The Guardian view on Labour’s nuclear bet: big promises, but bigger questions remain unanswered | Editorial

A bold state investment signals nuclear revival, but unresolved issues around cost, waste and safety demand urgent ministerial clarity

The government's decision to invest 14.2bn in nuclear energy, on top of existing funds, marks a return to significant state funding of nuclear power after Hinkley Point C, financed by the private sector, was dogged by delays and cost overruns. It is also a decisive shift in energy policy. Ministers have high hopes of a nuclear energy renaissance. Ed Miliband, the energy secretary, described the prospect of a new reactor in Suffolk, Sizewell C, combined with new money for modular reactor development and fusion research, as agoldenage". This was a striking choice of words from the greenest voice in the cabinet.

The Climate Change Committee's latest advice to thegovernment took a more restrained view of nuclear,which drew industry ire. Mr Miliband's commitment to renewable energy is not in doubt. Thegovernment has made good progress on wind andsolar - although the cancellation of an offshore wind project was a stepbackwards. Nuclear is meant tocomplement support for renewables and speed up the transition away from gas. That, at least, is the theory, and Labour's bet reflects a broader shift across Europe. The other part of the calculation made by ministers including Rachel Reeves - whose departmentmade the announcement - is jobs. SizewellC is expected to employ 10,000 people, including 1,500 apprentices.

Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.