With nuclear in the news today, readers might be interested in this statement from Steve Webb.
The Lib Dems also have an email list to keep people informed about our anti-nuclear campaigns.
And don’t forget our screensaver – available here.
Subscribe
-
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
-
Like us on Facebook
-
Subscribe to our feed
-
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Most Read
- Defining our future in Burnham Britain
- “Palestine should be run by Palestinians” so why won’t Britain reckon with what it did?
- Britain should confront history honestly, not selectively
- The Falklands are under threat again and we can’t rely on America to save us
- Andy Burnham - new messiah or naughty boy?
Search
Op-eds
-
Burnham has left a gap on tax. We should run through it. (Tom Reeve)
-
Should the Liberal Democrats support “None of the Above”? (Samuel Jackson)
-
Extending the school day: A catalyst for economic growth (Edward Marsh)
-
An open letter to Andy Burnham (Tony Vickers)
-
Four challenges in Andy Burnham’s in-tray (Callum Robertson)
-
Lib Dems should target becoming largest party in local government (LDN#212)
-
The Joy of Six 1552
-
Trump offended by key Burnham appointment
-
Alexander Mackendrick and Sweet Smell of Success
-
Clear the gallery!
-
RMT calls three one-day strikes over Midland Main Line safety
-
The first serving PM to receive the Legion of Honour?
-
Harry Chapin: W.O.L.D.
-
Will there be a general election?
-
Michelin-starred restaurateur faces jail for using ants as dessert garnish
Recent Comments
Pawel Urbanski
Where I grew up in Poland, school lessons finished at 3, but there was optional supervised care until 5 or 6, often just run in the library, for the parents who...
Peter Martin
@ Chloe, "Who picks up the tab for the net fiscal deficit of the Scottish & Welsh governments " You're absolutely right that it should be t...
Tony Vickers
@Tom Reeve you sort of get it but lets be specific how we'd pay for raising the income tax threshold. We would tax the annual rental value of land. Its been our...
cim
Matt (Bristol): for single-member AV it's not terrible, but most ways of including it in multi-member STV break the proportional representation aspect very badl...
Rif Winfield
Jack, you are absolutely right, as were Tom Ellis and the young David Lloyd George. The tragedy of the Newport meeting in January 1896 was that it set back the ...
One Comment
One cheer I think for the government’s decision to support a new programme of nuclear power stations. One cheer only because the decision is long overdue. One cheer only because it is still not clear how nuclear electricity will be paid for. Though cheaper than all but the best onshore wind, nuclear remains more expensive than fossil stations. If the price of carbon is low, nuclear will still not be economic: if high the promoters will make embarrassingly large profits.
The problem with the party’s anti-nuclear stance is that it is illogical: a dangerous attribute for any party seeking government. If we are serious about global warming we must take every oportunity to reduce CO2 emissions. We do not have the luxury to pick and choose. Worse, our opposition is based on false premises. On any objective grounds nuclear is safe, clean and relatively inexpensive. The problems of long term storage are political not technical. There is no reason why nuclear should push out wind and other renewables or delay efficiency drives: we need everything. If we want to be seriously treated as a potential government we must get back into the real world.