Greens End Blanket Opposition to Nuclear Power, Keep Renewables First
Members of the Green Party of England and Wales voted to end the party's opposition to nuclear power. The motion adopted at conference dropped the commitment to phase out nuclear power, according to The Guardian.
The adopted text removes blanket opposition to nuclear fission, the splitting of atoms to make electricity. It directs the party to assess nuclear projects alongside other low-carbon technologies, sources that release little carbon dioxide. Elected representatives may now support new reactors on a case-by-case basis. Electricity policy still lists offshore wind, onshore wind and rooftop solar as the primary sources. The amendment describes nuclear fission as 'low-carbon electricity generation', as reported by Left Foot Forward. Two amendments on fission were basketed for joint debate with separate votes, according to the Autumn Conference 2026 final agenda.
Green MP Carla Denyer said the change does not commit the party to backing new nuclear. It accepts nuclear is here to stay for now during the transition to electricity based primarily on renewables. She said keeping existing stations running could be a low-carbon option because a significant proportion of their carbon footprint came from construction. The logic is similar to extending the use of an existing building rather than starting a new one from scratch. Leader Zack Polanski had previously compared investment in new reactors to creating a fax machine. Eugene McCarthy, a co-founder of Greens for Nuclear, supported the motion to end opposition.
The vote supersedes longstanding manifesto language. The party's Powering Up Fairer, Greener Energy page called for phase-out of nuclear energy, describing it as unsafe and much more expensive than renewables. That page described new stations as too slow given the pace of action needed on climate. It warned of unmanageable quantities of radioactive waste and described civil nuclear as inextricably linked with the production of nuclear weapons. The deputy leader had said a new generation of small nuclear power stations is not a solution to rising energy bills.
The nuclear decision was one of several conference outcomes. Britain's Green Party voted to classify Zionism as a form of racism, a decision reported by Reuters that drew criticism from British Jews and the Israeli government. On 3 October, the party said nature loss and biodiversity decline should be treated as seriously as other national security threats. It also called for a pause on data centres.
The broader context here is how a party built on anti-nuclear identity manages governing credibility on decarbonisation, waste stewardship and non-proliferation at once. Keeping renewables as the stated primary sources while allowing case-by-case nuclear support creates a two-tier policy. Principle stays renewable-led. Practice gains local discretion. That structure will test parliamentary cohesion and council-level planning politics, where support or objection to a specific reactor carries material weight.
Looking at what this means for the party's next moves, the questions to track are procedural and political rather than technical. How representatives apply case-by-case assessment, what criteria outweigh cost, schedule and waste concerns, and whether existing stations are treated differently from new build will define the policy in practice. For watchers of European green parties and low-carbon licensing debates, the shift narrows the gap between manifesto and market reality without resolving it.
