< < Go back to Cogent Blog

Cogent Skills Academy: - Nuclear or not?

Author: Dai Hudd, Created 28/12/2005 12:23:47

As part of further government initiatives on skills, Sector Skills Councils have been invited to "bid" for the setting up of skills academy.  Cogent has been actively looking at two, the first Nuclear, the second Processing.  Both 'bids' did not get through on their first attempt.  Whilst disappointing, it was not surprising as only a limited number are being approved at each bid round, their number increases through a process of iterative selection.

Feedback indicates Cogent would be more likely to succeed with one bid.  For my part am not sure that a 'Nuclear' skills academy is the right description.  For a large part the nuclear industry is process driven, indeed Sellafield could easily, and accurately be described as a vast chemical processing plant.  Indeed I would go further, the Nuclear Industry is to a very large extent industrial processing in a radiological environment.  Indeed not all of that activity at nuclear sites is radiological.  So where does this leave Cogent - one to two academies?  For my part it should be one. I also believe it should cover processing industries, including a lead role for Nuclear. I say a lead role. I would not call it a Nuclear Academy.  There are a number of reasons for this. It needs in my view to cater for more than the nuclear industry.  Furthermore nuclear has much, I believe, to learn from other process industries, particularly in hazardous and highly regulated industries e.g. oil and gas.  Additionally 'nuclear' may "turn off" as much as it may 'turn on' potential participation.

So there you have it.

My view is one academy, dealing with the breadth of process industries, specialising in hazards and regulation and including Nuclear.  The next question, what about a name?  Suggestions on a post card please.

Comments: