Responding to the Queen's Speech today, John Sauven, executive director of Greenpeace, said:

"This is the latest chapter in the government's shameful attempts to blight the UK with more nuclear power stations. They fully intend to use the Energy Bill to implement this farce without looking at cleaner alternatives, or dealing with any of the problems of waste and economics.

"Today we’ve seen Brown’s vision for the country, and it looks like a dark, dystopian disaster. These woeful plans mark him as a sorry shambles when it comes to dealing with energy and climate change."

Greenpeace won a High Court ruling in February which overturned an earlier consultation on nuclear power. Mr Justice Sullivan called that consultation "unfair" and "unlawful", adding that it was "seriously flawed" and "manifestly inadequate" because insufficient information had been made available by the government for participants to make an "intelligent response".

Greenpeace lawyers are currently examining the possibility of going back to court to challenge the second consultation.

For more information, contact the Greenpeace press office: 020 7865 8255

Environmental group says public "wilfully misled"; files official complaint over consultation process.

On the day before the Government's consultation on the future of nuclear power in the UK comes to an end, John Sauven, executive director of Greenpeace UK said:

"The Government has got it seriously wrong yet again. This consultation has been wilfully misleading, flawed, and its methods are now under investigation by the market research standards body. The only way the Government can make the case for new nuclear power is through misinformation and a liberal dose of spin. So much for Brown’s new politics."

Greenpeace has lodged an official complaint with the Market Research Standards Board (MRSB) which is investigating the public consultation held on 8th September. More information on the detail of this complaint can be found at the end of this press release. The company involved, Opinion Leader Research, is regularly used by Gordon Brown to carry out private polling on behalf of the Labour Party.

Sauven continued:

"It has been clear from the start of this consultation that the process was designed to deliver a preordained conclusion. We believe that the Government’s favourite polling company has failed to properly represent the facts surrounding nuclear power, including the liabilities that the taxpayer will inevitably face. It’s been a stitch-up from start to finish."

Nuclear power in the UK: recent timeline

• February 2003 – Energy White Paper promised not to change policy on new nuclear without the "fullest public consultation" (http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file10719.pdf).

• Patricia Hewitt (then at the DTI) tells the Commons "It would have been foolish to announce … that we would embark on a new generation of nuclear power stations because that would have guaranteed that we would not make the necessary investment and effort in both energy efficiency and in renewables. That is why we are not going to build a new generation of nuclear power stations now." House of Commons debate on Energy White Paper 2003, 24 February 2003, see Hansard; 24 February 2003.

• November 2005 – UK Energy Review & consultation on nuclear power launched (http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file31890.pdf / http://www.dti.gov.uk/files/file25079.pdf).

• July 2006 – Energy Review comes to an end. Government concludes: "nuclear power already accounts for almost a fifth of our electricity but this is likely to drop to just 6% by 2020. Our analysis suggests that, alongside other low carbon generating options, a new generation of nuclear power stations could make a contribution to reducing carbon emissions and reducing our reliance on imported energy," adding that it will set up "measures to facilitate new nuclear power stations" (http://www.britischebotschaft.de/en/news/items/060711a.htm).

• February 2007 – Greenpeace takes case against Government's decision to support new nuclear build to the High Court, arguing that their recent exercise was not the "fullest public consultation" they had promised in 2003.

(http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/blog/climate/governments-key-energy-review-on-trial).

• February 2007 – Mr Justice Sullivan rules in favour of Greenpeace, saying that the Government’s pro-nuclear decision was “unlawful.” In his Judgment he described the consultation as “seriously flawed” and “manifestly inadequate and unfair“ because insufficient and “misleading“ information had been made available by the government for consultees to make an “intelligent response.“ The Government are forced to reconsult on nuclear power (http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/MultimediaFiles/Live/FullReport/ERJRSullivanJudgement.pdf).

• On receiving news of our High Court victory, Tony Blair stated "that the decision won't affect the policy at all... If we don’t replace the existing nuclear power stations then I cannot see how we are going to meet our climate change targets". http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6366725.stm 16th February 2007


• May 2007 – Government launches another Energy White Paper (http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file39387.pdf) and a new consultation on the future of nuclear power (http://nuclearpower2007.direct.gov.uk/).

• September 2007 – Greenpeace and other NGOs officially pull out of the consultation process, claiming it is a stitch-up designed to rubber-stamp the Government’s pre-ordained policy to actively support new nuclear power stations (http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/media/reports/talking-nonsense-the-2007-consultation).

• October 2007 – Consultation on future of nuclear power officially ends on 10th October, with Government expected to announce a formal decision in November / December.

Quotes from the Government which appear to pre-judge the outcome of the nuclear consultation

• On receiving news of our High Court victory, Tony Blair stated "that the decision won’t affect the policy at all... If we don’t replace the existing nuclear power stations then I cannot see how we are going to meet our climate change targets". http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6366725.stm 16th February 2007

• On the Politics Show, 20th may, Alistair Darling stated “I believe that nuclear ought to be part of the mix…we’ve got to strike a sensible balance and I think including nuclear as an option would do that.” The Politics Show. 20th May 2006 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/politics_show/6660707.stm

• On the 4th July Gordon Brown stated to the H of C "that is why we have made the decision that we will continue with nuclear power, and that is why the security of our energy supply is best safeguarded by building a new generation of nuclear power stations" Official Report, 4 July 2007; Vol. 462, c. 955.

• At the Labour Party conference, Gordon Brown told the party faithful that he wanted the country to be leading the global economy "by our skills and creativity, by our enterprise and flexibility, by our investment in transport and infrastructure - a world leader in science; a world leader in financial and business services; a world leader in energy and the environment from nuclear to renewables".
http://www.world-nuclearnews.org/nuclearPolicies/Brown_calls
_for_UK_to_be_a_leader_on_nuclear_and_renewables-240907.shtml


The Greenpeace Complaint to the Market Research Standards Board

Greenpeace have lodged a complaint against Opinion Leader Research with to the Marketing Research Standards Council for breach of conduct concerning the 'Talking Energy' public consultations which took place in September 2007.

Opinion Leader Research, as a 'company partner' of the Market Research Society, is bound by the MRSC code of conduct and Greenpeace maintains that the consultation carried out by Opinion Leader Research (OLR) contained misleading and factually inaccurate information and asked participants leading questions.

For instance, one document given to attendees claimed that an advantage of nuclear power is that “it is substantially cheaper than wind generation”. Yet the Government’s own figures from the Energy White Paper published in 2003 show the exact opposite. Greenpeace has much more information on this complaint avaialbe to journalists.

For more information please contact the Greenpeace press office on 0207 865 8255.

Gordon Brown's public consultation on nuclear power is being fixed by the market research company carrying out the polling.

Channel 4 News reported tonight that twenty "senior academics" will be writing to the Government as they believe that the process was "deliberately skewed" and participants were "misled". Dr Paul Dorfman, a senior research fellow at the University of Warwick, said that questions put to the public were "framed in a particularly ambiguous way in order to get a particular answer". And someone involved in the process, who wished to remain anonymous, said they felt the Government's view was "bludgeoned" into the heads of the participants.

Polling carried out by Opinion Leader Research (OLR) contained deliberately misleading and factually inaccurate information and asked participants leading questions. As a result, Greenpeace has made an official complaint to the Market Research Standards Board.

OLR, who have pocketed millions of pounds worth of contracts from the Government, are now facing the possibility of an investigation by the official trade body.

An investigation could derail the Government's consultation on nuclear power, a process which they are legally obliged to carry out before building new nuclear power stations.

Earlier this year, Greenpeace won a High Court ruling which overturned an earlier consultation on nuclear power. Mr Justice Sullivan called the first consultation "manifestly unfair" and "unlawful", adding that it was "seriously flawed" and "manifestly inadequate" because insufficient information had been made available by the Government for participants to make an "intelligent response".

Greenpeace lawyers are now examining the possibility of going back to court to challenge the second consultation.

The polling took place at a number of venues around the UK on 8 September, when selected members of the public were asked their views on nuclear power. One document given to attendees claimed that an advantage of nuclear power is that "it is substantially cheaper than wind generation". Yet the Government's own figures from the Energy White Paper published in 2003 show the exact opposite.

Some participants apparently saw through the Government consultation; one contacted Greenpeace to say that she "left the event in Edinburgh feeling furious with the government's blatant marketing of nuclear power" and the "participants of 'Talking Energy' were pushed up against a wall so they had no choice but to support a new generation of nuclear power plants".

John Sauven, executive director of Greenpeace, said: "This so-called consultation on nuclear power is a complete charade designed to push through the Prime Minister's pre-ordained policy on nuclear power.

"When Brown became PM, he said he wanted a new and different kind of conversation with the public. It's now clear that this self-styled conversation consists of a bullying monologue based on shockingly skewed information."

Greenpeace and other environmental groups pulled out of the consultation a fortnight ago, calling it a "sham". They have today been followed by the Public and Commercial Services union (PCS).

PCS union opposes any Government proposals to build another generation of nuclear power stations in the UK and believes the Government should be pursuing renewable energy as a legitimate option for UK's energy needs.

PCS assistant general secretary Chris Baugh said: "It is clear that the government is determined to push ahead with new nuclear power regardless of what people in this country think. The only conclusion we can draw is that the government‘s only concern is pandering to the multi-million pound nuclear lobby and ensuring they meet the timescales of the private companies that stand to benefit from contracts to build new nuclear power stations."

For more information contact the Greenpeace press office: 020 7865 8255.

You can see the full Greenpeace complaint and the letter from the Edinburgh participant here.

In 2006 the Government initiated an Energy Review with the aim of producing a new Energy White Paper by the end of that year. The issue of whether or not the UK should build new nuclear power stations was high up the agenda. However, the way in which the government then proceeded to consult on nuclear power drew heavy criticism from a range of parties. It looked as though the government had already made up its mind on the issue of nuclear power and the consultation was mere window dressing.

After losing a High Court challenge the Government was obliged to re-consult comprehensively on nuclear power prior to making decisions to allow or support new build. As a matter of law the Government must keep an open mind on new nuclear power until after the “fullest public consultation.” While the NGOs have always been absolutely committed to taking part in a balanced and open consultation that will actually shape policy, it is has now become clear that the Government has already made up its mind on building new nuclear power stations and that this new consultation is nothing more than an expensive and time consuming sham.

Here's why.