nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

Sizewell C: the Unanswered Questions

 Alison Downes, https://stopsizewellc.org/sizewell-c-the-unanswered-questions/

8 June 2026: On the day the Public Accounts Committee begins scrutiny of Sizewell C, [1] and almost a year to the day that the government’s announcement of its £14.2bn investment paved the way for a Final Investment Decision, Stop Sizewell C is publishing a report “Sizewell C – The Unanswered Questions”. This highlights what is known, what it is impossible to know, and what the government continues to keep secret about Sizewell C. It is a story of secrecy, obfuscation and deception and contains a number of recommendations. [2]

Read here:  Sizewell C, the Unanswered Questions, 8 June 2026

Stop Sizewell C said: “Over the last decade, efforts to uncover Sizewell C’s expected cost and schedule have been met by obfuscation, secrecy and outright deception. [3] While the National Audit Office published some details that the government wanted to keep secret, [4] we now demand much greater transparency; the Sizewell C Full Business Case and Strategy and Delivery Plan must be published – unredacted – immediately.

“With households on the hook for Sizewell C, we need assurances that the government has  a prepared exit strategy for when the project – which according to the NAO is already based on “big assumptions” and “significant uncertainty” [5] – goes wrong. The government’s inability to back out of HS2 shows where this project might be heading, but with Sizewell C’s “novel” financing, it would be immoral to force households to continue paying for something that might never work properly, while investors laugh all the way to the bank.

“In the cost of living crisis, consumers must be protected now and into the future from the risks of building nuclear projects. As well as assurances of increased scrutiny and Ministerial accountability for Sizewell C, we call for a commitment that RAB will never be used again for future nuclear projects. Unless investors suddenly rediscover an appetite for risk – unlikely given the free ride provided by Sizewell C’s RAB – abandoning nuclear or switching to full state funding would seem to be the only alternatives.

“We look forward to the outcomes of the Public Accounts Committee’s enquiry into Sizewell C and hope the Committee calls out the government for failing to come clean about this deeply flawed project.”

Notes

1. The Public Accounts Committee is taking oral evidence on Sizewell C at 1pm today, 8 June with senior officials and Nigel Cann https://committees.parliament.uk/work/9713/sizewell-c/

2. See Appendix below. Some of our recommendations echo those by the National Audit Office in its report on Sizewell C.

3. Our report includes examples such as:


  • The government claimed not to “recognise” a cost of Sizewell C put at “close to £40bn” by the Financial Times in January 2025, when in July the project “baseline” was given as £38bn and HMG’s “central cost estimate” as £40.5bn.
  • Ministers are keeping the target completion date secret, saying only “mid to late 2030s”, but the NAO revealed the project baseline date as July 2039.
  • Sizewell C revised its May 2020 cost estimate of £20bn a few months later, including removing allowances for in risk contingencies, but told the Planning Inspectorate in January 2021 the estimated cost “remains the same”.
  • Officials gaslit Stop Sizewell C in a conversation about the project costing over £30bn.

4. Stop Sizewell C has repeatedly called for publication of the Sizewell C Full Business Case (FBC) but the government decided to only publish a summary. The NAO had sight of the FBC in preparing its report, but the FBC itself is still unpublished.

5. NAO’s press statement says: “This novel approach [RAB financing] has costs and relies on big assumptions” and “DESNZ’s modelling of [Sizewell C’s] benefits shows they will not outweigh the costs to consumers until after 2060. They are also subject to significant uncertainty.”

Appendix: Our recommendations.

I. GREATER TRANSPARENCY

  1. We call for the immediate unredacted publication of Sizewell C’s Strategy and Delivery Plan that contains clear and accessible information about cost, schedule and project milestones to enable the public to understand project progress. Annual updates to Parliament should spell out the following:
  • Average and total costs for domestic and business users to date.
  • Total capital accessed by the project to date.
  • Updated construction cost compared to project baseline, LRT and HRT.
  • Transparency about the whole life cost of the project from inception, through construction, operation and decommissioning. The cost of risk shouldered by HMG should also be included.
  • If the Strategy and Delivery Plan cannot be published at this time the government should make a statement explaining why and commit to a publishing date.
  1. We call for the immediate – unredacted – publication of Sizewell C’s Full Business Case, as accessed by the National Audit Office.
  2. Terms agreed with EDF for use of its technology should be placed in the public domain.

II. EVIDENCE OF AN EXIT STRATEGY

While Stop Sizewell C is already convinced that Sizewell C cannot provide value for money or energy security, we believe the case for Sizewell C will weaken further over time as project milestones are missed, technological challenges emerge, and other sources of energy generation become cheaper. Given the financial burden on consumers, we seek assurances that the government would pursue an exit strategy rather than commit further funds to an expensive, unreliable energy source that would add to the UK’s stockpile of nuclear waste. The lack of an exit strategy must surely be a fundamental learning from HS2 – and Hinkley Point C.

  1. DESNZ should publish a process and timetable for regular reviews of the FBC, including ongoing assessments of internal or external developments on the economic viability of the project. These updates should be made public.
  1. These updates should transparently communicate the cost of continuing Sizewell C compared to the cost of abandoning the project, and what and when a government exit strategy would be pursued, to save consumer money being wasted.

III. PROVIDE CONSUMERS WITH ASSURANCES OF SCRUTINY AND PROTECTION

  1. We echo the NAO’s call for close, ongoing scrutiny by Ministers and independent watchdogs of consumer risk. The government must provide clarity on how this scrutiny will be undertaken, and demonstrate that DESNZ is resourced with the right skills and expertise to ensure full oversight. The government should undertake an early review of Sizewell C’s governance and assign specific Ministerial accountability for the project.
  2. The government should make a commitment not to use RAB for future nuclear power developments, especially GW nuclear projects. Full state funding would seem inevitable.
  3. The policy decision to “recycle” the government’s profit from Sizewell C’s RAB during construction (and operation, assuming the government kept its share) to help reduce consumer contributions towards Sizewell C should be legislated, to reduce the likelihood that future governments would rescind this arrangement and force consumers to pay even more for Sizewell C. (See point 3.)
  1. DESNZ should provide more detailed information to show how private sector expertise will be garnered from investors, and the basis of their belief that this will deliver savings for the benefit of consumers and that would justify use of the RAB.
  2. With investor returns during construction considered “high” by the NAO, we call on Ofgem to use all its powers to limit the profits investors would receive during operation, and not be swayed by investor claims that returns should reflect their “higher risk” * – when in fact consumers are bearing significant risk.

*Comments made by Centrica in a video presentation, https://www.centrica.com/investors/centrica-as-an-investment/investing-for-value-at-sizewell-c/

June 12, 2026 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) defends Sizewell C funding which puts risk on taxpayer.

 Representatives of the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ)
have defended the government’s funding model for Sizewell C, which places
risk on taxpayers rather than private investors.

Under the agreed final
investment decision (FID), private investors won’t have to pump more
equity into the nuclear project even if construction costs spiral.

At an oral evidence session of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) on Monday (8
June), DESNZ civil servants were grilled about the findings of a recently
published report by the National Audit Office (NAO) into the delivery of
the 3.2GW nuclear plant, which concluded that private investors are reaping
“high” rewards from the project.

 Utility Week 8th June 2026,
https://utilityweek.co.uk/desnz-defends-sizewell-c-funding-which-puts-risk-on-taxpayer/

June 12, 2026 Posted by | business and costs, UK | Leave a comment

Spiralling costs, fish discos and vast radioactive waste. Is nuclear really the solution to Britain’s energy problem?

an “unsolved environmental problem for future generations… a heavy burden to lay on our children and their children’s, children.” Porritt is aghast: “This is 
a truly extraordinary development – confirming that the UK still has NO idea what to do about its legacy nuclear waste.” And there is, of course, a huge cost involved, firstly with decommissioning a nuclear reactor and then storing the waste.

an “unsolved environmental problem for future generations… a heavy burden to lay on our children and their children’s, children.” Porritt is aghast: “This is 
a truly extraordinary development – confirming that the UK still has NO idea what to do about its legacy n

In an increasingly energy-hungry Britain, is nuclear the best way to meet soaring demand without burning fossil fuels? Fergus Collins investigates the benefits and risks

Fergus Collins, BBC CountryFile, June 8, 2026

“…………………………………….. The UK currently has nine operational nuclear reactors at five plants, with four more due to come online in the 2030s – two at Hinkley Point C in Somerset and two planned at Sizewell C in Suffolk – demonstrating Government commitment to this energy source (devolved Scotland has no nuclear plans).

“Nuclear will play a central role in meeting the UK’s future energy needs as we deliver our net zero target,” says the current minister for nuclear Lord Patrick Vallance. “As set out in our clean power mission, while our future electricity system will be dominated by renewables, we still need firm, low-carbon power to ensure the system is stable, secure and affordable. Nuclear provides that essential backbone – delivering clean power for millions of homes while underpinning a safe, resilient and cheaper system for the decades ahead.”

Not everyone is convinced, especially those concerned about safety issues; the shadows of the Chernobyl and Fukushima nuclear disasters, in 1986 and 2011 respectively, still dog the industry. Nuclear power creates vast amounts of potentially lethal radioactive waste, which must be contained and stored securely for thousands of years. Then there are questions of cost. Nuclear reactors are massive infrastructure projects and hugely expensive, not least because of the requirements of mitigating safety risks. Is it worth the investment – or could we power the UK through other means?

………………………………………………………………..The two new nuclear power stations at Hinkley Point and Sizewell are being built by EDF, France’s state-owned energy company. EDF manages eight nuclear sites in the UK – seven Advanced Gas-cooled Reactor (AGR) sites and one Pressurised Water Reactor (PWR). It says it’s driving the transition towards “an Electric Britain

………………………………….Who opposes nuclear power?

Some of the strongest voices against nuclear power in the UK come from groups protesting against the new reactors at Hinkley and Sizewell. Former science teacher Allan Jeffrey has been voicing concerns for over 40 years as part of campaign group Stop Hinkley, which works closely with TASC (Together Against Sizewell C). He doesn’t mince words: “Nuclear power stations are toxic radioactive waste factories” and argues that nuclear is “neither clean nor green” saying “large amounts of greenhouse gasses are produced in the nuclear fuel cycle from uranium mining and fuel processing to the building of power stations and waste storage sites and decommissioning old reactors.”

Jeffrey dismisses the idea that nuclear is more ethical than the gas or coal supplies the UK buys from unstable or openly hostile foreign states. “Uranium is not a renewable fuel,” he says, “and is mined in countries such as Australia, Canada, Niger and Kazakhstan. The miners frequently get lung cancer from the Radon gas, and much environmental pollution is left locally by the mining tailings and river water pollution.”

Jeffrey also points at the cost of nuclear: “Nuclear reactors take too long to build and pay back their greenhouse gas emissions.” He has a point with Hinkley Point C, which has been a building site since being approved by the Conservative Government in 2016.

Stop Hinkley and TASC are supported by statistics from CND (Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament) and many prominent anti-nuclear voices, including the environmentalist and friend of King Charles, Jonathan Porritt. In a recent blog post he claimed: “The Treasury’s financial modelling for the new power station at Sizewell C (seen by the Financial Times) gives a range of roughly £80 billion to £100 billion, far higher than the official estimate of £47 billion from the DESNZ – which in itself was already nearly double the original cost of £20 billion!”

DESNZ argues that there will be a big saving with Sizewell C because it is a replica of Hinkley and will be “built at a cost of £38bn in 2024 real terms. This would represent around 20% saving on the capital cost of the project compared with Hinkley C”.

What are the wildlife costs of nuclear power?

One very public reason for rising costs – and one the press have leapt on – is mitigation measures to prevent deaths of wildlife, especially fish. Nuclear power stations are located on the coast so they can draw seawater to cool the reactors. But they also suck in large numbers of fish; the Environment Agency has estimated 4.6 million per year at Hinkley, a figure EDF strongly contests.

EDF says it has spent £700 million in mitigation measures, including sonic fish deterrents developed with Swansea University. These use ultrasound to drive fish from the water intakes and have been dubbed ‘fish discos’ in the press.

That said, the Government’s own review, led by Sir John Fingleton, found that Britain was the most expensive place in the world to build nuclear facilities due largely to a “fragmented” regulatory system that had led to “conservative and costly decisions not proportionate to the actual risk being managed”.

However, Matt Browne, head of public affairs at The Wildlife Trusts, disputes EDF’s claims. “The developers of Hinkley C continue to misrepresent the impact that the nuclear plant will have on nature… 
This is highly misleading and allows EDF to pretend that £700 million is being spent to protect nature, when the real figure is closer to £50 million. It also misrepresents the number of fish affected by the proposed plant.”

Browne goes on to say: “On the basis 
of these false claims, the Government is now considering progressing recommendations which will lead to nature protections being 
severely compromised.”……………………………….

What happens to nuclear waste?

One area where there is a gap in the Government and EDF’s positive messaging – and one that tallies with Stop Hinkley and Porritt’s deeper fears – is just how and where to store nuclear waste.

Even after it’s no longer useful for generating heat, it continues to emit radiation, which breaks molecular bonds and causes severe damage to cell tissues in all organisms, leading to cancers and other severe health issues. And, as it breaks down very slowly, the waste emits this harmful radiation for tens of thousands of years.

The ONR says “Nuclear waste is primarily transferred to specialised, secure and regulated facilities for storage pending long-term disposal. Current Government policy is that UK higher activity radioactive waste will be managed in the long-term through geological disposal facilities (GDF)”.

GDF means burying the waste in deep subterranean vaults and leaving it alone till its radiation cools.

For Allan Jeffrey, this is simply an “unsolved environmental problem for future generations… a heavy burden to lay on our children and their children’s, children.” Porritt is aghast: “This is 
a truly extraordinary development – confirming that the UK still has NO idea what to do about its legacy nuclear waste.” And there is, of course, a huge cost involved, firstly with decommissioning a nuclear reactor and then storing the waste.

Currently, most high-level nuclear waste is being stored at Sellafield. Once at the forefront of the UK’s nuclear programme, Sellafield stopped generating electricity in 2003 and is now in the process of being decommissioned. As well as dealing with Sellafield’s own waste – spent fuel rods and other debris stored in silos and artificial ponds – it holds waste from other plants.

High level waste usually occurs in liquid form, a byproduct of processing spent fuel. This is mixed with crushed glass in a furnace and the molten product is poured into steel cannisters where it cools and solidifies, making it stable and safe for storage. But it is temporary storage only and Sellafield is almost full. Communities in Cumbria and Lincolnshire have been identified as potential nuclear waste sites.

…………The decommissioning of Sellafield is a massive project that may take over 100 years, with spiralling costs – but that’s a blink of an eye in terms of nuclear radiation. 

………………………..Such gigantic periods of time, when all current decision makers and hundreds of generations of their descendants will be long dead, are hard to comprehend. Opponents of nuclear, such as Stop Hinkley and TASC, urge policymakers not to take the risk and to invest instead in renewables such as wind, solar and hydro power. In 2025, wind provided approximately 30% of the UK’s electricity needs compared to just 11–17% provided by nuclear. The UN’s International Energy Agency predicts renewables will generate 90% of all new power in the coming years. And yet you’ll find protest groups opposing almost every new wind or solar farm with the same vigour as those who 
are anti-nuclear……………..https://www.countryfile.com/environment/spiralling-costs-fish-discos-and-vast-radioactive-waste-is-nuclear-really-the-solution-to-britain-s-energy-problem

June 12, 2026 Posted by | UK, wastes | Leave a comment

UK Navy nuclear submarine fleet stuck in dock while awaiting maintenance

The UK’s Navy’s entire available fleet of nuclear attack submarines is stuck in
port, leaving Britain vulnerable to Vladimir Putin’s underwater fleet. All
five of the UK’s Astute-class hunter-killer boats are awaiting maintenance
and repairs. A sixth, which was commissioned into the fleet, is not yet
ready to deploy. Naval commanders have said the situation makes the UK look
“toothless” in the eyes of Russia, which has ramped up naval activity
around British waters by a third in the past year. Cdr Ryan Ramsey, a
former nuclear submarine captain, said the lack of available attack boats
was a “serious wake-up call” for Britain.

Telegraph 7th June 2026, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/06/07/navy-fleet-out-of-service-maintenance-russia-lord-west/

June 12, 2026 Posted by | UK, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Natasha Walter: Labour’s workaday repression of protest doesn’t alarm us. But it should

If a far-right government detained activists for months without trial and declared them terrorists, there would be outrage. But Palestine and climate campaigners are being treated like this in a social democracy, writes the author and columnist

But as a result of these complicated, bureaucratic moves we are seeing more and more people locked up for longer and longer periods, and more and more people dissuaded from protesting at all. And if our next government is a far-right one, with the groundwork for greater authoritarianism already dug, with so many precedents already set, many more dissenters will be locked up. 

Natasha Walter, Jun 10, 2026, https://www.thenerve.news/p/natasha-walter-column-protest-palestine-action-sentencing-terrorist-connection-elbit?utm_source=www.thenerve.news&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=tuesday-edition-natasha-walter-on-protest-sangita-myska-on-farage-hotlist&_bhlid=ea754b28990feab0acf9d70ebf48f5b17a368a9a

I hate lazy parallels with the 1930s, but one echo does keep running through my mind just now. In 1933, my grandfather was imprisoned for three years for “high treason”, for being a member of a proscribed organisation. The first nine months of his imprisonment was pre-trial – on remand, as we would call it now. The organisation that had been outlawed in that year was the Communist party, and he was living in Germany. 

This is not the start of the Third Reich in Britain, for sure: not even close. But when I look at the young people who are being held for long periods – up to 20 months – on remand right now, and when I see that this Friday four protesters face being sentenced as if there had been a “terrorism connection” to their crimes during a break-in at the Elbit Systems weapons factory in Bristol, I realise a little more clearly how it is that even when the right to dissent is being directly threatened, most people can shrug it off, and so the slide to further repression is eased.

For those who are not turning away, this case has particular weight. The four individuals have been convicted of criminal damage and grievous bodily harm, which can potentially carry long sentences. But the prosecution has submitted that the offences have a “terrorist connection”, which means that the defendants would have no chance of early release and face the possibility of long-term surveillance. The jury in the trial was not asked to deliberate on this terrorist connection, so it is something that – for the first time in British legal history – the judge will decide alone. And the judge in question, Mr Justice Jeremy Johnson, has already lost the trust of many observers.

In the trials of those individuals and others, Johnson has ruled that the defendants could not give evidence on their motivations, including their reasons for joining Palestine Action, their beliefs about Elbit’s supply of weapons to Israel for use in the war in Gaza, or their views about the actions of Israel in Gaza and its legality. He even referred one of the defendants’ lawyers, Rajiv Menon, for contempt of court because Menon had reminded the jury that they could acquit the defendants based on their own consciences. 

As usual, a number of people will turn up outside the court who have become thorns in the police’s side. We’ve seen them before, those often elderly people with their handwritten signs and fold-out chairs, their unbowed determination to turn up in all weathers and despite all threats of arrest. 

Right now, I think we should all be saluting their determination. Indeed, the question keeps nagging away at me: why aren’t more people alarmed by this extreme erosion of the right to protest and what it means for our country?

It’s telling that so often this government doesn’t actively own these repressive developments, but portrays itself as simply compelled to carry them out

A few weeks previously I had been talking with an eminent lawyer who has been involved in many cases involving protesters. “What’s going on here right now is shocking,” he said. “It is making the UK an outlier in Europe. Other countries are looking at us and wondering how on earth this is happening when we don’t even have a far-right government.”

“When we don’t even have a far-right government.” I think that this is key to why more people aren’t protesting about these developments, and why so many people who are otherwise politically engaged are shrugging off this assault on people’s liberties. If a far-right government with a Trumpian narrative of a grand assault on dissent was putting in place the kind of measures we have recently seen, there would be an outcry from all sides. But because our government is not shouting about it, and is not even putting it into an ideological frame, the shift has simply become part of the political weather for most people. 

Indeed, it’s telling that so often this government doesn’t actively own these repressive developments, but portrays itself as simply compelled to carry them out. When Labour took power, many who voted for them expected them to repeal the anti-protest legislation that had been put in place by the Conservatives, but instead they kept it and built on it. When questioned, David Lammy, the deputy prime minister, said it would take up “so much parliamentary time” to undo it. It was notable that when Yvette Cooper, as home secretary, banned Palestine Action, she referred darkly to things she couldn’t disclose about the group, about shadowy “advice and intelligence” and “assessments”. 

And many other developments to silence protesters have taken place in an even more shadowy way, with no scrutiny by members of parliament or the public. Mr Justice Johnson’s refusal to allow Palestine Action defendants to bring evidence on the context and motivation for their actions has been preceded by other judges in climate protest trials who refused to allow defendants to discuss the climate emergency and its effects, or even about fuel poverty and home insulation. 

The recent revealing report by the Centre for Climate Crime and Climate Justice at Queen Mary, University of London (I am an honorary professor at the centre, though had nothing to do with this report), showed that this direction of travel by judges means that many protesters are therefore locked up not because of their original protest, but because of behaviour that is deemed in contempt of court, including refusing to keep quiet in the courtroom. Many others have been imprisoned for breaching injunctions granted to private companies stopping protests around oil terminals or other buildings. This kind of repression carried out by courts is often too complicated and bureaucratic to campaign on. It’s hard to explain quickly on an Instagram reel; it’s hard to get excited about. 

But as a result of these complicated, bureaucratic moves we are seeing more and more people locked up for longer and longer periods, and more and more people dissuaded from protesting at all. And if our next government is a far-right one, with the groundwork for greater authoritarianism already dug, with so many precedents already set, many more dissenters will be locked up. 

When my grandfather was imprisoned in Germany for attending Communist party meetings, most people shrugged off that first wave of repression – it was just the Communists and the oddballs who were getting locked up. To repeat, I don’t think this is our 1933, but the road we are walking down now is ever more shadowed. As Trudi Warner – who has been arrested several times already for protesting in the service of the right to dissent, and who will be outside the court on Friday – said to me this week: “I get that a lot of people don’t actually care about the climate or Palestine, so they aren’t getting upset right now. But when you are trying to speak up for something you care more about, and find you can’t, you will wish you had stood with us.”

Natasha Walter is an author and the founder of Women for Refugee Women. Her new book, Feminism for a World on Fire (Virago) was published in May

June 11, 2026 Posted by | civil liberties, UK | Leave a comment

Protest to be held at Calderbridge nuclear waste meeting

A PROTEST is set to be held in Calderbridge today, as concerned activists
ask why land off the Copeland coast is under consideration for an
underground nuclear waste store. Activists of ‘Lakes Against Nuclear Dump’
(LAND) have told Newsquest Cumbria that they will be protest outside the
Mid-Copeland GDF Partnership meeting at Calderbridge and Ponsonby Village
Hall today. Between 1pm and 3.30pm, the activists will be invited to join
LAND outside the meeting to colour in a giant postcard of an area off the
Copeland coast, which will then be handed to the partnership board.


Community partnerships formed in Mid and South Copeland in 2021 to speak to
residents about the Geological Disposal Facility (GDF), discussing the
potential economic benefits and its role in providing a permanent solution
for the UK’s radioactive waste. Meanwhile, Nuclear Waste Services (NWS) has
been conducting preliminary tests to determine whether the Mid Copeland and
South Copeland search areas contain the correct geology for the underground
nuclear waste store.

After narrowing its search to the area off the coast,
NWS has submitted a report to the Secretary of State for Energy Security
and Net Zero, Ed Milliband. Mr Milliband will hear that the area out to sea
could contain the necessary geology and it will be for him to decide
whether to progress to more detailed investigations. Mid and South Copeland
are now the only areas being considered for a GDF.

Carlisle News & Star 8th June 2026, https://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/26169800.protest-held-calderbridge-nuclear-waste-meeting/

June 11, 2026 Posted by | Events, UK | Leave a comment

Industrial dispute on Hinkley C site sees large police presence

A LARGE early morning police presence was needed at Hinkley Point C as
tempers flared while hundreds of workers were locked out of the site during
unofficial industrial action. The dispute arose after claims a dangerous
crane lift on the nuclear power station construction site has put workers
at risk. MEH Alliance workers, who are delivering Hinkley C’s mechanical,
electrical, heating, ventilation, and air conditioning installations,
staged protest sit-downs in canteens. The site’s management then withdrew
access rights for the workers ‘to avoid any further disruption, limit
impacts to other HPC team members, and allow time for discussions’.

West Somerset Free Press 6th June 2026, https://www.wsfp.co.uk/news/industrial-dispute-on-hinkley-c-site-sees-large-police-presence-914669

June 10, 2026 Posted by | employment, UK | Leave a comment

Why Europe Embraced Authoritarianism For Israel

Nate Bear Do Not Panic, June 3, 2026 , https://scheerpost.com/2026/06/03/why-europe-embraced-authoritarianism-for-israel/

This week the UK revoked the visas of leftist American influencer Hasan Piker and the podcaster Cenk Uygur who were both scheduled to speak at events in Oxford and London.

The UK government hasn’t commented on the reason, but it’s obvious it was for their views on Israel. Piker and Uygur are not radical in any true sense of the word. They are both fairly mainstream progressives close to the AOC-wing of the Democrats. Uygur used to be a Republican. They don’t call for revolution, they call for voting and standard social democratic policies. Nothing in their speech is conventionally radical, hateful or incites violence. But they are anti-genocide and anti-Israel, and this is radical enough to get you banned from entering the UK.

While it’s a frightening level of authoritarianism from a supposedly liberal democracy, the decision is not that surprising. From proscribing non-violent protest group Palestine Action as terrorists, to the mass arrest of peaceful anti-genocide protestors, to the secret terrorism charges being brought against pro-Palestine activists, the UK’s embrace of authoritarianism on behalf of Israel has been a consistent theme of Keir Starmer’s Labour government.

The incredible twist is that banning Piker and Uyghur has attracted more attention and controversy than letting them speak at the event ever would have, and is going to win Labour precisely zero votes from a right that hates them anyway.

On the face of it the decision appears, like the crackdown on pro-Palestine activism which has seen Labour bleed votes to the Greens, to be comically bad politics. But I have to consider, as was pointed out to me when I posted this perspective on twitter, that maybe politics isn’t the point here. I have to consider that rational political calculations, when it comes to Israel, aren’t part of the equation for most western governments. Maybe slavish servitude to Zionists and Zionism is the only position that matters. Maybe signalling that you are prepared to do anything for Israel regardless of the domestic political consequences is the only point. And frighteningly, we have to consider that perhaps the worse those consequences are, the better. It seems illogical on the one hand, but there’s an argument to be made that the more pain an elected official endures on behalf of Israel, the greater the benefit to them in the long run. If not politically, then certainly personally and financially.

I think there’s a huge chunk of truth to this analysis, and I understand why people look at these moments and find it increasingly hard to interpret events in any other way. But I find it hard to accept this as the full explanation. I think a fuller explanation is that vote-losing slavish Zionism is simply a core tenet of the anti-politics of centrism. An anti-politics that clings, against all evidence, to a mythical centre ground in which an anti-fascist is considered the same as a fascist. I’ve been up close to these people, and their capacity to make utterly false equivalences between ‘extremes’ because doing so enables them to feel more secure about their defunct political ideology can be hard to appreciate. They will point to the fact the UK has also banned right-wingers from entering the country, and token progressive red meat such as recognising Palestine to sanctioning a few Israeli settlers, as proof of their centrist sincerity. They really think a sweet-spot can be found opposing fascist speech and anti-fascist speech, and because of their brainwashed Zionism do not recognise that their support for an apartheid state committing genocide is materially fascist in nature.

But it’s not just the UK of course.

France and Germany have also cracked down hard on pro-Palestine voices and are working to make criticism of Israel a criminal offence in pursuit of a miserable waste-ground politics of ‘anti-extremism’ which rests on the conflation of anti-Zionism with antisemitism.

Last month France denied an entry visa to the Palestinian human rights campaigner, Shawan Jabarin, a decision which came two weeks after the country arrested one of its own elected MEPs, Rima Hassan, for her pro-Palestine advocacy. France is also pushing forward with a law to make criticism of Israel punishable with up to five years in prison. Germany has embarked on a similar campaign of repression, cracking down on anti-Israel dissent by banning protest, arresting activists, outlawing pro-Palestine slogans as antisemitic, and denying entry to pro-Palestine figures. The EU has also frozen the bank accounts of critics of both Israel and NATO in its desperate attempts to wrest back control of a status quo narrative.

While these are the most high-profile efforts to codify anti-Zionism as hate speech, even in countries considered more sympathetic to Palestine, like Spain, police violence and repression against pro-Palestine activists has been a regular feature. Just this week a pregnant Palestinian woman was thrown violently to the ground and brutalised by Dutch police after her husband, a Palestinian from Gaza, was arrested on spurious disturbance charges.

All of this is happening, of course, while Gaza has been turned into a literal concentration camp, where 1.8 million people are living in tents, crammed into just 133 square kilometres of space while still being indiscriminately murdered from the sky, and with disease rampant.

But for most European governments, especially those dominated by legacy centre-left and centre-right parties, Israel’s colonial settler brutality is not an example of extremism. The sexual assault and rape of European citizens by Israeli soldiers is not extremism to be overly concerned about or condemn. No, the real extremists, in their minds, are those who oppose the creation of Palestinian concentration camps, who oppose Israeli rape dungeons, and who oppose the genocide of Palestinians.

There is no question that Zionism is a totalitarian ideology which has infected Europe deeply and at a moment of crisis has revealed the massive contradictions between the continent’s professed liberalism and its liberalism in practice. But it is not enough just to say that Zionism alone determines the political contours of growing European authoritarianism. The UK, for instance, has also been sentencing peaceful eco protestors to years in prison.

It is, I think, more accurate to say that the establishment status quo is by necessity Zionist, and a centrist anti-politics, which stands for nothing but the maintenance of the violent and oppressive status quo, is a perfect political vehicle for such an ideology.

Israel is a vital European project and a valuable geopolitical extension of the violent status quo, and embracing a natural inclination towards authoritarianism to protect it just makes perfect sense.

June 9, 2026 Posted by | EUROPE, politics international, UK | Leave a comment

Rolls-Royce is turning a quiet Welsh site into a nuclear bet, and the strange part is how many homes three small reactors could power

Public money is carrying the risk

 SMRs are often promoted as cheaper and faster than conventional nuclear plants, but the first projects still need heavy financing, regulatory work, supply-chain confidence, and buyers willing to believe the model can scale.

By Indux, June 3, 2026, https://www.vozpopuli.com/indux/en/rolls-royce-is-turning-a-quiet-welsh-site-into-a-nuclear-bet-and-the-strange-part-is-how-many-homes-three-small-reactors-could-power/5488/ 

Rolls-Royce SMR and Great British Energy – Nuclear (GBE-N) have moved the United Kingdom’s first small modular reactor (SMR) project into a new phase, signing a contract that starts technology design work for three units planned at Wylfa in North Wales.

The project is expected to deliver at least 1.4 gigawatts of electric output, enough to power the equivalent of around 3 million homes for more than 60 years.

This is not a finished power plant, and it is not yet the final investment decision, but it is a big marker for a country trying to cut its exposure to volatile fossil fuel markets, rebuild industrial capacity, and keep the lights on without making the electric bill feel like a monthly shock. The material provided for this story described Wylfa as the centerpiece of a new British nuclear push.

Wylfa gets its second act

Wylfa is not new to nuclear power. The site on Anglesey once hosted a nuclear station that helped feed the British grid for decades before its last reactor shut down in 2015, leaving the area with the familiar question that follows many old industrial sites. What comes next?

The answer, at least for now, is a factory-built nuclear project led by Rolls-Royce SMR. The British government confirmed Wylfa in November 2025 as the home of the first small modular reactor plant in the program, with an initial three units and possible room for up to eight in the future.

That matters because Wylfa has had false starts before. Earlier replacement plans collapsed, and the local community was left waiting for a project big enough to bring jobs, training, and long-term investment back to the coast.

The Rolls-Royce design is called small, but the numbers are not tiny. Each unit is a 470 MWe pressurized water reactor, which means the first three units would add up to roughly 1.4 gigawatts of electric capacity.

The pitch is simple. Build much of the plant in factory conditions, move the pre-tested pieces to the site, and reduce the risk that has made traditional nuclear megaprojects expensive and slow.

World Nuclear News reported that about 90% of the SMR would be built away from the site, with the reactor unit measuring about 52 feet by 13 feet. That modular approach is supposed to make schedules more predictable and limit disruption around Wylfa, although nuclear projects rarely become easy just because the parts are smaller.

Jobs are part of the sell

The government says the first SMR project could support around 3,000 jobs at peak construction, along with thousands more across the national supply chain. Rolls-Royce SMR has put the wider employment impact even higher, saying its Wylfa program will support an average of almost 8,000 skilled jobs across the United Kingdom during the build program.

That difference matters. One figure is centered on peak construction at the project, while the other looks more broadly across the build program and the wider supply chain.

For Anglesey, the local promise is easy to understand. Big energy projects do not just bring engineers in hard hats. They bring apprenticeships, local contracts, traffic on access roads, new pressure on housing, and, ideally, years of steady work rather than a short construction rush.

Public money is carrying the risk

The program is also a test of how much public backing is needed to get new nuclear technology moving. The 2025 Spending Review allocated about $3.5 billion to enable the contract and wider SMR program, while the National Wealth Fund is committing up to about $805 million to support Rolls-Royce SMR’s reactor development.

That public support is not just a footnote. SMRs are often promoted as cheaper and faster than conventional nuclear plants, but the first projects still need heavy financing, regulatory work, supply-chain confidence, and buyers willing to believe the model can scale.

At the end of the day, the government is trying to turn Wylfa into more than one power station. It wants a repeatable British nuclear product that can be built at home and exported abroad.

At the end of the day, the government is trying to turn Wylfa into more than one power station. It wants a repeatable British nuclear product that can be built at home and exported abroad.

The timeline is still long

The contract allows Rolls-Royce SMR to begin site-specific design, regulatory engagement, and planning work ahead of a future final investment decision. That last phrase is important. It means the project has momentum, but it still has key approvals and financial steps ahead.

GBE-N has said work is set to start at the site in 2026, while the government has pointed to the mid-2030s for grid connection. So this is not a quick fix for today’s energy bills.

Still, nuclear power is being pitched as the steady partner for wind and solar. When the wind drops or demand spikes during a cold evening, the grid still needs reliable generation that can run day and night.

Why Rolls-Royce wants this win

For Rolls-Royce, Wylfa is more than a domestic contract. Chris Cholerton, chief executive of Rolls-Royce SMR, said the deal “unlocks the delivery” of the first three units and gives the U.K. program certainty, while also pointing to plans for up to six units in Czechia.

That is the bigger business angle. If Rolls-Royce can prove the model at Wylfa, it could strengthen its case in a global market where governments are looking for cleaner baseload power, industrial heat, and energy security.

Proof, however, is the key word. The SMR promise has been talked about for years. Wylfa is where Britain is trying to show whether the factory-built nuclear idea can move from slide decks into steel, concrete, regulation, and power lines.

Wylfa is now the test case

The United Kingdom is betting that small modular reactors can help solve several problems at once. Cleaner electricity, more energy independence, skilled jobs, and a stronger industrial base are all part of the same package.

That is a lot to ask from one coastal site. BHowever, Wylfa has become the place where those promises will start being measured against deadlines, budgets, and public confidence.

The official statement was published on GOV.UK.

June 8, 2026 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Police at Hinkley Point C as thousands of workers locked out

 Police attended Hinkley Point C on Wednesday (June 3) as part of an
ongoing industrial dispute that has seen thousands of workers locked-out of
the site. MEH Alliance workers staged a sit-in protest in the site canteen
on Tuesday (June 4).

The protest related to several issues alleged by
workers, including a change in shift patterns to include weekends. Workers
had previously held a vote to overwhelmingly reject the shift pattern
change. Following the protest, EDF has barred MEH Alliance workers from
attending site without pay this week – with no decision made on when they
can return.

 Bridgwater Mercury 6th June 2026, https://www.bridgwatermercury.co.uk/news/26169782.police-hinkley-point-c-thousands-workers-locked/

June 8, 2026 Posted by | employment, UK | Leave a comment

Up to 2,000 workers temporarily kicked off Hinkley Point C site after protest

 EDF has told around 2,000 mechanical and electrical (M&E) workers to stay
away from the Hinkley Point C construction site until next Monday (8 June)
after they downed tools in a dispute over shift patterns and other
grievances, Construction News understands.

The client for the £46bn
Somerset nuclear project suspended the passes of workers from the MEH
Alliance who took part in a sit-down protest on Tuesday (2 June). It is
understood that operatives refused to undertake scheduled tasks on site and
instead sat down for long periods in areas including the canteen and
changing rooms.

The workers are believed to be unhappy with a proposed
change to shift patterns being introduced in July that will see them on
duty for 10 days in a row every fortnight.

 Construction News 4th June 2026,  EDF has told around 2,000 mechanical and electrical (M&E) workers to stay
away from the Hinkley Point C construction site until next Monday (8 June)
after they downed tools in a dispute over shift patterns and other
grievances, Construction News understands. The client for the £46bn
Somerset nuclear project suspended the passes of workers from the MEH
Alliance who took part in a sit-down protest on Tuesday (2 June). It is
understood that operatives refused to undertake scheduled tasks on site and
instead sat down for long periods in areas including the canteen and
changing rooms. The workers are believed to be unhappy with a proposed
change to shift patterns being introduced in July that will see them on
duty for 10 days in a row every fortnight.

 Construction News 4th June 2026 EDF has told around 2,000 mechanical and electrical (M&E) workers to stay
away from the Hinkley Point C construction site until next Monday (8 June)
after they downed tools in a dispute over shift patterns and other
grievances, Construction News understands. The client for the £46bn
Somerset nuclear project suspended the passes of workers from the MEH
Alliance who took part in a sit-down protest on Tuesday (2 June). It is
understood that operatives refused to undertake scheduled tasks on site and
instead sat down for long periods in areas including the canteen and
changing rooms. The workers are believed to be unhappy with a proposed
change to shift patterns being introduced in July that will see them on
duty for 10 days in a row every fortnight.

 Construction News 4th June 2026,  EDF has told around 2,000 mechanical and electrical (M&E) workers to stay
away from the Hinkley Point C construction site until next Monday (8 June)
after they downed tools in a dispute over shift patterns and other
grievances, Construction News understands. The client for the £46bn
Somerset nuclear project suspended the passes of workers from the MEH
Alliance who took part in a sit-down protest on Tuesday (2 June). It is
understood that operatives refused to undertake scheduled tasks on site and
instead sat down for long periods in areas including the canteen and
changing rooms. The workers are believed to be unhappy with a proposed
change to shift patterns being introduced in July that will see them on
duty for 10 days in a row every fortnight.

 Construction News 4th June 2026, https://www.constructionnews.co.uk/supply-chain/up-to-2000-workers-temporarily-kicked-off-hinkley-point-c-site-after-protest-04-06-2026/

June 8, 2026 Posted by | employment, UK | Leave a comment

First Minister pressed over Welsh Government support for Wylfa small modular reactors

Wrexham.com 3rd June 2026

Wales’ new First Minister has been urged to provide clarity on the Welsh Government’s position on proposed small modular reactors at Wylfa.

During his inaugural First Minister’s Questions, Rhun ap Iorwerth, was asked by interim Welsh Labour Leader Ken Skates to confirm whether the new Plaid Cymru-led administration supports plans for up to eight small modular reactors at the Anglesey site……………………………………………………………………

 Mr ap Iorwerth said he had “always taken the approach of fighting for the economic benefits” that could come from any development at Wylfa and stressed that the site remained a reserved matter for the UK Government.

The First Minister stopped short of explicitly backing the construction of eight SMRs, but said the government would “work positively” on proposals because of the potential economic benefits for Anglesey and the wider region…………………………………………………………………………………………… https://wrexham.com/news/first-minister-pressed-over-welsh-government-support-for-wylfa-small-modular-reactors-293228.html

June 8, 2026 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

The Guardian view on NHS records: patients are not raw material for Palantir big tech

Ministers should end Palantir’s contract before medical confidentiality is sacrificed to Silicon Valley’s appetite for public data

Editorial, 5 June 26 https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/jun/04/the-guardian-view-on-nhs-records-patients-are-not-raw-material-for-big-tech

Ministers should end Palantir’s contract before medical confidentiality is sacrificed to Silicon Valley’s appetite for public dataFri 5 Jun 2026 03.54 AESTShare

Alarm bells ought to have rung when it emerged last month that Palantir engineers could gain “unlimited access” to identifiable NHS patient data. Such sensitive medical information was only supposed to be available either to someone involved in a patient’s care or with the patient’s informed consent. NHS England’s new position appears to have changed that, extending access to private companies because it may make data processing easier. Convenience is not a basis for undermining medical confidentiality.

Nicola Byrne, the government’s national data guardian, clearly thought the NHS had broken its promise that its £330m deal with Palantir would see “identifiable patient information … limited to NHS staff with a legitimate need”. Patients tell doctors things they may tell no one else. If they think that sensitive details can be disclosed to US tech corporations, trust will suffer – and patients will say less when the truth matters most.

This risk helps explain why MPs on parliament’s science, innovation and technology committee warned this week that Palantir had become an “unacceptable point of weakness”. The business model is simple. Britain supplies the raw material: NHS patient data. Silicon Valley monetises it. The problem is that the benefits – better models, new products – accrue not to the British public, but to US shareholders.

The MPs also argued that Palantir is not just another software firm. In the US it has worked with the military and immigration authorities on controversial programmes. Its co-founder, Peter Thiel, the committee noted, has disparaged the idea of a national health service. The report recommends that ministers should activate the February 2027 break clause in its £330m NHS Palantir contract – ending its relationship with the company and moving to either an in-house or UK-owned provider. The government should heed this advice.

The committee ought to be thanked for making it clear that this is no one-off scandal, but part of a wider pattern. Public bodies, it warns, have become dependent on a few powerful technology companies which the state lacks the capacity to challenge or replace. Officials often struggle to understand the systems they buy. Allowing critical public infrastructure to rest on foreign-owned platforms undermines state autonomy. Accountability is blurred when decisions on data access and procurement are buried in technical briefings and dense contracts.

This is especially concerning when assessing the government’s claim that a new £1.8bn digital ID system would make “public services quicker, easier and more secure to access”. Given the chequered history of big government IT projects, it is unsurprising that the committee is sceptical of its successful launch. Its report, correctly, views mandatory adoption as wrongheaded. The public sector holds citizens’ data on trust, MPs say, “and should therefore hold itself to a higher standard”. With patient data, that seems not to be the case.

Ministers have offered various reasons for digital ID: stopping illegal working, easing access to vehicle records and even checking bin collection days. None has stuck. The deeper problem is that digital transformation is treated as an exercise in efficiency, not one requiring public consent and parliamentary scrutiny. Infrastructure built around a person’s identity must not expand by bureaucratic drift. The committee’s call for separate parliamentary votes on each use of digital ID is the democratic lock missing from the NHS’s Palantir deal.

June 7, 2026 Posted by | secrets,lies and civil liberties, UK | Leave a comment

Rolls-Royce under fire for outsourcing parts of UK nuclear project to South Korea

 Multibillion-pound contract to build three small modular
reactors was signed with government body in April. Rolls-Royce is facing
mounting criticism from politicians and industry figures for a decision to
outsource the core parts of a multibillion-pound UK government plan for
three small nuclear reactors to South Korea.

The announcement by the
British engineering giant, the lead investor in a consortium developing the
reactors, has raised questions about whether the government’s target of
70 per cent of the project being British-made will be met.

Rolls-Royce
SMR’s selection of South Korea’s Doosan Enerbility to finalise designs
for key components for the small nuclear reactors has triggered warnings
from industry representatives that the UK is squandering a chance to build
its own supply chain for the technology. Liam Byrne, Labour MP and chair of
parliament’s business and trade committee, said he would be writing to
ministers seeking clarification as to how Rolls-Royce’s announcement is
compatible with the 70 per cent target.

 FT 5th June 2026, https://www.ft.com/content/dcc90c25-43e7-4456-84bb-35458dc6726c?syn-25a6b1a6=1

June 6, 2026 Posted by | business and costs, UK | Leave a comment

‘What’s happening is horrifying’: the rebel film-maker challenging AI’s march into Hollywood

While pro-Silicon Valley documentaries got major distribution deals, Valerie Veatch had to struggle to get her film, about Big Tech’s dark past and future, into the world. She talked to Charlotte O’Sullivan about what some attendees called ‘the scariest movie playing at Sundance’

Charlotte O’Sullivan, Jun 6, 2026, https://www.thenerve.news/p/valerie-veatch-interview-ghost-in-the-machine-documentary-ai-sundance-tech-bros?utm_source=www.thenerve.news&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=weekend-edition-gagged-facebook-s-whistleblower-james-mcavoy-q-a-nilufer-yanya&_bhlid=9a5a1970bb01aaa89602f0fb01add0f7ae856b22

Valerie Veatch doesn’t want to come across as “a crazy, bitter film-maker”. But she admits it’s “triggering” to talk about the challenges she faced when making Ghost in the Machine, her blisteringly enjoyable documentary about the dark past and present of AI, which hits UK cinemas today.

From the start, Ghost in the Machine was a hard sell. As Veatch says: “I couldn’t get funding from the usual places. People weren’t interested in a film that was tech-critical.” She wanted to talk about the “father of Silicon Valley”, Dr William Shockley, and his abiding interest in eugenics, to explore the sexism and racism that underpins “breathless, gushy” discussions about “superintelligence” and the “singularity” (the hypothetical moment when AI surpasses human intelligence). “I was so full of rage. This stuff is not inevitable.”

Veatch, who was born in Seattle but is now based in Kent, has made three critically acclaimed and zeitgeisty documentaries (including 2014’s Love Child and Me at the Zoo in 2012). For the new film, she talked to more than 30 US experts about the power dynamics behind the much-hyped, eye-wateringly lucrative AI revolution. She did the Zooms, and edited the Zooms, “compulsively, in the middle of the night, for a year; I did urgent listening and, somehow, I got a cut ready for Sundance”. Once Sundance 2026 accepted the film, Veatch got a grant, which paid for all the archival footage. And her dad and aunt came in as investors, she says proudly. “So this is an almost entirely homegrown film. I don’t think we could carry the message that we’re carrying if we were at all beholden to any large studio or distribution company.”

‘What is the difference between being in the pocket of Big Tech and being an independent voice? Well, a lot!’

Irreverence is Veatch’s thing and she cites the British director Adam Curtis as the biggest influence on her work (“I wanted to utilise the archive, the way he does … I wanted it to be surreal and sardonic”). Ghost in the Machine is crammed with jolting images: we see William Shockley, on TV, spewing his racist poison with the gentle patience of a man hawking encyclopaedias. Elsewhere, phrases chime in quietly chilling ways: the Victorian originator of eugenics, Francis Galton, wants to create a “galaxy of genius”. 

Also shown at Sundance this year, and distributed by the mainstream giant Focus Features in the US (and Universal Studios elsewhere), was The AI Doc: Or How I Became an Apocaloptimist. Made by Daniel Roher and Charlie Tyrell, this documentary, as its title suggests, manifests a cautious lack of pessimism on the subject of AI. Framed as a personal journey (Roher, about to become a father, wants to know if he’s bringing his baby into a safe world), it suggests this technology will always be with us. This film, which premieres at Sheffield DocFest next Friday, 12 June, and then goes on general release in the UK on 19 June, had the cooperation of the tech bros and includes on-camera interviews with Google Deepmind’s CEO, Demis Hassabis, and OpenAI’s Sam Altman. In the words of Daniela Amodei, the co-founder and CEO of Anthropic, “this train isn’t going to stop”. 

Veatch draws my attention to the fact that Sundance now receives funding from Google, adding: “Last year, so I’m told, audiences clapped when film-makers said their movies didn’t contain AI … this year was so different.” Even before the festival began, she sensed unease about her project. As it happened, Ghost in the Machine connected with audiences. In fact, it was a huge success, with word of mouth suggesting it was “the scariest movie playing at Sundance”. 

Still, Veatch gets infuriated when her film is compared to Roher’s. She says: “What is the difference, ultimately, between being in the pocket of Big Tech and being an independent voice? Well, a lot!”

Author and linguist Emily Bender (who appears in both Ghost in the Machine and The AI Doc) is on record as saying Veatch’s film is the better of the two. Bender says Roher “lets himself get buffeted by the imaginations of some of the most unhinged people in this space”, whereas Bender feels Veatch has “woven together an informed and engrossing essay”. Similarly, Timnit Gebru, a computer scientist and cofounder of Black in AI, who also shows up in both films, recently praised Ghost in the Machine while distancing herself from Roher’s movie. “She went on LinkedIn and said: “I reject [The AI Doc]. They used us like chocolate chips.’” Veatch nods grimly. “And they did. They sprinkled in diversity.”

‘This industry is rotten. I hate it! But this is why we need women film-makers’

Veatch insists this isn’t about individual movies getting it wrong. It’s about a trend to sideline or erase voices with a different point of view. A new British production called AI: Probably Nothing to Worry About, is showing at Tribeca this weekend. Veatch says she only heard about the movie through Bender, who was interviewed for it but didn’t make the final cut. The film-maker said something like: “Sorry we didn’t use your footage. In the end, we were just focusing on people who were in the room when big discoveries happened.” Veatch pulls a face. “In other words, ‘we focused on men’. This industry is rotten. I hate it! But this is why we need women film-makers.”

Veatch says repeatedly that she feels the need to be “aggressive” when talking about her film. That she’s willing to seem “negative”, because “what’s happening with AI is so urgent – the building of all these hyper-scale data centres is horrifying.” In the US, she says, “they’re trying to criminalise dissent”. (Wired recently reported that federal intelligence agencies and domestic law enforcement are targeting “anti-technology extremists”). Veatch jiggles in her seat. “The film’s going to get a release on PBS and YouTube in September. And we’re about to get a huge grant, to make data centres the theme of our summer push, in the US. I’ve invited Erin Brockovich [the environmental activist, who has started a database to track data centres around America] to one of our events. I’m like: “I really hope she says yes. She’s an icon. You can’t criminalise Erin Brockovich!” 

Veatch says she’d “love to do something in the UK about data centres”, then pauses and, for the first and only time in the whole interview, sounds lost. She murmurs, “There are networks in the US. I don’t know anyone here …” Human contact means everything to Veatch. Concerned citizens of the UK, if you want to join forces with this formidable woman, drop her a line.

Ghost in the Machine is released in UK cinemas today, or can be rented through Kinema

The Nerve is a fearless, independent media title launched by five former Guardian / Observer journalists: investigative journalist Carole Cadwalladr, editors Sarah Donaldson, Jane Ferguson and Imogen Carter and creative director Lynsey Irvine. We cover culture, politics and tech,

June 6, 2026 Posted by | media, technology, UK | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »