Sizewell C investors set to cash in and leave taxpayers to foot the bill, Public Accounts Committee (PAC)warns

“The high level of risk borne by taxpayers and consumers for the construction of Sizewell C is extraordinary”

28 October 2026, https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/127/public-accounts-committee/news/218492/sizewell-c-investors-set-to-cash-in-and-leave-taxpayers-to-foot-the-bill-pac-warns/

The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) is raising the alarm over the substantial financial contribution and risk borne by UK taxpayers and consumers in the construction of Sizewell C.

Read the report

The UK has found itself in this position due to the poor record of delivering nuclear projects. The PAC believes it is crucial that the UK government seizes this opportunity to demonstrate it can break that track record to ensure that they never have to accept such poor terms again. Delivering Sizewell C on time and on budget would set the Government on much stronger footing for future deals, and ensure the financial risks of any future schemes can be distributed more fairly.

Sizewell C will cost between £40.5bn and £47.7bn and is expected to finish construction between 2039 and 2043. The design has previously been used in France, Finland and China and is currently being used in the UK for the construction at Hinkley Point C. Despite assurances that using this design will reduce risks, it has a poor international delivery record, with a clear pattern of significant delays and substantial cost escalations. No comparable nuclear power station anywhere in the world has been built on time and to budget.

The project’s novel delivery model means the public will provide most of the financing and bear most of the risk. However, the Government has relinquished majority control to a delivery body primarily owned by private investors. The PAC is therefore deeply concerned that if costs exceed projections, as they are likely to, private investors will only have to provide an additional £30m compared to an additional £9.8bn paid by consumers during construction and £12 billion over the 60-year operating contract through higher energy bills.

This raises concerns about whether investor incentives are strong enough to promote efficient delivery. As the Government’s ability to intervene directly is likely to be constrained, the PAC has serious concerns about whether the public interest will be protected. The Department should set out how it intends to protect consumers and taxpayers, and monitor and evaluate the success of this approach.

Similarly, at the end of the plant’s operational lifetime, if decommissioning costs rise above the level of funds set aside by Sizewell C Ltd, taxpayers will be called upon to cover the shortfall. The PAC is calling for Funded Decommissioning Programme reports to be published every five years, including how funds compare to expected decommissioning costs.

The total added value to the UK economy during construction could reach £26.6bn and is expected to generate significant local and national economic benefits to UK businesses. The Government must set out how it will ensure that Sizewell C meets its target of 70% of construction spend in the UK and that associated jobs remain in the UK.

Current plans to report once a year are inadequate for a project with such significant exposure for taxpayers and consumers. Reporting more frequently could help to identify emerging risks more quickly which should result in more cost-effective solutions. The Committee is calling for reports to be published every six months and for them to be transparent and accessible, containing details of expected impacts on consumer bills and forecast investor returns.

Chair quote

Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown MP, Chair of the Public Accounts Committee, said: “The high level of risk borne by taxpayers and consumers for the construction of Sizewell C is extraordinary. Private investors look set for significant returns on their investments, while customers are likely to be saddled with higher energy bills. The government must focus on the successful delivery of this project, not just of a new nuclear power station, but of a commercially derisked nuclear sector for a taxpayer that should never be put in this position again. The history of the Sizewell C deal risks being one of missed opportunities for the taxpayer; for example, the mapping of the Hinkley designs onto the current project the point is they did it rather than going out into the world to see if there was a better cheaper design.

“Our Committee has previously raised concerns of poor workplace cultures at other civil nuclear sites. Though we welcome the steps already taken by Sizewell C Ltd to prevent these issues from taking root, it is not yet clear if this will be enough. The construction should give a welcome boost to the UK’s economy and have a significant positive impact on the local area; it will be up to the Government to turn this into a lasting legacy, rather than a relatively short-lived boost.”