UK « nuclear-news

UK nuclear industry in lobbying blitz ahead of Scottish election

THE UK nuclear industry ramped up its lobbying of MSPs ahead of the Holyrood
election, the Sunday National can reveal. An investigation based on the
Scottish Parliament’s lobbying register has revealed that activity has
reached an all-time high, with industry groups, business organisations and
unions increasingly looking to reverse the Scottish Government’s
opposition to the building of new nuclear power stations.

In 2025, 32 MSPs
were lobbied across 14 separate meetings – the highest levels recorded to
date. Compared to the previous year, this was more than three times the
number of MSPs lobbied and almost double the number of distinct meetings.

So far in 2026, 12 MSPs have already been lobbied across seven separate
meetings in the run-up to polling day on May 7. The majority of recent
lobbying has been carried out by the Nuclear Industry Association, which
held a series of meetings with MSPs in Holyrood in 2026.

On March 24, 2026,
representatives from the association met several Labour and Tory MSPs. The
discussions focused on the role of nuclear energy and calls to reverse the
Scottish Government’s opposition to new nuclear development.

At another
meeting on February 20, 2026, the association spoke to Tory MSP Douglas
Ross, raising the “importance” of nuclear power to Scotland’s energy
future. The register also showed involvement from other organisations. On
February 25, 2026, for example, the trade union Prospect met with Net Zero
Secretary Gillian Martin to raise concerns from its members about the
future of the energy sector, including nuclear.

The French state-owned
energy company EDF Energy, which owns and operates Torness nuclear power
station, also lobbied 20 MSPs in 2025. Patrick Harvie from the Scottish
Greens said: “The nuclear industry may be a cash cow for lobbyists, but we
don’t need or want it in Scotland. “We cannot afford to waste time or money
on a costly and unsustainable energy source that will take years to go
online while leaving a toxic legacy for future generations. “If we are to
have a cleaner and greener future, it needs to be based on the vast
renewable resources that we already have in abundance rather than a dated
and dangerous false solution like nuclear.”

The National 26th April 2026, https://www.thenational.scot/news/26052414.uk-nuclear-industry-lobbying-blitz-ahead-scottish-election/

April 29, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Epstein’s evil legacy destroys everything it touches. Everything except Palantir

f Palantir were a person, it would be a much worse person than either Peter Mandelson or the deceased paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein. And yet the Labour government continues to welcome Palantir to manage our NHS, military and financial data, spewing all our personal details into its cauldron of weaponisable knowledge.

Mandelson, and by extension Starmer, are tainted by proximity to the abuse scandal. But the paedophile was a close associate of Peter Thiel too. Why don’t we talk about that?

Stewart Lee, Apr 25, 2026, https://www.thenerve.news/p/stewart-lee-column-palantir-manifesto-epstein-peter-thiel-alex-karp-mandelson?utm_source=www.thenerve.news&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=weekend-edition-palantir-special-stewart-lee-gwenno&_bhlid=1a3d9f40d08525d6188cc53c8a1c959336f9859c

The American tech firm Palantir, which uses its data hoard to provide tech support for ICE’s violent street goons and the bombing of Iranian girls’ schools, has just issued a terse manifesto – “The Technological Republic” – basically outlining its plans to turn the world into a fascist technocracy, bent on neutralising “regressive cultures”, enfranchising right-leaning male voters at the expense of educated liberal female voters, and muttering darkly of the errors made in reining in the power of post-Nazi Germany. I thought we all agreed at the time that this was a good thing, what with the Holocaust and that? We’re all worried about antisemitism aren’t we? Did I miss the memo on this, as they say in American sitcoms?

The Palantir manifesto’s cryptically fascist reappraisal of the “postwar neutering” of Nazi Germany makes the company’s decision to appoint the perma-smirking grandson of the British fascist leader Oswald Mosley, Louis Mosley, as its British head look less like carelessness and more like someone holding your head under the duvet and farting in your face just because they can. Take that!

Oddly, the London listing app Time Out significantly softened a joke about Louis Mosley and Palantir in a piece I wrote for it this week, about a fun walk around Hackney, which included the site where, in 1962, Louis’s Nazi grandad Oswald Mosley and his then-fascist father Max Mosley were knocked to the ground outside Ridley Road market by Jewish and antifascist protesters. It seems Palantir’s intimidating shadow even extends to the realm of recreational historical hiking. Rest assured any Leisure Walking Route I submit to the Nerve will remain resolutely politically independent. If only one of the Hackney Jews had booted Max Mosley really hard in his Nazi nuts too, maybe Palantir wouldn’t currently have a British head of operations.

“It’s the kind of market dominance thing Apple did with making you have to buy their special plugs, but applied to missiles, snatch squads and gulags“

Palantir’s CEO, Alex Karp, has posited, openly and unashamedly, the necessity of a warlike American surveillance state, which Palantir would essentially profit hugely from servicing with its own warlike surveillance technologies. It’s the kind of monopolised market dominance thing Apple did with making you have to buy their own special plugs, but applied to missiles, snatch squads and gulags.

And it makes Nigel Farage’s attempts to profit from the cryptocurrencies he uses his political platform to promote look rather quaint, like a child stealing some Blackjack chews from the newsagent sweet racks while Mr Knuckles arrives in a ski mask, shoots the shopkeeper in the face and makes off with the till, the choicest porn mags and all the worst fags.

If Palantir were a person, it would be a much worse person than either Peter Mandelson or the deceased paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein. And yet the Labour government continues to welcome Palantir to manage our NHS, military and financial data, spewing all our personal details into its cauldron of weaponisable knowledge. There are lonely old ladies scammed by people pretending to be down on their luck, who just need a few hundred thousand to free up their family funds, with better noses for decidedly dodgy dodginess.

And when Nigel Farage gets elected by millions of angry morons and, like Trump, starts coming for immigrants, Muslims, pro-choice campaigners, academics, journalists, teachers, cartoonists, and in the end even people your racist Facebook auntie rather likes, like that nice transgender woman over the road with the cats, Palantir will be only too happy to provide Farage’s snatch squads with all their personal details, as it already does for Farage’s best friend Donald Trump, “the bravest man” he knows.

But Palantir is fine, apparently, despite the fact that its founder Peter Thiel met Epstein many times after his child sex trafficking conviction and invested heavily in his venture capital company, in a deal which netted the dead paedophile $130m, none of which was included in the sum divided into restitutive payments to his victims. Perhaps Palantir’s Peter Thiel can top the paedo payments up with some of his personal wealth of $29.3bn.

Thiel’s $29.3bn is a sum which makes you realise managing the NHS for pocket money can’t really be about the cash. Palantir’s fascist vision of the future doesn’t need to be funded by turning the British public health system upside down like a sleeping tramp and shaking the loose change from its threadbare pockets into a top hat. But the data it provides is worth its digital weight in digital gold if you are aiming to TAKE OVER THE FUCKING WORLD!!!

And Farage is fine as well, of course, despite the fact that he and his American mentor Steve Bannon both appear in the Epstein files because Bannon was working with Epstein on how to fund his pan-European fascist aggregator, The Movement. Never mind. Protect our women and girls!!! But only from brown people. Bernard Manning! Bernard Manning!! Bernard Manning!!!

Proximity to Mandelson or Epstein can prove politically toxic, ending careers and ruining reputations. But not for everyone. It seems there’s one law for Epstein-adjacent people and institutions on the left and quite another for everyone else. Double standards anyone? We’ve got loads!

Years ago now, the TV dramatist Graham Duff told me that Mark E Smith, the now late lead singer of enduring Manchester post-punk thing the Fall, had asked him to help him write a play. Its working title? The Death of Standards. How I would love to have seen that play – the name alone makes me laugh out loud – though suddenly it doesn’t seem quite so apposite, and we look back on the early noughties, when Smith proposed this project, as a golden age of determinable ethical values.

Contrary to popular belief, reports of the death of standards (as they were regarding Mark Twain, Rock Family Trees cartographer Pete Frame and one of the fiddle players from Fairport Convention) are greatly exaggerated. Standards aren’t dead. They are just in a perpetual state of flux. To say we live in a world of double standards is an understatement. Post-Trump, post-Epstein and post-Brexit, there are so many different standards in operation simultaneously that trying to judge any action by a commonly understood yardstick of ethical value makes about as much sense as trying to knit fog or make a hat out of soup.

Can we put an end to this? By all means, allow Keir Starmer’s proximity to Epstein, via his cheerleader Peter Mandelson, to bring him down, although let it be noted he kept us relatively clear of an Iranian quagmire Farage and Kemi Badenoch were only too keen to bathe in, like a pair of horrible hippos. But to condemn Starmer by association with Epstein, and yet to allow Palantir to continue to cherry-pick the ripest fruit from the data we are happy for it to traffick into its lair makes no sense. And it is far more damaging for the country than the outgoing PM’s once unanimously praised realpolitik decision to appoint an arsehole ambassador to deal with an even bigger arsehole president.

Stewart Lee vs The Man-Wulf tours everywhere in the UK and Ireland until the end of the year, with a final November and December London run just announced.

Stewart is talking to the director Mark Jenkin at a screening of his new film, Rose of Nevada, at Hackney Picture House on 26 April, and hosting an evening of imaginary horror film soundtracks by Graham Reynolds and Mike Lindsay at Hackney’s Moth Club on 30 April. He is also co-hosting a screening of the rockumentary King Rocker, with director Michael Cumming and star Robert Lloyd, and launching his new podcast, Joking Apart, at the Machynlleth Comedy Festival on 2 May

April 28, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | secrets,lies and civil liberties, UK | Leave a comment

Britain’s Nuclear Subservience

Norman Dombey, 2 April 2026, https://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2026/april/britain-s-nuclear-subservience

In a brief exchange during Prime Minister’s Questions last month, the leader of the Liberal Democrats, Ed Davey, asked Keir Starmer about Trident replacement. ‘We have to make a choice now,’ Davey said: ‘lease new missiles from the United States, accepting whatever terms the president gives us, or build our own here in the United Kingdom.’ The prime minister replied that Davey was ‘advocating a plan without knowing how much it would cost and how it would work’. The discussion moved on.

Both men spoke of Britain’s ‘independent nuclear deterrent’. But the UK’s nuclear weapons capability is dependent on the US. Not only does Britain rent its Trident missiles from America, but the British-built warhead designed to be carried by those missiles, the Holbrook, is closely based on the American W76. The Los Alamos National Laboratory announced last year that a replacement for the W76 is going ahead: the W93 should be ready by 2034.

There is no need for the UK to replace its warheads. A Holbrook’s maximum yield is ninety kilotons of TNT-equivalent, about six times the size of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima. But the US Navy wants a new warhead in the mid-2030s and the UK has to follow suit even though there are no good reasons to do so. No one in Britain played any part in choosing the parameters of the W93.

George Robertson, the former Labour minister of defence and Nato secretary-general who now works for the Cohen Group, has said that the UK’s military dependence on the US is ‘no longer tenable’.

Britain’s nuclear subservience to the US dates from the 1958 Mutual Defence Agreement (MDA) between Washington and London:

Each party will exchange with the other party other classified information concerning atomic weapons when, after consultation with the other party, the communicating party determines that the communication of such information is necessary to improve the recipient’s atomic weapon design, development and fabrication capability.

The minutes of the first meeting of nuclear scientists from both sides in 1958, which seem to have been declassified by the US by mistake, show that the US provided ‘details of size, weight, shape, yield, amount of special nuclear material’. Several weapons were described. Britain’s nuclear bombs have been built at Aldermaston to an American design ever since.

President Kennedy and Harold Macmillan met at Nassau in the Bahamas in 1962 and agreed that the UK could use American Polaris missiles in its submarines. Charles de Gaulle was offered the same deal but declined. He said that the US could not be trusted and insisted that France had to take nuclear decisions for itself. British nuclear warheads are all carried by US-dependent submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBM). France builds its own SLBMs and its own warheads

David Manning was Britain’s ambassador to Washington from 2003 to 2007. ‘It is very difficult to imagine,’ he told the International Relations and Defence Committee last year, ‘what we will do to defend ourselves if, for example – this is very hypothetical – the Trump Administration decide that they will end our nuclear co‑operation deal, or Trump moves out of Nato, or even becomes just so equivocal about Nato that the Article 5 guarantee is no longer plausible.’

Trump and his war on Iran have given new urgency to Anglo-French nuclear co-operation, which should replace the ‘special nuclear relationship’ with the US before Britain needlessly commits itself to the US-dependent modernisation of its nuclear weapon system. If Britain were to join France, its first action should be to extract itself from its agreement to buy the W93 from the US. Aldermaston can make its own warheads or make them to a French rather than a US design.

The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) was drafted by the UK and US to forbid weapon-state signatories from helping non-weapon states to develop nuclear weapons. But they are not forbidden from helping one another: the MDA and Polaris Treaties between the UK and US are not affected by the NPT. A similar agreement between the UK and France would also be allowed by the treaty. France delivers its weapons on SLBMs, cruise missiles and aircraft and could share information with Britain in these fields (as it already does in some of them).

In any case the NPT may well be obsolete. India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea all have nuclear weapons. Faced with a hostile Russia, it might be sensible for Germany and Poland to have them too. It certainly makes sense for the UK to decouple its nuclear weapons programme from the US.

April 28, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, UK | Leave a comment

UK named worst violator of anti-nuclear weapons treaty

by Tom Pashby, 22 April 2026, https://www.thecanary.co/uk/news/2026/04/22/uk-worst-violator-nuclear-weapons-treaty/

The UK has been named as the worst violator of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) in the Nuclear Weapons Ban Monitor 2026, a report by Norwegian People’s Aid (NPA).

Its ranking as the worst state in terms of “non-compatibility” with the treaty is, in part, due to the UK having its own nuclear weapons, as well as being understood to have started hosting nukes for Trump’s USA.

A damning report

The report explained why it focuses on the TPNW:

It tracks progress towards a world without nuclear weapons and highlights activities that stand between the international community and the fulfilment of the long-standing goal of the elimination of nuclear weapons.

In measuring this progress, the Nuclear Weapons Ban Monitor uses the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) as the primary yardstick, because this treaty codifies norms and actions that are needed to create and maintain a world free of nuclear weapons.

The TPNW is the only legally binding global treaty that outlaws nuclear weapons. It was adopted on 7 July 2017 and entered into force on 22 January 2021. The impact of the TPNW will be built gradually and will depend on how it is welcomed and used by each and every State.

The TPNW is supported by 99 of the world’s 197 states, with 74 joining as parties and 25 as signatories that have not yet ratified the treaty.

Political pressure

No nuclear-armed states have joined the treaty, but the Ban Monitor said:

Every non-nuclear-armed State that joins strengthens political pressure for nuclear disarmament.

Adding:

With ratification processes advancing in several signatory States, further progress in expansion of the treaty membership appears likely in 2026.

The report took aim at the poor record of European states on eliminating nuclear weapons, saying “support for the TPNW is strong across all regions of the world except Europe,” and warned:

The UK was singled out as having the most policies or practices in 2025 that were viewed by the report’s authors as being “non-compatible with, or of concern in relation to, one or more of the TPNW’s prohibitions”.

It was singled out alongside 44 other states found to have non-compatibilities with the TPNW. Most were not compatible with the TPNW’s “Prohibition on assisting, encouraging or inducing prohibited activity”.

The UK, meanwhile, was identified as being non-compatible with a total of six prohibitions:

on “development, production, manufacture, or other acquisition”;
on “possession or stockpiling”; on “receiving transfer or control”;
on “assisting; encouraging or inducing prohibited activity”;
on “seeking or receiving assistance to engage in prohibited activity”;
and on “allowing stationing, installation or deployment” of nuclear weapons.

The next least compatible country was the US, which had five prohibitions it was not compatible with.

‘Evidence suggests’ UK received US nukes and is expanding its own stockpile

ICAN head of communications Alistair Burnett told the Canary:

The Nuclear Weapons Ban Monitor reports annually on the size and composition of the arsenals of the world’s nine nuclear-armed countries and it also assesses how compatible each country is with the provisions of the United Nations Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW).

Of the nine nuclear-armed states, Britain violates more articles of the treaty than any other because it not only has its own nuclear weapons, it may have also started hosting US nuclear weapons on its soil again after a break of 18 years.

In 2008, US nuclear weapons that were held at US air bases in Britain were quietly withdrawn, but last year evidence suggests the US may have returned upgraded nuclear bombs (the B61-12) to RAF Lakenheath in Suffolk.

Neither country shares any information publicly on this, but research by the Federation of American Scientists revealed new facilities to store these weapons were being built at Lakenheath and flights by the US planes that ferry nuclear weapons around the world have been monitored arriving there.

The United Kingdom also engages in assistance and encouragement of banned nuclear activities under the TPNW in its nuclear cooperation with France, and the United States.

In 2021, the UK also removed the cap on the number of warheads it has and stopped releasing information on nuclear warhead numbers.

UK faces becoming ‘more and more isolated diplomatically’

Burnett went on to explain how the UK’s failure to support the TPNW is likely to make it increasingly diplomatically isolated, and recommended how the government could work towards a nuclear weapons-free future.

He said:

The TPNW came into force in 2021 and a majority of the world’s states have already either signed or ratified the treaty (74 have ratified and a further 25 have signed it and are working on ratification). As more and more countries join it, Britain and the other nuclear-armed countries become more and more isolated diplomatically

The TPNW provides a fair and verifiable pathway to eliminating nuclear weapons, and Britain – which committed to getting rid of its weapons when it joined the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1968 – should engage with the TPNW and work towards joining that treaty as well in order to fulfil the disarmament commitments it has made and also to help reduce the nuclear threat that continues to menace the whole world.

It is impossible to envisage any use of nuclear weapons in conflict that would be consistent with international law, of which the British Government claims to be a champion.

A first step would be for the UK to stop voting against annual UN General Assembly resolutions on the TPNW and the humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons. In 2024, the UK, alone with Russia and France, even voted against setting up an independent scientific panel to update our understanding of the impact of the use of nuclear weapons in 2024.

In addition this year, the UK Government, at a minimum, should also observe the first Review Conference of the TPNW that is being held at the UN in New York in late November and early December.

The Canary approached the Ministry of Defence (MOD) for comment on the government’s shaming in the report. An MOD spokesperson deferred to the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO). The FCDO did not respond to a request for comment.

UK Government urged to end its ‘nuclear hypocrisy’ and engage with TPNW

The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) general secretary Sophie Bolt told the Canary:

It’s little surprise Britain is the worst violator of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons for 2026. It’s ploughing ahead with the multi-billion pound modernisation of its nuclear-armed submarines, update and expansion of its nuclear warhead stockpile, hosting of US nuclear weapons on British soil, and giving the RAF a nuclear role for the first time since the end of the Cold War.

The Canary reported earlier in April that campaigners were demanding that the UK stops hosting Trump’s nuclear weapons, in response to his veiled threat to use nuclear weapons against Iran.

Bolt continued:

As the government is facing increased pressure to enforce more austerity to fund major military spending hikes, a quarter of the MoD’s budget is blown on nuclear weapons.

What’s more, these nuclear projects are facing delays and ballooning costs with diminishing oversight. Nuclear dangers have never been higher but having nuclear weapons doesn’t increase security. Britain needs to end the nuclear hypocrisy and finally engage with the TPNW.

Nuclear deterrence is ‘naïve idealism’ – professor

University of Sussex emeritus professor Andy Stirling reacted to the report by telling the Canary:

Recent events show more than ever, that notions of ‘nuclear deterrence’ are a delusion that only lasts so long. Now more than ever, time is running out.

As with the same claims made in the past for explosives, machine guns and aircraft, nuclear weapons are not – and never can be – technologies to end war. Nuclear deterrence is naïve idealism.

With impacts of global war now more existential than ever, the security of each country must be viewed with reason, not sentimental nationalist blinkers or militaristic ideology.

Even where only a few countries claim exclusive national rights to make nuclear threats against others, the inevitable result will be nuclear war.

The only rational way to reduce the threat of nuclear war is to address security globally. As in the playground … or in gangland … the only realistic way to abolish nuclear threats for all is for each to stop making them against others.

Those who make nuclear threats lower their own security by adding to risks of surprise nuclear attacks against them.

It is too often forgotten that even a small nuclear attack by any one country will (even if it is not retaliated against), cause devastation in that country as well through nuclear winter. In that way too, nuclear threats are a suicide vest.

In a debate on ‘Civil Preparedness for War’ in the House of Lords on 20 April, MOD minister of state Lord Coaker confirmed that the government does still support the NPT and representatives would be attending the NPT review conference in New York later in April.

This could be seen as a thin sliver of hope for the UK eventually working to rid the world of nuclear weapons.

April 28, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics international, UK | Leave a comment

Study for Miliband finds Scotland suitable for new nuclear

Scotland could be “ripe” for new nuclear power, according to a
“discrete study” sitting on Ed Miliband’s desk. Simon Bowen, chair of
GB Energy Nuclear, told MPs that the government-owned company has completed
research for the Energy Secretary on “the suitability of Scotland for new
nuclear development” but that the report has yet to be published.

Bowen said whilst publication of the report is a matter for Ministers it
doesn’t take an awful lot to work out what it will say.

Torness Hunterston and Dounreay are natural sites for development. SNP candidate
for Banffshire and Buchan Coast, Karen Adam, said: “GB Energy has utterly
failed to create the jobs promised by the Labour Party and now we know it
is being used as a vehicle to plot unwanted nuclear developments in
Scotland that would undermine our energy sector.

“Another energy
superpower Norway has just ruled out nuclear power so there are serious
questions to answer as to what on earth is going on here — Anas Sarwar
must come clean on these underhand reports and explain why he supports
these extortionate, toxic, nuclear plants being imposed upon Scotland

Herald 24th April 2026, https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/26048810.study-miliband-finds-scotland-suitable-new-nuclear/

April 28, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, UK | Leave a comment

How do Britons feel about nuclear energy?

40 years on from the Chernobyl nuclear disaster, Britons are divided on
whether nuclear energy is safe: Key takeaways:

Britons support the use of
nuclear power by 51% to 29%, with opposition declining in recent years:
Green voters are divided 46% to 39% on whether or not they support the use
of nuclear power: 37% of Britons want more of the UK’s electricity to come
from nuclear energy, compared to 23% who want less: Britons are divided 45%
to 39% on whether or not nuclear energy is generally safe: Men are
consistently far more supportive of nuclear power than women.

You Gov 24th April 2026, https://yougov.com/en-gb/articles/54612-how-do-britons-feel-about-nuclear-energy

April 27, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | public opinion, UK | Leave a comment

Westminster keeps nuclear secrets to avoid upsetting Scottish Government

The Scottish Greens argued that the people of Scotland have a “fundamental right” to know the risks they face from hosting weapons of mass destruction on the Clyde. Suppressing information that may support arguments against nuclear weapons poses a “clear and present danger” politically, it warned

Rob Edwards, April 10 2023, https://www.theferret.scot/nuclear-secrets-scottish-government/

The UK Government is refusing to say why it is keeping nuclear safety reports secret because it is worried about “anti-nuclear arguments from the Scottish Government”.

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) won’t give its reasons for failing to release annual assessments of the safety of nuclear weapons on the Clyde so as not to “prejudice relations between the UK and Scottish governments”.

The secrecy has been condemned by the Scottish Greens as “outrageous, undemocratic and frankly dangerous”. It was akin to nuclear policies in Russia, China and North Korea, according to a campaigner — and it was described as “totally unacceptable” by a former nuclear submarine commander.

The Scottish Government urged the MoD to be “open and transparent” about the handling of nuclear materials in Scotland. The MoD said it had to “strike a balance” between public interest in safety and protecting information about nuclear weapons.

Annual reports from the MoD’s internal watchdog, the Defence Nuclear Safety Regulator (DNSR), were released for ten years, but ceased being published in 2017. A freedom of information appeal to a UK tribunal to force the MoD to again release the reports was rejected in July 2021.

The Ferret previously revealed that the reports for 2005 to 2015 highlighted “regulatory risks” 86 times, including 13 rated as high priority. One issue repeatedly seen as a high risk was a shortage of suitably qualified and experienced engineers.

Now the MoD has rejected another freedom of information request asking for documents that set out the rationale for refusing to release more recent DNSR reports. It disclosed that the decision was taken in 2017 by then secretary of state for defence, Michael Fallon, but has withheld information on why.

In a letter to a campaigner in January 2023, the MoD said it had used an exemption under freedom of information law aimed at preventing damage to relations between UK administrations. The exemption had been applied to information “which relates to the basing of the nuclear deterrent in Scotland”, it explained.

“There is a strong public interest in reassuring the public, especially in Scotland, that the nuclear deterrent is maintained and operated safely. However, any misinterpretation of the information, due to an incomplete picture, could lead to further anti-nuclear arguments from the Scottish Government, which is already strongly in favour of removing the nuclear deterrent from Scotland.”

The MoD concluded that “the balance of public interest” was in favour of withholding the information “as its release would prejudice relations between the UK and Scottish governments.”

The MoD letter also argued that information on reasons for withholding the reports should be kept secret “for the purpose of safeguarding national security”. Secrecy was also necessary so as not to prejudice “the defence of the UK” or “the relationship between the UK and the US” as well as to allow a “safe space” for officials to advise ministers.

A formal memo to officials from Fallon in October 2017 released by the MoD gave a little more detail. “The current threat of the UK deterrent from hostile state actors, including hostile foreign intelligence services [redacted] means we need to tighten up our practice on release of information,” it said.

“Even information which is unarguably unclassified in isolation could help a potential adversary put together a more highly classified picture.”

Nuclear secrecy ‘totalitarian’

“The extraordinary admission in this letter that the MoD and UK Government are actively concealing key pieces of information from the Scottish Government is outrageous, undemocratic and frankly dangerous,” said Green MSP, Mark Ruskell.

“The MoD is basically saying they won’t share this information because they are scared Scotland won’t like it and it might upset the US. You simply can’t get any more totalitarian than that and this should be challenged further.”

Ruskell added: “If they want to reassure people that there are no unnecessary added dangers, they should share the information urgently and transparently. If not they should pack up and ship out. Scotland doesn’t want nukes here and they know it.”

The nuclear researcher and campaigner who has been challenging the MoD’s refusal to release the nuclear safety reports is Peter Burt. UK citizens are allowed to know “virtually nothing” about the hazards of nuclear weapons despite paying billions of pounds for them, he said.

“We’re not allowed to know whether the Ministry of Defence’s safety watchdog thinks the nuclear weapons programme is complying with public protection arrangements, and Scottish Ministers are not trusted to know what is going on at the Navy’s nuclear bases in Scotland,” Burt told The Ferret.

“It’s pretty clear that this has more to do with politics than security. While the US government regularly releases information about its nuclear weapons programme, the UK Government has decided to model its own nuclear policies on those of countries like Russia, China, and North Korea.”

Rob Forsyth, a former Royal Navy nuclear submarine commander who now campaigns against nuclear weapons, described the MoD’s justifications for secrecy as “totally unacceptable”.

He said: “The way to avoid any misinterpretation is to be honest and fully transparent over matters affecting public safety and our national defence. The notion that government should not allow public discussion is not conduct expected of a democracy.”

The Scottish Government reiterated its opposition to the possession of nuclear weapons and its support for world-wide nuclear disarmament.

“In order to retain the confidence of this government and the Scottish public, the Ministry of Defence should be open and transparent in its actions around the handling of nuclear materials in Scotland,” said a spokesperson.

The Ministry of Defence insisted that it had “robust safety measures” at nuclear sites and took safety incidents “incredibly seriously”. Nuclear programmes were “subject to regular independent scrutiny and reviews,” it said.

An MoD spokesperson told The Ferret: “The release of information on nuclear safety must strike a balance between recognising public interest in nuclear safety matters and protecting information about our nuclear systems.”

April 26, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | secrets,lies and civil liberties, UK | Leave a comment

Exposed: Israeli operation to help Brits move to West Bank

Undercover investigation reveals charity touted ‘awesome’ illegal settlements and claimed it could benefit from UK tax subsidies

Martin Williams, DECLASSIFIED UK, 13 April 2026

An Israeli organisation has been caught on camera offering to help British citizens move to an illegal settlement in the West Bank.

Declassified can reveal how the group, Shivat Zion, told supporters it could benefit from UK tax subsidies – despite staff bragging about “awesome” settlements.

An undercover investigation saw the group’s “encouragement” officer discussing the support it would give settlers moving to Efrat, in the West Bank.

“You’re next to the Arabs; you’ll hear their mosques,” he was recorded saying. “But apart from this, it’s a great living standard.”

The comments were made during a Zoom call with a Jewish anti-Zionist activist, who asked Declassified to secretly film the conversation.

In February, the UK government promised to take “concrete steps in accordance with international law to counter settlement expansion”.

Foreign minister Hamish Falconer said: “Israel’s illegal settlements and decisions designed to further them are a flagrant violation of international law”.

But Declassified can reveal how Shivat Zion invited supporters to claim UK Gift Aid when making donations.

Despite being registered in Israel, it directed donations to a separate charity called UK Toremet Ltd, based near London.

In an email seen by Declassified, a representative from Shivat Zion claimed that donations “go through” the UK Toremet charity, explaining that this “ensures the donations properly reach Shivat Zion”.

If money were to be received this way, it could mean that support for illegal settlers could potentially benefit from British tax subsidies………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ‘Unacceptable’

Human rights lawyer Daniel Machover told Declassified: “Fundamental breaches of international law cannot constitute charitable purposes.”

He added: “It’s just unacceptable, really, for these things to go unhindered when it’s clear that they shouldn’t be taking place. I am really deeply disturbed that this is going on.”………………………………………………………………………………………………..https://www.declassifieduk.org/exposed-israeli-operation-to-help-brits-move-to-west-bank/

April 26, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Israel, secrets,lies and civil liberties, UK | Leave a comment

New report lays bare media bias on Gaza

DECLASSIFIED UK, Hamza Yusuf, 23 April 26

A comprehensive, data-rich report released today by UK media monitoring group NewsCord puts hard numbers on the UK media’s failings in reporting on Israel’s crimes in Gaza.The study analyses coverage from Al Jazeera, BBC, The Guardian and Sky News across 686 articles and 11,295 classified excerpts.The findings illustrate how the UK mainstream media methodically sanitises genocide, shields the public from reality and marginalises Palestinian experience.

For example, when civilians are killed in Gaza, the BBC attributes the attack to Israel in only 50% of cases, with the Guardian only marginally better with 54%.

The BBC also labels Gaza’s health ministry as “Hamas-affiliated” in 60% of death toll citations, but mentions that the United Nations considers these figures credible in only 0.6% of cases. Al Jazeera names the perpetrator at nearly twice the rate of the BBC and Guardian.

References to “genocide” in UK outlets are notably limited in the dataset – 15 mentions by the BBC, 12 by Sky News, and 21 by the Guardian – compared to 58 by Al Jazeera.
Just as important as how a story is told is whose story is heard: Sky News gives Israeli perspectives nearly double the space of Palestinian ones.
Meanwhile, when Israeli officials declared explicit genocidal intent, this went practically unreported. The BBC never covered such statements by Israeli figures like Benjamin Netanyahu, Isaac Herzog or Yoav Gallant.

This is despite some of those statements being cited in proceedings at the International Court of Justice in the case against Israel.
Reflecting on the report’s findings, NewsCord founder Nima Akram said: “The data is not opinion, it’s the result of classifying thousands of articles to measure bias. These aren’t isolated incidents, they’re structural patterns that shape how millions understand the genocide in Gaza, and whose suffering deserves attention.”

Their report demands the outlets publicly review their Gaza coverage against the evidence and to disclose and revise their editorial practices.
Simply put, the mainstream media has failed in its duty to report Israel’s actions with accuracy, fairness and integrity. The new data leaves little room for denial.

April 25, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Gaza, media, UK | Leave a comment

Nuclear Power No Thanks

Mike Small, 20th April 2026, https://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2026/04/20/nuclear-power-no-thanks/

A new Survation poll has shown a “miserable” level of support for nuclear power in Scotland while more than half believe the main focus should be on renewables. The polling makes grim reading for Scottish Labour and the LibDems who are both promoting new nuclear. The study carried out by Survation showed just 14% thought Scotland should rely on uranium used in nuclear reactors for its long-term energy security needs.

Only Reform UK and Conservative voters appear to prefer a focus on nuclear power. People who voted SNP and Green in 2024 appear overwhelmingly (over two thirds) in support of renewables.

In regions where nuclear facilities exist around Hunterston, Torness and Dounreay, a preference for renewables was in the clear majority over nuclear. When asked which energy sector could be trusted most to ‘tell the truth’ about their costs, pollutants and safety record, nuclear scored last at 12%, just behind the oil and gas industry at 13%.

This despite the fact that, as we exposed here the nuclear lobby group Britain Remade are run by PR/lobbying firm Stonehaven who donated £7,200 to the Scottish Labour Party.

Read our previous investigation here: Who are Britain Remade? – Bella Caledonia
Read The Ferret investigation here: This pro-nuclear group claims to be ‘grassroots’. So why are its directors industry lobbyists?

George Baxter, from Green Power said:

“New nuclear power is a costly distraction for Scotland. Between eye-watering costs, huge public subsidies, decades-long delivery timelines and leaving a toxic legacy for future generations, it cannot compete with the immediate, affordable potential of our renewable resources. With the technology already available, a 100% renewables-led system is the only logical path to a secure and sustainable economy.”

“A renewables-based energy system needs flexible power, a modern upgraded grid and energy storage, these should be the priority. That is what will provide lower cost energy, power industry and keep the lights on. Moreover, because nuclear is so inflexible it blocks renewables off the grid, forcing green energy generators to be turned off. Nuclear is no friend of sustainable energy

Nuclear Free Scotland

This is a major blow to the dark money, the front-groups, and the media campaigns that have been desperately promoting new nuclear for the past year.

Commonweal has covered this with a handy briefing note on the nuclear lobby [How to debunk the nuclear lies — Common Weal]. They ask you to Google search:

“How many former Labour politicians have been lobbyists for the nuclear industry, and who is the current CEO of the Nuclear Industry Association, which is behind all of this lobbying?”

The answer is:

Tom Greatrex, a former Labour MP and energy spokesperson, is the current CEO of the Nuclear Industry Association (NIA), representing the industry. While the specific number of former Labour politicians acting as nuclear lobbyists varies over time, key figures like Brian Wilson and Tom Greatrex have bridged the Labour Party and the nuclear industry.

Brian Wilson is of course is a devout nuclear enthusiast. In 2013 he decried Scotland’s energy policy as “Salmond’s nuclear fatwa”. In October 2005, he was appointed non-executive director of AMEC Nuclear Holdings Ltd, the nuclear services arm of AMEC plc. The announcement boasted that the firm is the UK’s largest private nuclear services business. In 2021 it was announced that he would lead a commission into new nuclear power [see Labour Go Nuclear – Bella Caledonia].

The extent to which new nuclear is a major focus for Scottish Labour is demonstrated in their manifesto, in which their ‘top priorities’ are listed as ‘Improve the NHS’, Top up tax-free childcare’ and ‘Back nuclear energy.’ In their Economy section the first two actions listed are ‘Create a Scottish Treasury’ and second ‘Remove the Scottish government’s block on nuclear energy.’ See:
Scottish Labour’s 2026 election manifesto at-a-glance – BBC News

This is a major blow to the Labour Party and the nuclear lobby, showing once again that the Scottish people are resolutely opposed to nuclear power.

April 25, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | public opinion, UK | Leave a comment

Pull the plug over nuclear reactors

Sir, – I refer to the letter from Dr Steven Welsh (April 11) headed “We have been failed on energy and jobs” in which he states that “Dounreay is crying out to be developed as a site for a small modular nuclear reactor”.

He argues that by ignoring our crying need for nuclear Scotland continues to miss out on investment, jobs and a long-term future for Scotland’s civil nuclear sector.

I presume he knows that Dounreay currently employs 1,300 people with 700 in the supply chain and that the clean up will continue into the 2070s at a cost of £8.7 billion.

Highlands Against Nuclear Power (HANP) will be crying out to prevent any
nuclear in Scotland as it is not carbon free nor safe, does nothing to
reach netzero, is the most expensive form of energy production and the UK
has no solution for dealing with highly radioactive nuclear waste.

Press & Journal 20th April 2026, https://www.pressreader.com/uk/the-press-and-journal-aberdeen-and-aberdeenshire/20260420/282041923714019

April 25, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

Arms industry given direct influence over university courses

Officials from BAE Systems, Leonardo and Thales sit on advisory committees that oversee the ‘strategic direction’ of academic departments

Martin Williams, 8 April 2026, https://www.declassifieduk.org/arms-industry-given-direct-influence-over-university-courses/

Arms industry executives have been given direct influence over British university courses, Declassified can reveal.

BAE Systems, Leonardo, Thales and Rolls-Royce are among the firms who have been invited to sit on at least 53 university advisory committees across the country.

They are usually asked to provide “strategic direction” for academic departments – and sometimes also review the progress of research projects.

Using the Freedom of Information Act, Declassified found that at least 21 universities had asked arms companies to sit on their committees. They include the universities of Southampton, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Leicester, Cardiff, York and Queens University Belfast.

Some institutions boast that the setup allows them to “respond to the needs of employers”. The minutes of one committee meeting show that arms executives – along with officials from other companies – were thanked for “ensuring that our programmes fit industry requirements and demand”.

During a meeting at the University of Hull, an official from BAE Systems said they would “welcome applications” from students for “industrial placements”, adding that they would “like to develop the relationship”.

And a committee at the University of Cardiff discussed whether “industry” could “teach material to students,” noting that this would be “an appealing prospect for the School but would also offer good exposure for industry”.

They also agreed to meet with Rolls-Royce to discuss “research challenges”.

‘Disturbing’

The finding comes two years after it was revealed how British universities had taken almost £100m from defence companies – including many that are arming Israel.

In one case, BAE Systems gave almost £50,000 in sponsorship to University College London (UCL) to fund its Centre for Ethics and Law – despite the company being accused of being party to alleged war crimes in Yemen in 2019.

Universities including Oxford, Cambridge and Sheffield were all found to have taken huge sums from arms firms – accepting £17m, £10m, and £42m respectively.

Sam Perlo-Freeman, of the Campaign Against the Arms Trade (CAAT), said: “Declassified’s disturbing findings add to CAAT’s growing concern about deepening ties between UK universities and the military-industrial complex.

“As purveyors of a deeply corrupt and immoral trade that blights human life and the planet like no other, arms company executives should be nowhere near institutions of learning and intellectual freedom.”

He added: “Universities should be treating arms trade representatives as pariahs. Instead, and thanks to Declassified, we now know that they sit on at least 53 different advisory committees across 21 universities.

“We have little doubt that this will have impacted academic freedom and the integrity of higher education research. The question is exactly how. We need answers.”

Responding to our investigation, the co-founder of Demiliterise Education, Jinsella Kennaway, said: “Academic freedom is undermined while arms companies hold such influence over what gets researched, funded, and legitimised on campus”.

“Students deserve pathways into work that make the world safer and more humane, not careers that contribute to mass killing and deepening global insecurity,” they said.

“University leaders have a responsibility to ensure Britain’s knowledge centres contribute to saving lives, rather than allowing education to become a pipeline into the war economy.”

Martin is Declassified UK’s chief investigator. He previously worked for The Guardian, Channel 4 News and openDemocracy, where he was UK Investigations Editor. His book, ‘Parliament Ltd’, exposed widespread corruption in British politics and sparked multiple inquiries by Westminster authorities. It was described as “ground-breaking” by the Sunday Times, while the New Statesman said the book was “a powerful reminder that reporters can serve the public good”. Martin has published investigations on issues ranging from lobbying and dark money, to espionage and human rights. He has also produced investigations for TV and YouTube, including going undercover. Between 2015 and 2016, he co-presented a live stage show with comedian Josie Long which combined investigative journalism with stand-up.

April 24, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | Education, UK | Leave a comment

Poll finds ‘miserable’ support for nuclear power in Scotland.

20th April, By Steph Brawn

A POLL has found a “miserable” level of support for nuclear power in
Scotland while more than half believe the main focus should be on
renewables.

In what will make “grim reading” for Scottish Labour and the
LibDems as the election draws near, the study carried out by Survation
showed just 14% thought Scotland should rely on uranium used in nuclear
reactors for its long-term energy security needs. Just 20% said it was the
energy source Scotland should focus on to “make the most effective
contribution to tackling climate change”, while almost 60% supported
renewables like wind and solar.

Only 12% said they trusted the nuclear
industry “to tell the truth about their products” including costs, the
pollutants they might produce and their safety record, which put it behind
the oil and gas industry. Just 18% said it was the energy source most
likely to reduce bills.

Pete Roche, of the Scottish Campaign to Resist the
Atomic Menace (SCRAM), said: “The poll demonstrates that Scots are not as
gullible as the lobbyists and pro-nuclear political parties seem to think.
“A renewable energy future is not only possible, but is the most supported
and most trusted sector by far. Relying on a uranium-fuelled nuclear future
is like jumping out of the oil and gas frying pan and into a nuclear fire.
It makes no sense and Scots seem to get that. “A score of 14% for a
uranium-fuelled future is quite miserable. The crisis in the Middle East,
with its heady mix of oil and gas dependency and uranium stockpiles is a
wake up call.

The National 20th April 2026,
https://www.thenational.scot/news/26035122.poll-finds-miserable-support-nuclear-power-scotland/

April 24, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | public opinion, UK | Leave a comment

Scotland & Nuclear Power

A fresh opinion poll conducted in the middle of the Scottish election
campaign has found widespread support for renewable energy sources to
reduce energy bills and tackle climate change.

When asked about
Scotland’s energy security needs, support for a uranium-fuelled nuclear
future polled a ‘miserable’ 14%, compared to 55% support for harvesting
home grown wind, water and solar sources. The findings will likely make
grim reading for Scottish Labour and Libdem campaign bosses who are
promoting new nuclear power stations, due to resounding support for
renewables compared to nuclear, from their own voters.

SCRAM 20th April 2026,
https://www.no2nuclearpower.org.uk/scram/

April 23, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | public opinion, UK | Leave a comment

Greenham Women’s Peace Camp: The forgotten protest against nuclear weapons that lasted 19 years

Writing her novel Fallout – set against the backdrop of the Greenham Women’s Peace Camp – turned Eleanor Anstruther into an anarchist

Eleanor Anstruther, The Big Issue, 16 Apr 2026,

You’d have thought a protest that lasted 19 years, involved hundreds of thousands of people, achieved its aims through non-violent direct action and was women-only would already be assured of its place in history. If not in the story of women, then surely as a module in a political degree, or on the school curriculum alongside the suffragettes, apartheid, Gandhi and the American civil rights movement.

Yet throughout all my research and the many conversations I’ve had since writing Fallout, I’ve only met one – yes, you read that right, one – person under the age of 30 who’d heard of it, and she was a journalist who’d studied politics at university and consciously sought out the missing pieces in the history of British civil disobedience.

Even those of us who knew about Greenham from seeing it on the news as young people ourselves in the Eighties are surprised when I tell them how long it lasted. “Nineteen years?” They say, incredulously. “Yes,” I reply,“ and in the signing of the INF treaty which marked the removal of the cruise missiles from RAF Greenham Common, Reagan and Gorbachev cited Greenham women as part of their inspiration.

The leaders of America and Russia, locked for so long in a deadly battle of mutually assured destruction (or MAD for short) found it in themselves to namecheck these women who refused to give in to bullying, not only from the government but consistently from the British media. Yet, the history books? Barely a whisper. A level politics? Forget it. Primary school dress-up days? You can’t move for Emmeline Pankhursts, but Greenham women are nowhere to be found.

Can you hear the outrage in my voice? You’d be right in thinking Fallout is more to me than a book. I thought I knew about Greenham until I started researching it and I thought I had a pretty good handle on the history of protest until I started talking to Greenham women. I’ve been holding up banners and holding up the traffic for much of my adult life, but writing Fallout turned me into an anarchist, and I mean that in the true sense of the word; a belief in the goodness of people to organise themselves around caring for one another.

Because more than a political action which got rid of the bombs and reclaimed the land, Greenham Common Women’s Peace Camp was living proof of our ability to share space with conflicting opinions. Greenham was not one-size-fits-all. It was an idea, not an ideology, and no one, as far as I know, was thrown out of camp for failing to comply. There was no dogma to comply with, and not everyone who came to Greenham was there for political reasons…………………………………….

The women who did leave home to take up space at Greenham did so at their peril – not only physically at the hands of the police but also reputationally throughout their towns and villages. They weren’t held up as icons by their children and husbands; they were lambasted for failing their families.

And this weapon was liberally used by state and media too, shaming them into returning home and if they refused, shaming them on the front pages of national newspapers.

Yet they persisted. Through biting winters and heatwave summers, through prison and beatings and bailiffs and the nighttime assaults by local vigilante groups who tore through camp on motorbikes hurling buckets of blood and maggots.

Despite every effort by the government to get the women to give up and go home, they stood firm. They crawled through brambles, bolt cutters down their boots to cut the fence, proving how poorly the bombs were defended. They threw carpets over barbed wire and danced on the silos. They sang and weaved and fought and held hands and were funny and refused to back down, and they won.

When young people, overwhelmed by the challenge before them, ask me what can be done, I point them towards Greenham. Look, I say. Look what they did. Never underestimate the power of being consistently and creatively annoying. Believe in your rage. There is nothing so powerful as an idea whose time has come. Greenham women are all of us and we are everywhere. https://www.bigissue.com/news/activism/greenham-womens-peace-camp-eleanor-anstruther/

April 18, 2026 Posted by Christina Macpherson | UK, Women | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries Next Entries »