The government is unable to reach a conclusion

ONDRAF adopted its plan for B and C category waste-management in September 2011. It then gave its recommendations to the Belgian government which has the responsibility of deciding policy with regard to the long-term management of nuclear waste. There was a problem at the time, however, as the Belgian government was only functioning in a caretaker capacity and as such did not have sufficient authority to take an executive decision on such an important subject. Hence no political decision was taken. A decision on the subject will have to be taken soon, however, as a 2011 European directive obliges member states to submit a detailed program to the European Commission setting a timetable and the conditions for construction of final storage facilities for their radioactive waste.

Whatever the future decision of the Belgian authorities may be with regard to B and C category waste-management, its application in practice will be spread over decades, allowing time for the construction of adequate infrastructures for surface storage, landfill, or any other solution. Some options could neccessitate monitoring for hundreds of years. ONDRAF hopes to involve the public in a decision-making process on a more regular basis. It seeks to develop a social dialogue in the long-term which is “adaptable, participatory and transparent” in order to reconcile technical feasibility and social acceptance.

Building a regulatory system

SPIRAL studied the legal provisions for this type of decision-making process. Céline Parotte explains, “My colleague Sylvain Paile, who is an assistant lecturer in the political science department, examined all the existing legal implications of this subject. The main conclusion he comes to is that there are practically no laws on the subject: there is a legal void with regard to the direction and timing of consultation with the public. Even the European directive which stipulates the obligation to take account of public opinion does not specify how this should be done; we can therefore allow ourselves some creative latitude, the regulatory system has yet to be created”. In its waste–management plan ONDRAF considers that this regulatory system which has yet to be created should involve “ the creation of an independent monitoring body ”, because it does not feel that it is itself the best placed body for organizing or supporting participatory processes. The SPIRAL report offers some options by analyzing participatory, decision-making processes that have been implemented in France, Switzerland, Sweden and Great-Britain.

For Céline Parotte, a referendum is not a desirable means of public consultation on such controversial subjects as the management of highly radioactive nuclear waste. “A referendum asks a question without placing the problem in its fullest context. It therefore presents a considerable risk. By means of a simple yes or no, it could perhaps destroy what has been achieved during many decades. The way a question is asked can also influence the answer”. There are other methods of consultation or cooperation with the population concerned. On one hand, ONDRAF has already experimented with cooperation partnerships in the context of category A nuclear waste, and on the other hand, SPIRAL can put forward the results of its experiments in matters relating to consultation and participation.