Nuclear Safeguards (EU Exit and Fees) (Amendment) Regulations 2026
House of Lords · Grand Committee · 23 Jun 2026 · 9 speeches · Official Report
Considered in Grand Committee
Moved by
That the Grand Committee do consider the Nuclear Safeguards (EU Exit and Fees) (Amendment) Regulations 2026.
My Lords, these draft regulations were laid before the House on 23 April 2026. I want to briefly outline the purpose of nuclear safeguards and explain the proposed amendments to the nuclear safeguards regulations. These regulations form the foundation of the UK’s civil nuclear safeguards regime, enabling us to meet our international obligations. These amendments are designed to refine and strengthen the UK’s system. Nuclear safeguards are a cornerstone of the global nuclear non-proliferation regime. They are accounting, reporting and verification processes that demonstrate that nuclear material and facilities are not being diverted for military use. Safeguards are how we show the International Atomic Energy Agency and the international community that civil nuclear material is being used as it should be and is not being diverted into military programmes. The safeguards system is also central to building confidence for international nuclear trade and co-operation. These are distinct from nuclear safety and security but, of course, they are just as vital. For almost 50 years, the UK has committed to meeting our international obligations and supporting the international nuclear safeguards regime. A strong, well-functioning regime sends a clear message that the UK takes its responsibility as a nuclear state seriously. Our current safeguards regime has been in place since the UK left the European Atomic Energy Community, Euratom, in 2020. It was designed to be equivalent in...
My Lords, I thank the Minister for setting out the purpose of these regulations. Nuclear safeguards and the system for reporting, inspection and verification gives the International Atomic Energy Agency and the wider world the confidence that our civil nuclear material is being used for peaceful purposes and is not being diverted into weapons programmes. Without a credible safeguards regime, we cannot trade in civil nuclear material, operate our existing plants or attract the international partners on whom our nuclear ambitions depend. The 2019 regulations established our domestic regime post Brexit. This instrument, some seven years on, does several things. It removes transitional provisions that were only ever intended to smooth the exit from Euratom; tightens and clarifies the language operators must work within; introduces new offences to plug enforcement gaps; adjusts reporting timelines to give the Office for Nuclear Regulation more time to scrutinise what it receives; and, most significantly for our international standing, transitions the UK from Euratom-style basic technical characteristic questionnaires to the IAEA’s own design information questionnaire format. It also amends the associated fees regulations to put the ONR’s cost recovery on a clearer statutory footing. On these Benches, we recognise this as an essential and overdue update to a globally recognised regulatory system, and we support it. We particularly welcome the removal of the Euratom transition...
My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for coming to the Committee to introduce these regulations. I am particularly pleased to be opposite him for the first time on these issues. I hope we will have many similar exchanges in the years to come. I am glad to say that, on this occasion, we are in agreement. There is little I can add to the excellent contribution of the noble Earl, Lord Russell. A strong, independent nuclear safeguards regime is vital for our civil nuclear industry to function effectively. However, the Government must support nuclear site operators and other nuclear industry partners to ensure that they are not placing unworkable burdens on the nuclear industry. As the Minister said in his introduction, the instrument will implement most of the recommendations from the post-implementation review in 2019, so it is largely Conservative Party policy. The Nuclear Safeguards (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 are the current regime used to demonstrate that civil nuclear material is not unlawfully diverted into military use. Also relevant are the Nuclear Safeguards (Fees) Regulations 2021, which regulate the fees payable by operators to the Office for Nuclear Regulation-ONR. This instrument will amend both to remove regulations related to the transition from Euratom, as both previous speakers have said, which are no longer applicable or do not apply to the UK context. We agree with that. A new offence corrects an oversight, when the NSR 19 was originally implemented,...
I thank the noble Earl, Lord Russell, and the noble Lord, Lord Moynihan, for the support and the useful additional questions. I thank the noble Lord, Lord Moynihan, for his wish to be opposite me for a long time. I cannot make any guarantees on that. I agree with some of the points made, which largely support what I said. As I said, these amendments strengthen our position and make things easier. They will support trade and operations that are central to the sector’s work. The noble Earl, Lord Russell, asked why there is a gap in closing the offences part. The answer is that a statutory instrument was needed to do that, and this is a statutory instrument to achieve that. It is important that we are now closing those gaps. These amendments remove what has been a long transition agreement that really is not needed any more, given where we are domestically. The industry has largely welcomed this. By bringing our design reporting requirements in line with those of the IAEA, we will make it simpler for both domestic and international new entrants to the market. That includes, on the point made by the noble Earl, Lord Russell, the SMRs, which are crucially important for where we go next. The noble Earl, Lord Russell, and the noble Lord, Lord Moynihan, raised operator concerns. There is no doubt that the operators expressed some concerns about the move, for example, to use the IAEA questionnaire so quickly. We listened to that and introduced a longer transition period, to give them...
Motion agreed.
Committee adjourned at 5.16 pm.