Conflating councils with communities causes confusion in nuclear dump areas
The Nuclear Free Local Authorities have written to the senior director at Nuclear Waste Services with responsibility for community engagement in the GDF search areas asking him to make it plain in future that it is only local Councils that can choose to withdraw from plans to developing a nuclear waste dump in their area, rather than local communities.
Councillor David Blackburn, Chair of the NFLAs English Forum, has written to Simon Hughes, Director for Siting and Community Engagement at the NWS, to point out that previous statements made by staff and NWS publications have erroneously claimed that communities can choose to withdraw from the process at any time, when government and company guidance clearly states that it is only higher-level local Councils, which are engaged in the process, and Nuclear Waste Services itself that can do so.
Commenting Councillor Blackburn said: “Current practice conflates councils with communities because the so-called Community Right of Withdrawal can infact only be exercised by councils not by communities. The continued practice of claiming the contrary has led to great frustration amongst residents of the communities effected by the proposals, as it also conveys to the outside world the impression that these residents must be happy with the process or surely they would have exercised their ‘right to withdraw’?”
Councillor Blackburn has asked Mr Hughes to ensure that, in future, company statements and publications convey the true facts. He concluded: “Nuclear Waste Services has stated that it wants an open and honest dialogue with communities and stakeholders. I would suggest that one small step they could take to build trust would be to ensure that in future staff members dealing with the media, addressing public meetings, or publishing online or written materials make plain that it is NOT infact the Community which can exercise the Right to Withdrawal, but rather only the company or the Relevant Principal Local Authorities which can do so.”
No comments yet.
-
Archives
- December 2025 (277)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (377)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
- February 2025 (234)
- January 2025 (250)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS


Leave a comment