With baited breath we await Government policy on the long-term fate of the UK's radioactive waste. The response was, Ministers appointing CoRWM (Committee on Radioactive Waste Management), to review the options, from burying it underground to storing on the surface, even to shooting it at the sun as suggested recently in the Guardian. With waste being seen as one of the primary obstacles to new nuclear build, CoRWM's recommendations could profoundly influence the future of the industry. Time is of the essence.

Chaired by economist and NERA Economic Consulting Director Gordon MacKerron, a committee of eleven 'decision making' experts, are developing their work programme. Their currently preferred methodology for public and stakeholder engagement (PSE) is "Deliberative Mapping" (DM), but they are still considering its viability. The draft programme has just been sent to DEFRA Ministers and will also be presented to Patricia Hewitt, Secretary of State for Trade and Industry on 22 April. They want to extend the completion date from the end of 2005 to the end of 2006, but if the Government refuses, they will have to revise their strategy.

The group will visit possible locations for storage and disposal of waste and aspire to engage public dialogue. However, they have been criticised for the quality of their website and their accessibility. To address these concerns, they have hired a media advisor, and are conscious of their over stretched secretariat and IT problems; CoRWM's costs have doubled to £5.7m.

How will CoRWM's experience differ to that of recently suspended RWMAC (Radioactive Waste Management Advisory Committee), giving recommendations to Government since 1978 that often fell on deaf ears? How will it affect Nirex? What is the interface between CoRWM and LMU/NDA? These questions are being asked as much from within the walls of CoRWM as from outside. Given the progress that is being made on resolving the waste issues in other countries, we hope that CoRWM will not prove to be the cause of yet further delay in reaching acceptable solutions here.