nuclear-news

NEA cannot make publicity it is hosting an international meeting on stakeholder engagement, but only allow well-resourced stakeholders to participate, having allocated no budget line for accommodation or travel for civil society organisations (CSOs).

Initially, NEA refused to reveal which Civil Society / NGO groups had shown up to participate, because – I believe – they were embarrassed that so few were there. Aside from representatives of civil society groups invited (and remunerated) as speakers, there was virtually no civil society representation. The final list of attendees, released after four months of pressure from me, shows the balance of participants was about 95% pro nuclear institutional interests, 5% civil society or non-aligned interested parties. To label such an imbalanced event a “Stakeholder Engagement” meeting is an abuse of language.

The nuclear industry cannot be allowed to pretend they believe in transparency, then practice secrecy, as NEA did in this sorry saga. Because, like a dog with a bone, I refused to let go in this, I finally forced disclosure. But this should have come automatically.

NEA needs to learn the lessons: the first is, it needs to abide by the dictionary definition of transparency, and deliver it in future!  http://www.nuclear-transparency-watch.eu/activities/transparency-and-public-participation/nuclear-energy-agencys-janus-like-approach-to-nuclear-transparency-a-case-study-in-obstruction.html