Ann: Berkeley submits Notification of Investment Dispute, page-3

A lot of EU countries making noises about withdrawing from the ETC, although all the media you will commonly see is painted in terms that this treaty protects evil fossil fuel and other emission-intensive investors I think there might be an implication that if Spain withdraws from the ETC then BKY may not be able to pursue action against the Spanish Government/regulators for any adverse decisions taken against BKY. Poland, France and the Netherlands have all been backsliding their way out of the ETC because the ETC protects investors from maladministration, regulatory interference and corrupt conduct of member EU governments, and being governments, they don't especially like being held to account.

The future of the ETC will be interesting because if its not clear if the ETC only protects fossil fuel investors, or if it also affects investors in nuclear energy, or indeed if it offers protection for even Renewable energy investors. Its all part of the narrative of the disintegration of the EU and their inability to control the behavior of their own member national governments that I expect will lead to a rapid deterioration in the energy network within the EU and some interesting effects on the nuclear industry in the EU. Right now I am guessing that the previous supplier of U for the EU was stuff from Russia, Ukraine and Kazakstan so it will be an interesting case for the Spanish regulators to do something before the French and German plants run out of Uranium and the lights start going out all over Europe next winter. I imagine that the Spainish government won't want to be blamed for this and are quite keen to get security of supply for energy and a viable pathway from the raw product through to finished fuel rods secured and not subject to the whimsy of Vladimir Putin.

Certainly, the implication of this BKY announcement is that some Spanish regulators are "making it up as they go along" and BKY is seeking to look at the compliance documentation around the other licensed state-owned facilities in Spain, and I will bet you London to a brick that those existing facilities in Spain will not have such stringent or indeed any regulatory oversight as what is proposed to be the rules affecting BKY's facilities. i.e. a typical case of a government telling the private sector to do as they say, and not do as they do.

This is certainly one of the more aggressive responses to regulation that I have seen from a company in an ASX release, so will keep watching this with interest. If BKY already had a mine and plant in operation and production with employees in Spain, then I suggest they would have much more "leverage" than their current position is now.