Who are Britain Remade?
There’s a concerted attempt to attack Scotland’s long-standing commitment to no new nuclear power, alongside a full-scale assault on the idea of Net Zero, and the very basics of climate policy (however inadequate mainstream policy is).
This is being led by Nigel Farage who has called Net Zero ‘the New Brexit’, whatever that means. All this has been echoed by Tony Blair’s intervention this week where he argued that any attempt to limit fossil fuels in the short term or encourages people to limit consumption is “doomed to fail”. Alongside this we can see Scottish Labour’s recent commitment to the cause of new nuclear power in Scotland.
Today The Scotsman ran with a front-page splash all about how ‘SNP voters back nuclear power’ by Deputy Political Editor David Bol and Alexander Brown.
The article was replete with quotes from Labour MSP for East Lothian, Martin Whitfield, Scottish Conservative MP, John Lamont, who said the Scottish Government embracing nuclear power would be “basic common sense”. Then there’s a quote from Sam Richards, founder and campaign director for Britain Remade, who, it turns out commissioned the poll and was also enthusiastically pro-nuclear.
What The Scotsman didn’t explain though, was who ‘Britain Remade’ are? They’re presented as if they’re maybe pollsters or some independent think-tank.
But Britain Remade is a Tory think-tank and lobby group campaigning on behalf of nuclear power. Jason Brown is Head of Communications for Britain Remade, a former No. 10 media Special Adviser and Ben Houchen’s comms Adviser.
Ben Houchen, Conservative Mayor of the Tees Valley
Jeremy Driver is the Head of Campaigns at Britain Remade, a former Lloyds Banker and Parliamentary Assistant to Ann Soubry. Sam Dumitriu is Head of Policy at Britain Remade who formerly worked at the Adam Smith Institute. These are Tory SPADS working on their own campaign to support new nuclear in Scotland: Lift The Ban On New Scottish Nuclear Power.
Britain Remade claimed they are not affiliated: “We’re an independent grassroots organisation. We are not affiliated with, or part of, any political party” their website says. They may not be officially affiliated to any party, but it’s very clear where their politics (and their staff) come from.
So here we have the Scotsman giving over its front-page to a Tory lobby group to promote their campaign. On the same day they published a similar piece in the Telegraph “SNP’s ‘senseless’ nuclear ban ‘damaging Scotland’” so it’s really working for them.
This is not just a question of client journalism, it’s a question of how far right-wing forces, often working with dark money, will attempt to derail even the most modest (and completely inadequate) environmental policies. Quite why Saudi-funded Tony Blair should jump on the anti Net Zero bandwagon is anybody’s guess, but it’s quite clear there is a coordinated pro-nuclear lobbying group in action in Scotland that pans across the Conservatives and Labour parties, and is supported by astroturf groups and pliant media friends. Watch this space for more on the new nuclear lobby.
Your analysis is both on point and on target. You have it right on the money — and I mean that literally.
Yours is excellent journalism at work. You have laid bare the sinews of power structures at work in the real world and it’s often concealed naked brutality. I am reminded of Hobbs “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.” Poetic/philosophic exaggeration perhaps but a worthy reminder.
Dito!
James O’Brien in “How they broke britain’ highlights the incestuous relationship between the tory party, think tanks, pollsters, bbc, press, interns and some businesses.
In Scotland replace Tory party with unionism.
Deep shame on Labour for promoting nuclear with the tories!
Controversial bbc this week was saying Hunterston was nuclear free – eeehhh???
This of course follows the premature and destructive closure of Grangemouth!
You can see the pieces of the puzzle unionism wishes the people of Scotland to piece together.
Scotland dependent on England for energy, whereas, we all know the opposite to be true!
The. Scottish Government needs to be bolder and louder in highlighting to the people of Scotland the dangerous nuclear strategy westminster seeks to impose on Scotland!
Remember Dounreay!
It is still an active nuclear accident!
Unionism can’t be trusted an inch, let alone a half life of 25,000 years!
Sigh.
Nuclear power is a red herring because we have no known ability to deal with the waste nor decommissioning reactors once they get too old. All it’s fuel and assembly requires fossil fuels (anyone seen a solar or nuclear powered uranium mining machine recently?), so once you “phase out FF by replacing it with nuclear” you can’t build anymore nuclear or renewables. Also, nuclear requires a consistent input of electricity for safety purposes – in the Spanish blackout yesterday the Spanish nuke plants automatically shut down. To quote a BBC article:
“….but four nuclear power reactors at Almaraz, Ascó and and Vandellós were automatically shut down by the outage, and three others were already offline anyway.”
So even if you went 100% nuclear and renewables, you’d still need gas/hydro backup for the nuke plants.
We have to remind ourselves that nuclear plants and renewables produce electricity, not concrete nor iron ore nor bauxite nor rare earth metals.
Plus, to replace fossil fuels the world would have to be building 3 reactors a day worldwide, whilst shuttering 2 fossil fuel plants a day.
Is it happening? No, therefore it isn’t going to happen. If English or Scottish nuclear is going to take as long as Hinckley Point C to come on line, then sellers of rocket stoves and boxes of matches should do well in the interim.
Net zero is a red herring because newables require fossil fuels to mine, manufacture, transport and install, and more signficantly, not one iota of renewable infrastructure as displaced any FF infrastructure, it has merely added to the total energy mix. Despite the claims of Mark Jacobson and others, it ain’t gonna happen. Especially not within the current market-orientated dominant paradigm.
Yes, you can have renewables, but humans are going to have to realise that it won’t be a one-for-one replacement for fossil fuels or nuclear. Until we grasp that nettle and the other one of leaving it all ‘to the market’ this issue will never be resolved. Until, as is happening already (with me certainly), people start self-rationing because they simply cannot afford the price.
Less energy use, and very localised and owned energy systems are the only way forward that will even attempt to work.
Whatever energy system is pushed by these “think tanks” – more like Unthink tanks, is clearly a sign that someone smells a profit somewhere, usually through some kind of government subsidy and/or price commitment. I don’t think any of them actually give a sh*t about where energy comes from, as long as it keeps coming and they can be involved in the profits.
Looks like we need to get the old SCRAM – Scottish Campaign to Resist the Atomic Menace going again.
Bliar is a shill got the fossil fuel, nuclear weapons / atoms NOT for peace and tech bro hegemony.
Remade Scotland one to watch for!
Should be easy on this occasion. Scotland is self sufficient with renewables and has abundant other energy reserves to meet all our energy needs without nuclear power. England is in a different situation and they may need nuclear to fulfill their energy needs.
Simply say we oppose nuclear power stations being built in Scotland to provide energy for England because they don’t want to build nuclear power plants down south. Scotland takes all the risks to provide energy for English customers. It might sound a bit nationalistic but I do think this would have a lot of popular support throughout Scotland.
The tale of corporate media and astroturfed groups pushing for a big policy shift in painfully familiar to trans people.
Again, I’d recommend Nuclear is Not the Solution: the folly of atomic power in the age of climate change, by MV Ramana (2024). In the author’s opinion, nuclear power is pushed by capitalists to solve a problem caused by capitalists, appeals to elites and fantasies about growth, often exploiting the myth of the entrepreneur and gullible journalists, and is inextricably linked to militarism (and global armageddon). It’s an expensive folly mired in corruption, extortion and undelivered promises. Reactor integrity will be threatened by increasing climate volatility. Nuclear cannot be rolled out at anywhere near the scale required, even if all other problems were solved.
Renewables will require a paradigm shift, with new infrastructure planning, and their negative consequences minimised.
p235 “This is an open and shut case. Expanding nuclear energy will not help address climate change but will worsen a range of environmental problems and security risks.”
The nuclear industry also appeals to people who prefer secrecy over transparency, centralisation of power over democracy (let alone biocracy), and get a kind of sick thrill about poisoning the world for hundreds of human generations (best case scenario).
….but Nuclear energy will be so cheap and abundant that we won’t even need to meter it ! 70 years and still waiting for this Utopia !
Have we been lied to ?
Muchly.
Thanks for drawing attention to this. There is a very determined effort going on to force us to accept new nuclear power.
I have recently fallen out with Octopus. I discovered that, without telling customers, their energy mix is now 15% nuclear. I was and still am shocked because they have previously made a great thing about their green credentials. I have been an anti-nuclear campaigner for 50 years and -as I told them – I would never knowingly buy nuclear electricity. I need all my consumption to be covered by renewable, and preferably local and co-operative, generation.
I already had a dispute with them because they refuse to pay anything for my solar PV exports unless I install a smart meter which I will not do. So they get my electricity for free while charging what they themselves agree is an outrageous price for electricity I buy from them, the highest rates in the UK no less, while the rural highlands is trashed and industrialised to send electricity to London. I have cancelled my contract with Octopus and changed supplier.
The reason for the promotion of nuclear now is that the techno-fascists have discovered that the vast amounts of energy required to drive their digital dystopia simply cannot be generated by renewables without trashing vast areas of the UK. And despite their rejection of any due diligence, consultation or planning constraints, building it all out will take too long. They want to power their facial recognition, their AI, their digital ID and digital ‘currency’ right now. They are also increasingly concerned that more and more people are installing their own solar panels, or developing local community energy projects that make them less dependent on centralised power.
Of course traditional nuclear is now almost impossible to finance and construct commercially, which is why they are so keen on Rolls Royce’s ‘small modular reactors’, the sort of thing developed for nuclear submarines and no doubt similar to Russia’s new nuclear powered missiles that can be deployed and re-deployed in space.
The other reason is of course that all the new nuclear weapons we are all spending bullions on developing need fuel. And nuclear power plants are where that comes from.
Although climate change and the ecological emergency are real enough, ‘Net Zero’ was always an accounting con-trick used to justify building out the electricity infrastructure. So they are replacing ‘net zero’ with a new, equally meaningless goal. ‘energy security’.
The good news is that the whole nightmare is unravelling. The drive for nuclear power is really a desperate effort to keep the ‘Great Reset’ on the road. But it is literally running out of fuel, and without the supposed (but always ludicrous) justification that it is the only possible solution to the climate emergency, they are left with nothing except forcing it on us all by sheer violence.
Nuclear power is an economic, political and ecological disaster in every way. We have to keep saying ‘no thanks’.
All that plutonium for future generations!