Why the Nuclear Regulatory Review matters for Sussex

By Laura Brook

Head of Nature Recovery

Last week I and fellow nature recovery team member, Atticus Kidd, headed to London, to attend an event at Parliament to discuss the Nuclear Regulatory Review. 

Now this may not feel like it has a connection to you or Sussex, but it absolutely does.

Hot on the heels of the bruising Government attacks on nature last year, we have seen another review published, providing the same troubling narrative that we need to weaken protections for some of our most precious places for nature, all in the name of speeding up growth. 

First called the Fingleton Review, and now referred to as the Nuclear Regulatory Review, it makes some concerning recommendations. 

Recommendations 11 & 12 involve making significant amendments to the Habitat Regulations, which would allow developers to skip the process of assessing the likely impacts on nature and go straight to compensation, without even knowing the exact details of the damage being done or the impact it will have. Worse still, this payment would not be specific to the needs of those species and habitats being harmed, but instead go into a general Nature Restoration Fund.

Meanwhile recommendation 19 proposes removing the duty on local authorities to advance the conservation and public access purposes of National Parks and National Landscapes - pushing in the opposite direction to the one we need these places to go in if we are to turn around the decline of nature.

Not just nuclear

Although the review first focused on nuclear energy, the Prime Minister's endorsement of the recommendations has seen him suggest that they could now be rolled out to wider industrial strategy, and he has instructed Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, Ed Miliband, to make it policy.

This latest pincer movement on nature has again seen environmental advocates come together to raise our concerns with MPs and members of the House of Lords. It feels like we need a monumental shift in Government, and that means questioning some fundamental assumptions. 

Among the excellent speakers at the parliamentary event was Debbie Tann, CEO of Hampshire and Isle of Wight Wildlife Trust. Not only did Debbie highlight the grave errors in the report relating to wildlife, she posed some questions we all need to start talking about: When the Government talks about growth, what is that growth for, and who is it benefitting? Is it about a sustainable, resilient future that supports people and nature - or is it purely about GDP figures?

While it might all seem like abstract discussion locked away in Whitehall, the reality is that Sussex has many places that could be affected by weakening standards in the ways being proposed. 

We have protected landscapes such as South Downs National Park and the High Weald, and protected areas such as Ebernoe, Pevensey Levels, the Lewes Downs, the Arun Valley, Chichester Harbour, Ashdown Forest and Rye Harbour. All of these, and more, are embedded in the very heart of our ambitions for wider nature recovery, which we so desperately need.

If the review's ideas progress to actual policy, it spells real danger for places we know and love here in Sussex. 

Ed Miliband needs to hear from us all

Right now, these are recommendations, and we have time to stop them - but we need to act together and fast.

Please take our simple action to send an email to Ed Miliband, the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, and help to stop this in its tracks.

We know so many of us are feeling bruised after the Planning & Infrastructure Bill, but unlike that Bill, the Nuclear Regulatory Review recommendations are just proposals at this stage.

This is our chance to defend the Habitat Regulations and protect our National Parks and special places.

Let's stop this together.