STATEMENTS by the Prime Minister that onshore wind farms have been 'over-subsidised and wasteful of public money', echoed by the Chancellor's concerns that we cannot restore our economic fortunes if our energy policy is driving industry abroad, are to be welcomed.

They have resulted in the Energy Secretary redefining our energy policy to include 'all multiple low carbon technologies which will compete freely with each other to drive down costs'. No longer is government policy placing emphasis on consumer subsidised wind and solar energy sources but is now including privately financed nuclear energy plants in its basket of approved energy sources.

The recent signing of the contract by the Prime Minister with the French company EDF for the Hinkley nuclear reactor is a welcome indication of the Government's intent to make clear that low carbon nuclear power is high on the Government's energy policy agenda.

The wind of change is also blowing in Europe but in different directions. Spain has cut all subsidies to renewable energy sources while Germany has adopted a non-nuclear policy and after 2022 aims to be largely dependent upon wind and solar power to replace nuclear sourced electricity to the national grid.

Angela Merkel, in the light of the Fukushima disaster has, at the behest of the Green Party in her Coalition Government, agreed to phase out Germany's seven nuclear power stations.

The loss of this nuclear energy source will make Germany a high risk location for business, resulting in a number of German industrial companies planning to move their operations elsewhere in Europe. It may also, perversely, open the door to more, not less, lignite (brown coal) burning power stations, if the current low price on carbon emissions continues.

It appears that no country in Europe, including Britain, has yet agreed on an effective energy policy. The problem rests on reconciling the need for low carbon fuels with important factors such as cost and energy supply security. It is a proven fact, for example, that wind power is not a cost-effective source of low carbon energy yet it has become the mainstay of most national energy policies.

I am of the view that we must accelerate our nuclear power programmes but at the same time develop new cost-effective alternative energy sources such as biomass, thermal energy, hydro, tide and wave power.

We need to take urgent action to decide on the mix of energy sources which will comprise our energy policy. If we don't then the lights may start to go out in the not too distant future.

Giles Chichester MEP

Conservative MEP for South West England and Gibraltar