
SNP's nuclear stance costing Scotland jobs, says UK minister
While energy is largely reserved to the UK Government, the Scottish Government effectively has a veto on new nuclear power developments through planning regulations.
Last week, in her Spending Review, Rachel Reeves unveiled a multi-billion-pound investment programme in new nuclear energy.
The Chancellor said £2.5 billion of the £8.3bn set aside for Great British Energy would be redirected to support new nuclear technologies, including small modular reactors, and a new plant in the south of England.
READ MORE:
In an interview with BBC Scotland's Sunday Show, Mr Shanks was asked about why the money had been redirected, particularly given the party's manifesto made no mention of nuclear, but instead focussed on onshore wind, solar, and hydro power.
'Well, it's not an exclusive list, because there's a lot of other clean energy technologies,' Mr Shanks said.
'Nuclear is part of our energy mix.
'I'm not going to make any apologies for the government investing in nuclear where thousands of highly skilled jobs can be delivered, including in Scotland if it wasn't for the ideological position of the SNP to block new nuclear, could be delivering those well paid skilled jobs here in Scotland.
'They turned their face against that, and they will have to answer for that.'
He added: 'The broader point here is Great British Energy is all about harnessing the power of the public purse to invest not just in clean power projects directly but supply chains that drive them.
'Because unlike the previous government, we want to see those well paid, industrialised jobs coming alongside us, not towing in offshore wind and switching it on, but building it in this country and getting the manufacturing jobs that go with it.
"That's how we deliver the jobs of the future.'
The Herald revealed at the weekend that unions are calling on the Scottish Government to end its longstanding resistance to new nuclear power.
Louise Gilmour, from GMB Scotland, has written to Energy Minister Gillian Martin calling for an urgent rethink.
She said: 'Amidst broken promises on a green jobs revolution, the Scottish Government cannot afford to scoff at the offering of nuclear energy on the table. An offer that would in large part be funded by the UK Government. The ban against new nuclear – especially SMRs – must be lifted.'
Responding to Ms Gilmour's comments, a Scottish Government spokesperson told The Herald: 'The Scottish Government is focused on supporting growth and creating jobs by capitalising on Scotland's immense renewable energy capacity rather than expensive new nuclear energy which takes decades to build, creates toxic waste which is difficult and costly to dispose of and does not generate power at a cost that will bring down energy bills.'
READ MORE:
Meanwhile, during the interview with the BBC, Mr Shanks was pressed on the impact of oil and gas job losses in Aberdeen.
Companies in the north east have blamed the UK Government's Energy Profits Levy, which means the effective rate of tax on oil and gas companies is 78%.
Mr Shanks said: 'Every single job loss is hugely distressing for the individuals and for their families and communities.
'I do not for a second discount the impact that job losses have, but I do not think that is an entirely fair assessment, because yes, there have been job losses recently announced, but there have also been thousands of jobs created.'
He argued that transition involved movement from one part of the energy sector to another, and that support for workers was crucial.
'That is why we announced incredibly quickly that passporting support—where if you are an offshore oil and gas worker doing a particular job and you could do the same job in offshore wind, you should not have to requalify or have your skills reassessed.
'You should be able to move straight into that job. That is something the previous government talked about for a long time. We delivered it.'
READ MORE:
The Labour Energy Minister also said he was 'hopeful' that an announcement on investment in Grangemouth will be made soon.
Mr Shanks said more than 80 potential investors had come forward since the UK Government pledged £200 million for the site.
The Government is seeking a further £600m in private investment in the area, following the closure of Scotland's last oil refinery.
Mr Shanks said the investment would help provide a 'long-term, sustainable future' for the site.
Petroineos, the joint venture between INEOS and PetroChina, which owns the 100-year-old refinery, first announced plans to close in November 2023.
They said the plant's future as an import terminal would 'require significantly fewer people to operate' and that there would need to be a 'net reduction of approximately 400 roles over the next two years.'
Mr Shanks said the Government was engaging with businesses on new projects for the area.
'We have had some really positive meetings around potential investors,' he said. 'In fact, more than 80 potential investors have come forward. Scottish Enterprise is driving forward due diligence on that. There are a number of really credible projects that we are developing at the moment.
'We hope we will have some really positive announcements to make soon.'
Mr Shanks said the 'unprecedented' £200m investment from the National Wealth Fund would help 'create the jobs of the future' while ensuring long-term investment security.
He added: 'I am not involved in the due diligence, as you would not expect, but there are some really exciting, viable projects coming forward that will deliver jobs in Grangemouth long into the future.'
Last week, Jan Robertson, Grangemouth director for Scottish Enterprise, said she had received a 'mixture of inquiries' from businesses—some interested in the site itself and others with 'a good opportunity to become projects in the relatively near term.'
'What I mean by that is the next three to four years,' she told Holyrood's Economy and Fair Work Committee.
'Our approach at the moment is very much working with those and working as closely and quickly as we can to make the progress that we want to see in Grangemouth.'
Ms Martin told the committee the 'door is not closed' to companies looking to work at the site, and said Petroineos had also received approaches.
'We could look back five years and start pointing fingers, but the most important thing is that in the last year—actually the last six months—Project Willow and the taskforce have moved things along in a way that has been swift, agile and focused,' she said.
'I am feeling so much more confident than I did this time last year in the prospects for that site.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Western Telegraph
39 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
Starmer insists Government's welfare reforms must be pushed through
The Prime Minister said 'everybody agrees' the social security system is not working and needs to change, when asked if there would be more measures to see off a Labour rebellion. The Government has sought to soften the impact of its plans, which it hopes will save £5 billion a year by 2030, in a bid to reassure MPs concerned about the impact of the cuts. The proposals include tightening eligibility for personal independence payments. Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall (Jacob King/PA) Up to 1.3 million people across England and Wales could lose at least some support under the changes, the Government has suggested. Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall earlier this week promised 'non-negotiable' protections for the most vulnerable benefits recipients would be included in the welfare bill in a bid to quell backbench unease, the Guardian reported. Asked whether there would be further concessions, the Prime Minister told reporters travelling with him to the G7 in Canada: 'Well we have got to get the reforms through and I have been clear about that from start to finish. 'The system is not working, it's not working for those that need support, it's not working for taxpayers. 'Everybody agrees it needs reform, we have got to reform it and that is what we intend to do.' The welfare reform bill is due to be published next week.

The National
41 minutes ago
- The National
Maxwell details Scottish FA decision over Rangers takeover
The Ibrox club had to submit paperwork to Hampden bosses before the takeover could be given the green light due to dual interest legislation. Andrew Cavenagh and 49ers Enterprises had to go through the legal process due to the investment wing holding shares in English Premier League club Leeds. The Scottish FA has granted permission for the takeover deal to go ahead without any issue, subject to written undertakings signed by club officials and the investing party. The agreement means the investing party's interest in any other club does not preclude Rangers from participating in any UEFA competition they qualify for, among other commitments. Chief executive Maxwell said: 'No, they've not been particularly complicated. To be honest, we've definitely been more open. Multi-club ownership is here. It's part of football. 'When you look across Europe, the number of clubs that are involved in some multi-club structure is growing by the day. We need to be part of that, why would you limit that investment? 'When you think about it was actually interesting when you start to think through the process and we had dual interest regulations, which meant that, when you're involved in a club, you can't get involved in a Scottish club unless we say yes. 'But someone like Tony Bloom, for example, is getting involved in Hearts and he has a track record at Brighton, understands football and already has Union SG and those other clubs. 'We actually make it harder for him to come into Scottish football than we do for someone who's just sold a company for £10 million that's got no understanding of the Scottish game. So when you actually get into it, you go that probably doesn't make a lot of sense. 'So our board are looking at it from two perspectives. Does it grow and develop the game? Will it generate financial investment into Scottish football? Does it give us an integrity issue? 'The integrity issue falls away because that would only happen if it was two Scottish teams playing under our jurisdiction, which it's not. 'The jurisdictional matter becomes a UEFA point and we've been clear in all the dual interests. 'All the multi-club investment models that we've done, we've been very clear that if there was, similar to a Crystal Palace scenario at the moment where there's a question mark about which one's going to play in Europe, it can't be the Scottish club that's the unintended consequence or has to step aside from European competition. Read more: Rangers follow Hibernian, with Black Knights investment, and Hearts, with Tony Bloom's prospective backing, as the latest club featuring in a multi-club ownership model. For Maxwell, it's an overwhelming positive that new investors have experience across a number of clubs. He added: 'The good thing is, because the vast majority of clubs that have came into Scotland have got other multi-club ownership models, they're used to that and when you speak to the guys involved in the Hearts deal they're very aware of what UEFA need and what UEFA want and how that structure needs to look to make sure we don't get ourselves those problems. 'So I think it's here, we can't ignore it and why would you want to step away from it? Why would you want to block investment coming into the game if it's going to be good for our clubs? 'The trick is that the club need to then go and spend that money as wisely as possible. 'We don't get involved in that bit, but from a board perspective there's definitely a willingness to look at anything that generates more investment into Scotland.'


Daily Record
42 minutes ago
- Daily Record
Rangers takeover crew handed ringing SFA endorsement as American dream can be good for Scottish football
Andrew Cavenah and the 49ers investors were given the green light to take charge at Ibrox and it wasn't a tough decision Ian Maxwell has revealed the SFA gave the Rangers takeover the green light as he is convinced the American money men can be a positive force for Scottish football. Hampden chiefs have the power to step in if potential new owners look dodgy with tightened up fit and proper person rules and there have also been questions raised across the globe amid the rise of multi-club ownership. Gers have been backed by the San Francisco 49ers' investment fund – who also have control at Leeds United, while Hearts and Hibs have also received cash boosts from Tony Bloom and Billy Foley, who are involved with Brighton and Bournemouth. Maxwell insisted it was an easy decision to rubber stamp the developments though – as the newcomers to Scottish football all have solid track records and are no fly-by-nights. And the SFA chief executive is convinced Andrew Cavenagh and the 49ers team will be good for Rangers and the wider game. Maxwell, speaking before Rangers slammed his organisation over the John Brown notice complaint, said: 'It's not been particularly complicated. To be honest, we've definitely been more open. Multi-club ownership is here. It's part of football. 'When you look across Europe, the number of clubs that are involved in some multi-club structure is growing by the day. We need to be part of that or why would you limit that investment? 'Why would you want to block investment coming into the game if it's going to be good for our clubs? 'The trick is the club needs to then go and spend that money as wisely as possible. 'We don't get involved in that bit, but from a board perspective there's definitely a willingness to look at anything that generates more investment into Scotland. 'It was actually interesting when you start to think through the process and we had dual interest regulations which meant that if you're involved in a club, you can't get involved in a Scottish club unless we say yes. 'But someone like Tony Bloom for example, that's getting involved in Hearts, has a track record at Brighton, understands football, has Union St. Gilloise and those other clubs. 'We actually make it harder for him to come into Scottish football than we do for someone who's just sold a company for £10 million that's got no understanding of the Scottish game. 'When you actually get into it, that probably doesn't make a lot of sense. 'Our board, we're looking at it from two perspectives. 'Does it grow and develop the game? Will it generate financial investment into Scottish football? 'Does it give us an integrity issue? The integrity issue falls away because that would only happen if it was two Scottish teams playing under our jurisdiction, which it's not.' The European issue is one that's got UEFA's attention, with several clubs now under the same umbrellas, such as the Red Bull and City Football Group. English FA Cup winners Crystal Palace are facing protests over their spot in the Europa League with their owners also involved with Lyon, who have qualified for the same competition. Maxwell is confident it won't become a problem for Scottish sides – and they would never be forced to step aside. He said: "The jurisdictional matter becomes a UEFA point and we've been clear in all the dual interests, all the multi-club investment models that we've done, we've been very clear that if there was, similar to a Crystal Palace scenario at the moment, where there's a question mark about which one's going to play in Europe, it can be the Scottish club that's the unintended consequence or has to step aside from European competition. 'UEFA have shown in the past that they can find a way, they're both Red Bull teams so they've found a way to make it work, whether it's just a timing issue or whether it's not. 'The good thing is, because the vast majority of clubs that have came into Scotland have got other multi-club ownership models, they're used to that and you speak to the guys involved in Hearts and they're very aware of what UEFA need and what UEFA want and how that structure needs to look to make sure we don't get ourselves those problems.'