as a separate issue to the power plant application which EDF claims will produce electricity for 60 years in the heart of Suffolk Coast and Heaths Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
TASC say the company could at any time have decided to proceed with a desalination plant but, instead, chose to keep open the option of a supply provided by Northumbrian Water Ltd (NWL). Also, it is put that if Sizewell C did rely on NWL for its potable water, the scale and location of the power station would necessitate additional infrastructure and the impacts of this, including harm to sites of vulnerable habitat protected by European (now domestic) law, have not been assessed.

Together Against Sizewell C (TASC) joined with supporters Stop Sizewell C and Suffolk Coastal Friends of the Earth to issue a joint statement: [as above]

Leigh Day solicitor Rowan Smith said:
“Fundamentally, our client is arguing that, without a permanent water supply, Sizewell C cannot operate, so the environmental impacts of sourcing that water needed to be assessed before development consent was given. The failure to do so was made even worse, so they say, given Suffolk is in drought and has vulnerable habitats, which need to be protected. We sincerely hope the Supreme Court grants permission to appeal for this decision to be looked at again.” 

TASC is fundraising towards the costs of the legal challenge.
For more information contact Leigh Day press office at pressoffice@leighday,co.uk