Representations of nuclear risk in the UK Parliament: Understanding the role of political discourse in the development of preparedness activity for nuclear accidents

Abstract

This article argues that despite a prevailing national preparedness imperative, significant vulnerabilities persist in the UK’s emergency arrangements for a nuclear accident. While such an imperative may drive legislation and the legitimation of emergency planning, its integrity can be compromised by other institutional and discursive factors. We propose that social representations of nuclear risk in UK parliamentary debates play a key role in shaping the conditions for anticipatory action. Through a discourse analysis of debates following three major nuclear accidents, Windscale (1957), Chernobyl (1986) and Fukushima (2011), we identify the emergence of a dominant nuclear energy metanarrative, which frames nuclear power as safe, necessary and nationally beneficial. We argue this metanarrative has contributed to the marginalisation of central government preparedness by shifting responsibility to local authorities and regulators and fostering potential overconfidence in structural mitigations, thereby narrowing the conditions under which nationally coordinated anticipatory action becomes possible.