Taken from speeches made in the House of Commons, Queen's Speech debate on energy on 27 May 2010.
Chris Huhne - Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change
"The coalition agreement clearly envisages a role for new nuclear providing that there is no public subsidy, a point I hope we can agree on all the way across this house...
"The transformation to a low carbon economy is critical in meeting our climate change objectives and our energy security objectives and we will use a wide range of levers to cut carbon emissions and decarbonise our economy."
Ed Miliband - Shadow Secretary for Energy and Climate Change
"Our position on nuclear power is that the challenge of climate change is so great so that we need nuclear as well as renewables and clean coal because we think the challenge of climate change is so big."
Caroline Lucas - Green Party
“Isn’t it actually the case that given that we have to get our emissions down in the next eight to ten years if we listen to the scientists, then we need to look at what is the most cost effective and fastest way to do that.
"And isn’t it the case that actually nuclear is a massive distraction in that debate because even if we doubled the amount of nuclear we would only cut our emission by 8 percent. Putting money into renewables and efficiency is a far more effective way of doing it."
Simon Huges - Liberal Democrat
Question directed at Ed Miliband: "As well as the fact that it can't deliver quickly isn’t it true that the contribution that it could deliver is so far away that it is going to make a minimal contribution if at all.
"And can he honestly say to the house that he believes that nuclear power can be delivered in this country without public subsidy unlike the (United) States, unlike Finland and unlike any other country in the world?"