Scotland's information watchdog has ordered the release of hidden details of Angus Robertson’s meeting with an Israeli diplomat after a lengthy freedom of information battle.
Women supporting refugees have been abused, followed and threatened by men in anti-immigration groups who claim they want to protect women. Now there are calls for big tech to do more.
The prime minister Sir Keir Starmer’s plans to reform the regulation of nuclear power and weapons to make new developments easier have provoked “serious concerns” within the Scottish Government, according to emails obtained by The Ferret.
The Scottish energy minister, Gillian Martin, wrote to the UK nuclear minister, Lord Vallance, in March, rejecting the suggestion that Scotland could “reap the benefits” of the reforms in helping to build new nuclear reactors.
She also expressed worries that proposals for a “lead regulator” system designed to simplify and speed up the handling of nuclear projects would threaten the independence of the Scottish Environment Protection Agency.
Campaigners warned that the “weakening” of nuclear safety regulation could lead to workers and the public being exposed to more radiation, which can cause cancer. They stressed that Scotland did not need nuclear power and its “toxic legacy”.
The UK Government said that Starmer would “like to see benefits delivered across the UK”. But it promised to work with the Scottish Government “in good faith without presuming an outcome”.
Nuclear power has become one of the most contentious issues in the run-up to the Scottish Parliament elections on 7 May.
Reporting you can check, not just share.
We publish rigorous, sourced journalism and we correct it when it’s wrong. If you value facts over noise, help keep this work independent.
Scottish Labour has repeatedly attacked the Scottish National Party (SNP) for “blocking” the building of new nuclear power stations, which it argued would bring jobs, investment and energy security.
The SNP has maintained the move would drive up electricity prices, create long-lived radioactive waste and undermine renewables, which offer Scotland a better energy future.
In February 2025, Starmer announced plans to “rip up rules to fire up nuclear power”, and set up a nuclear regulatory taskforce to “deliver new projects more quickly”. The Ferret reported in May 2025 that in doing so, he had ignored warnings from his nuclear safety watchdog that regulation was not to blame for delays.
The taskforce, headed by business expert John Fingleton, published its final report in November 2025. It recommended a “radical reset” introducing a “lead regulator” followed by a new regulatory commission to reduce “risk aversion” and “accelerate delivery”.
The report covered both nuclear power and nuclear weapons, and suggested that the civil safety watchdog, the Office for Nuclear Regulation, and the Ministry of Defence’s internal watchdog, the Defence Nuclear Safety Regulator, should be merged “to reduce duplication”.
Starmer published his full response to the taskforce in March 2026, accepting all its recommendations. The aim, he said, was to “build a Britain that reclaims its place as a leading nuclear nation”.
His response acknowledged that the taskforce had not made recommendations for the Scottish Government and other devolved administrations. But it promised to “work closely with them to ensure that they too can reap the benefits of these reforms”.
The UK Government was “committed to nuclear across the UK”, the response said. It highlighted government involvement in plans for a new fleet of so-called small modular reactors at Wylfa in Wales.
Martin expressed “concerns” that the UK Government was making commitments to take forward the taskforce’s recommendations in Scotland, despite having promised not to. The Scottish Government was yet to be convinced that there was “any merit” in adopting Westminster’s proposals, she said.
“We need to ensure we are reaching our full renewables potential rather than ploughing billions of pounds into a nuclear industry that will leave a long and toxic legacy for future generations." - Patrick Harvie, Scottish Greens
Martin pointed out that Scottish ministers had “a longstanding position on new nuclear energy in Scotland and matters of environmental regulation remain devolved to Scottish ministers and the Scottish Parliament.”
She also said that the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Sepa) had been invited to a meeting in London on 26 March 2026 to discuss the UK Government’s plans for a “lead regulator” for nuclear projects.
“We have serious concerns about a lead regulator model and the impact that would have on Sepa’s independence,” Martin warned. She sought clarification “on how the implementation of this will be done in a way which does not impact on areas of devolved competence.”
Another email released to The Ferret is from an unnamed Scottish Government official to the UK Department for Energy Security and Net Zero on 12 March. It complained that Starmer’s response to the taskforce “impinges on devolved issues without the agreement of Scottish ministers” and was “problematic”.
“Ministers will have to be robust on this with language and next steps,” the email said.
Other files disclosed that Martin had an online meeting with Vallance to discuss the nuclear regulatory taskforce on 25 February. According to Martin’s pre-meeting briefing from officials, there were “significant issues” with what the taskforce recommendations would mean for Sepa.
Another Scottish Government email to Westminster back in February 2025, when the nuclear regulatory taskforce was announced, said there had been “no engagement with, or agreement from, Scottish ministers”. It suggested that ministers “should not be part” of the taskforce’s work.
"The weakening of environmental protection is a slippery slope opening the way for increased radiation doses to members of the public and the workforce." - Pete Roche, Scottish Campaign to Resist the Atomic Menace
Vallance responded to Martin’s email raising concerns on 18 March. Starmer would “like to see benefits delivered across the UK”, he said, but the “recommendations apply only to England”.
The UK Government’s intention was to work with the Scottish Government to “discuss what reforms they may wish to echo or engage with”, he added. “We want to do so in good faith and without presuming an outcome.”
Vallance pointed out that regulatory reform was not just about building new nuclear reactors, but also covered the dismantling of defunct reactors. Major nuclear decommissioning projects, expected to take decades, are under way at Hunterston in North Ayrshire and Dounreay in Caithness.
“We do not consider that it implies an intention for the development of new nuclear power in Scotland,” he stated. Vallance also insisted that he “respected” Sepa’s independence.
“None of the measures in the government’s response are intended to, or would, cut across Sepa’s statutory remit or independence of judgment,” he said.
The plan for a “lead regulator” did not give legal powers to that regulator, he maintained. “It simply seeks to facilitate collective, consensus-based decisions.”
“The weakening of environmental protection is a slippery slope opening the way for increased radiation doses to members of the public and the workforce,” he said.
“The UK Government and the taskforce claim, with no evidence, and no rigorous analysis, that delays and increased costs of building new reactors are due to failings with the planning and regulatory systems.”
The Scottish Greens argued that the question of nuclear power in Scotland was a decision for Scotland alone. “There can be no question of the UK undermining Sepa’s independence, and we share the concerns of Scottish ministers,” said the party’s net zero spokesperson and former minister, Patrick Harvie.
“Despite the support it enjoys in Whitehall and huge amounts being spent on lobbying by the industry, nuclear remains a costly, dangerous and unnecessary form of energy,” he argued.
“We need to ensure we are reaching our full renewables potential rather than ploughing billions of pounds into a nuclear industry that will take years to go online and leave a long and toxic legacy for future generations."
The SNP attacked Starmer for wanting to “impose unwanted nuclear developments” on Scotland. “We don’t want or need new nuclear power stations which are expensive, take years to build and undermine our renewables future,” said a party spokesperson.
The Scottish Environment Protection Agency declined to comment directly on the planned reforms of nuclear regulation. But it confirmed that it was “not asked for input” on the taskforce, and was engaging with others to understand how its recommendations “may affect regulation of nuclear facilities in Scotland”.
If this reporting mattered to you, you can help fund the next one. The Ferret is independent, member-owned investigative journalism, backed by readers who want accountability in Scotland.
Rob has more than 40 years’ experience specialising in reporting on environmental issues. He has co-authored three books about nuclear power, produced radio and television programmes. He likes muckraking.
Women supporting refugees have been abused, followed and threatened by men in anti-immigration groups who claim they want to protect women. Now there are calls for big tech to do more.
Women have been leading the fight against the far right in Scotland but anti-racism activism has come at a high personal cost with at least 14 having been publicly abused and threatened. But they are resolute in the face of intimidation and say they will continue defending human rights.
The UK Information Commissioner is facing criticism for endorsing the Ministry of Defence’s insistence on concealing issues with nuclear weapons because of growing threats from other countries. Secrecy allows “fake news” to fester, say campaigners.
Rob Edwards
