nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

AI firms say UK has a year to head off datacentre protests before construction is threatened.

Opposition to datacentre construction is being fuelled by widening public concern about the safety of AI systems, after a summer in which some of the largest companies, including OpenAI, Anthropic and Google appeared to lose control of some of their most cutting-edge AIs. Some protesters have begun resorting to direct action and the membership of anti-AI campaign groups has been growing rapidly.00


Robert Booth, 22 October26
, https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/oct/22/ai-firms-say-uk-has-a-year-to-head-off-datacentre-protests-before-construction-is-threatened

Nvidia, Microsoft and Cisco taskforce urges ministers to offer areas greater benefits from tech infrastructure amid fears of US-style opposition

AI companies have told ministers they have 12 months to head off public opposition to datacentres in the UK or risk US-style protests that could threaten their construction.

Successive dry summers and rising energy bills are increasing public scrutiny of plans for the huge computer warehouses that are used to train and run AI models, says a submission to the Labour government from a group including the AI infrastructure companies Nvidia, Microsoft and Cisco.

Amid increasing anti-datacentre activism in the US and Europe, they are calling on ministers to create a “compact” that would show how communities can benefit from hosting datacentres, including allowing councils that host them to retain more tax revenues.

The move by the Sovereign AI Leadership (SAIL) taskforce reflects rising concern among tech companies that arguments that have blocked datacentre developments in parts of the US are taking hold in Britain. Microsoft has promised to invest $30bn (£22bn) in UK AI infrastructure.

Microsoft has built a datacentre in Acton, London and another is under construction in Newport, but wants to build several more facilities and is engaging with local and national leaders, including the prime minister, Andy Burnham, over the balance between the potential benefit of AI to the economy and public opposition to datacentres.

The SAIL group said: “In the United States, organised local opposition has stopped fully permitted datacentre projects, and moratoriums have been announced even in states that are otherwise pro-growth.

“Reporting from those places shows that AI itself is only a surface-level concern; distrust of corporate and government promises, fear of stranded assets and electricity costs run deeper. The same arguments have begun to appear here.”

It added: “Britain has a window – we think of roughly 12 months – to build a compact that earns public consent before that pattern takes hold.”

The taskforce is calling for the government to create a clear framework for councils and mayors to follow that will set out recommended terms for local benefit, including an indicative contribution – likely to be financial or in terms of facilities – scaled to a site’s size..

Opposition to datacentre construction is being fuelled by widening public concern about the safety of AI systems, after a summer in which some of the largest companies, including OpenAI, Anthropic and Google appeared to lose control of some of their most cutting-edge AIs. Some protesters have begun resorting to direct action and the membership of anti-AI campaign groups has been growing rapidly.

The datacentre companies are determined to head off that opposition. The chair of the SAIL taskforce, Steve Rigby, said: “By establishing a clear prosperity compact between government, industry and local communities, we can build the infrastructure we need, equip our workforce with future-ready skills, and ensure Britain’s digital destiny. This taskforce’s goal isn’t another strategy document, but high-impact actions that materially accelerate the UK’s transition to an AI-enabled economy.”

It has not calculated the cost to central government finances if councils that grant permission to datacentres are allowed to keep all of their business rates.

Responding to the proposals, Joseph Miller, the director of PauseAI UK, which campaigns for a global pause to datacentre buildout, said: “People are going to feel it is undignified to be bought off by huge tech companies who do not share their interests.”

He said tech companies were “absolutely right to be worried” about US-style public opposition to datacentres growing in the UK. Kat Jones, the director of Action to Protect Rural Scotland, which campaigns against datacentres, said tech companies had already “missed the boat on containing community opposition to hyperscale AI datacentres”.

“In Scotland, we have 15 community campaigns already working incredibly hard opposing these environmentally destructive developments locally, and a growing national campaign,” she said. “Even the titanic lobbying efforts of US big tech are going to find it a real challenge to change the winds of public opinion, which have already shifted solidly against hyperscale AI datacentres.”

Donald Campbell, the director of advocacy at the tech equity campaign Foxglove, said: “Big tech firms have spent years trying to force vast, highly polluting datacentres through the planning system under a blanket of secrecy and misleading information. Now, with the public waking up to the fact that these facilities plunder resources and wreck the climate, the US tech giants have decided that there’s a problem.”

He warned that incentivising councils to back datacentres by allowing them to keep more of their business rate revenue would mean “these wealthy tech giants would not pay a penny more” while boosts to council funding would “come from the pocket of central government services like the NHS”.

A government spokesperson said datacentres “should create British jobs and supply chains, and provide investment to the communities in which they are built, as well as prioritising clean power, using water responsibly”.

“For most proposed datacentre developments, community benefits are considered through the relevant local planning processes,” they said. “We have already announced measures which will enable local authorities hosting datacentres in AI growth zones in England to keep all the additional business rates they generate.”

October 26, 2026 Posted by | technology, UK | Leave a comment

Calder Hall at 70 – the sickening hype from the Nuclear Industry belies the Reality

By mariannewildart, https://lakesagainstnucleardump.com/2026/10/22/calder-hall-at-70-the-sickening-hype-from-the-nuclear-industry-belies-the-reality/

In all the media regurgitation of Sellafield’s triumphant press releases about “Calder Hall at 70” featuring the young Queen Elizabeth pressing the button to turn the reactors into nuclear waste, there is no mention that Calder Hall was built to provide plutonium for bombs. As the Tribune points out in 1982:

“WHEN the Queen opened Britain’s first nuclear reactor, Calder Hall, on October 17,1956, she said: “It may well prove to have been among the greatest of our contributions to human welfare that we led the way in demonstrating the peaceful uses of this new source of power.” But Calder Hall had nothing to do with either human welfare or with peace – its purpose was to produce plutonium for the manufacture of nuclear weapons. The hypocrisy of the British Establishment knew no bounds and the public was duped. Newsreels proclaimed an era of nuclear-generated electricity that would be cheap and clean and would bring prosperity to Britain. It was only in later years that the nuclear industry began to concede that Calder Hall was not what it had been made to seem. As the General Manager of Windscale, Calder Hall and Chapelcross admitted ten years later: “The primary function of the reactors at Calder Hall was to produce plutonium for the military programme and the design was optimised for this purpose.”

Another feature of Calder Hall is its name. Named after the beautiful Lakeland stone and slate farm the government compulsory purchased to provide land for the bomb making enterprise, along with a whole host of other Lakeland farms now gobbled up by the nuclear industry and either used as offices or demolished.

The nuclear industry vies with Beatrix Potter in its purchase of Lake District farms. Potter purchased around 16 farms, and the nuclear industry has purchased at least 11 that we know of in the West Cumbria area alone. Many of these have been demolished.

  • Calder Hall Farm, Seascale
  • Fleming Hall Farm, Seascale
  • Seascale Hall Farm, Seascale
  • Longlands Farmhouse and cottage, Gosforth
  • Town End Farm, Gosforth
  • High Ling Bank Farm, Ponsonby, Gosforth
  • Calder Town End Farm, Seascale
  • Greenmoorside Farm
  • Mid Tarn Farm
  • Tarn Head Farm
  • Yottenfews Farm House (now a corporate office for Sellafield)

The only difference between Beatrix Potter’s farm purchases and the nuclear industry’s purchases of Lake District farms is intention.

Beatrix Potter, best known as the author-illustrator of “The Tale of Peter Rabbit“, supported the efforts of the National Trust to preserve not just the places of extraordinary beauty but also those heads of valleys and low grazing lands that would be irreparably ruined by development… She left nearly all her property to the National Trust, including over 4,000 acres (16 km2) of land, sixteen farms, cottages and herds of cattle and Herdwick sheep. Hers was the largest gift at that time to the National Trust, and it enabled the preservation of the land now included in the Lake District National Park and the continuation of fell farming.

A friend of Beatrix Potter, the sculptor Josefina Vasconcellos who arrived in Cumbria in the 1930s remarked: “When I first came to the Lake District whenever John or I walked there were birds but since the atomic station came there have been less and less and less, they almost died out.” The atomic (nuclear power) station to which she refers is Windscale, which opened in 1950 and Calder Hall. The site was renamed Sellafield.

Nuclear power produces enormous amounts of waste heat. This requires lots of water for cooling. During this cooling process, Nuclear Power Plants are also legally allowed to discharge long-lived, lethal, radioactive materials into the air and water, along with heat.

Water from Wastwater lake is pumped to Sellafield nuclear waste site as a fresh water supply. The NDA (Nuclear Decommissioning Authority) has taken over the licence once held by BNFL (British Nuclear Fuels plc) which allows them to extract a maximum of 18,184.4 m³ a day (over 4 million gallons) and 6,637,306 m³ a year from Wastwater to use on site for various processes.” This is still not enough so an equivalent amount of water is also taken from rivers and boreholes to cool the heels of the nuclear industry. It was farmers in Wasdale and Ennerdale who stopped the nuclear industry taking even more of the Lake District’s top quality water, however the industry still has first dibs on our fresh water.

It is well known that Ruskin, Beatrix Potter and Wordsworth are Lake District icons. Not one of these icons would have separated the West Coast of Cumbria from the Lake District as we have been taught to do in the nuclear age.

The Lake District National Park is an artificial construct which does itself or us no favours in its readiness to publicly disown West Cumbria rather than publicly oppose the diabolic nuclear developments in the Lake District.

This is what the Lake District National Park Authority said said in 2012 about the plan for a geological dump for heat generating nuclear waste:

“It remains a concern that significant media interest highlights the potential location of the geological disposal facility in the ‘Lake District’ rather than ‘West Cumbria.”

Roll on to 2026 and the Chair of the plan for the nuclear waste dump in the Lake District, aka GDF (Geological Disposal Facility) in South and Mid Copeland is Andy Pratt. Andy Pratt is also the Lake District National Park’s “Member of Development Control Committee and the Strategy meeting.” No conflict of interest there then?!

The Lake District National Park Authority’s insistence that ‘West Cumbria’ is an entirely different geographical area to the ‘Lake District’ is an entirely artificial construct which has come about as a direct result of the ruinous nuclear industry.

When the Lake Counties included Cumberland, Westmorland and part of Lancashire there was none of today’s parochialism and narrow mindedness about what constituted the Lake District.

Today the plan for the “Biggest Nuclear Development in Europe” is promoted as if in an isolated industrial “West Cumbrian” bubble, despite being only 20 miles from Keswick and 25 miles from Ambleside as the crow flies.

Where are the protectors of the Lake District?”

Conservation in the Lake District is now focussed on rewilding but far from the fells being covered in trees the pre-Neolithic landscape would have been a relatively open park-like mosaic rather than closed forest.

It is a very safe bet that there are far fewer of Beatrix Potter’s beloved Herdwick on the Lakeland fells now than there were when she was the Ennerdale Show President in the 1930’s.

It is also very safe to say that the wildlife of the Fells was far more abundant in Beatrix Potters hayday. Research into the ‘brand’ of Cumbria has shown that farming and tourism are the two industries most damaged by nuclear developments.

Undermining farming and tourism would leave the field wide open for the nuclear industry to achieve its ambition of new build and burying heat generating nuclear waste under Cumbria.

Back to the friend of Beatrix Potter, the sculptress Josefina de Vasconcellos who arrived in Cumbria in the 1930s:


“When I first came to the Lake District whenever John or I walked there were birds but since the atomic station came there have been less and less and less, they almost died out”.

Josefina’s observations are backed up by science. Lancaster University has been studying the effects of chronic long-term radiation on animals. This includes: “Severe effect on reproduction hatching and abnormal larvae (fish).”

These test studies are backed up by findings in the real world. Many universities worldwide have been studying evidence from nuclear accidents:


“Low-dose radiation has been known to have negative consequences for living beings for almost 100 years. Indeed, background radiation causes the death of tens of thousands of humans annually. These ‘natural’ effects may be exacerbated by the 23 nuclear accidents recorded during the last century”.

Radiation Free Lakeland believe Sellafield to be the equivalent of an ongoing accident with routine releases of radiation to sea, air and groundwaters.

Beatrix Potter left a vast area of Cumbria to the National Trust to be farmed with the express wish of keeping Herdwicks on the land. Her life’s work was to retain the delicate balance created by the domestic and wild community that share and maintain the Lake District.

Nuclear is needed in that living landscape like a hole in the head.

The hype surrounding “Calder Hall at 70” is nuclear propaganda while the reality of at least a dozen Lake District farms bought up abandoned and demolished by the industry are the warning we should all heed.

October 26, 2026 Posted by | spinbuster, UK | Leave a comment

Scottish Greens co-leader issues warning ahead of nuclear vote

A SCOTTISH Greens co-leader has said she firmly opposes a key party motion which
would, if passed, change party policy to support new nuclear power in
Scotland.

Scottish Greens members are set to debate the controversial
motion at their party conference in Inverness this weekend. It comes after
the Green Party of England and Wales (GPEW) – which is separate from the
Scottish Greens – voted to drop their opposition to nuclear power.

The Scots motion supports the construction of nuclear plants in Scotland on the
condition that certain criteria are met, such as being “passively safe and
do not produce large quantities of nuclear waste”.

Speaking to The National
ahead of the party’s conference, co-leader Gillian Mackay said she would be
surprised if the motion passed a members’ vote. “It’s up to my members as
to whether it’ll pass or not. I certainly don’t think it should,” she said.
She added: “[Nuclear power] is hugely expensive, takes an age to build,
it’s not clean energy like renewables, there’s waste to be disposed of. “We
see here in the Highlands with Dounreay actually how long it takes to
decommission these plants as well, it’s the full life cycle of it.” “So
certainly, I won’t be supporting it,” she went on. “I’d be surprised if
members did vote for it, in all honesty.”

The National 24th Oct 2026,

https://www.thenational.scot/news/26665218.scottish-greens-co-leader-says-party-keep-anti-nuclear-stance/

October 26, 2026 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

Campaigners warn Welsh island could be target in nuclear attack amid fears of ‘no safe evacuation’

22 Oct 2026, Dale Spridgeon, Local Democracy Reporter, Nation CYMRU

.

The campaign group raised its concerns in an open letter to the Secretary of State for the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ), Miatta Fahnbulleh MP.

Wylfa was selected by the UK Government in April and the nuclear project is being led by Great British Energy – Nuclear (GBE-N) and Rolls-Royce SMR in a £2.5 billion partnership

It’s expected to create 8,000 jobs across the UK, including 3,000 in North Wales.

DESNZ has stated the “highest standards” of safety and security surround the UK’s nuclear sites.

GBN-E said it “recognised” that the people of Ynys Môn had questions about the plans and “looked forward to discussing them openly and constructively.”

But the promises of new jobs and safety assurances have not reassured the anti-nuclear campaigners who have expressed their “deep concerns”.

Increasing threats

In their letter to Ms Fahnbulleh, they said: “Increasing threats of war mean that we will be targets for attack. Russia and Iran have both threatened us due to our interventions in Ukraine and the use of British bases for the bombing of Iran. Nuclear power stations are now regular targets for attack.

“How are we to be protected? How are we to get off the island in the event of an attack or nuclear accident?

“There are two bridges connecting us to the mainland, and even if there were three, there would be no safe evacuation possible, without the danger of accidents.

“RAF Valley is also on the island, making us a further target.”

They also believe that waste produced by the possible new nuclear reactors will also “serve as an ongoing target and risk” and would “remain on-site for at least 100 years, being too hot to remove”.

“Our future generations will be responsible for this; not a legacy we want to bequeath.”

They dispute claims “electricity generated at Wylfa would go to homes” adding: “how are we to know the end use of the electricity to be generated by these nuclear reactors.”

They also believe droughts and wildfires “have threatened the safety” of nuclear plants all over the world including at Sizewell B, this year.

“We implore you to reconsider pouring more money into these nuclear reactors, yet to receive the Generic Development Consent order, and instead concentrate our resources to upgrading the grid, as you propose, and using our excellent renewable energy sources.”…………………. https://nation.cymru/news/campaigners-warn-welsh-island-could-be-target-in-nuclear-attack-amid-fears-of-no-safe-evacuation/

October 26, 2026 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, UK | Leave a comment

Work begins in UK for arming new nuclear submarines at £7.75bn each

Work begins on Coulport building for Dreadnought submarines, 19th October, By Donald Erskine

WORK has started on a building which will arm the Royal Navy’s new multi-billion-pound nuclear submarines.

Naval Base Commander Clyde Commodore Andy Bray recently broke ground on a new facility at Royal Naval Armament Depot (RNAD) Coulport to support future classes of submarines.

Building 300 at the site will house the Vertical Embarkation System, or VES, a new facility used to load tactical weapons onto future Dreadnought-class deterrent submarines.

The House of Commons approved replacing the current submarines in 2016, despite opposition from anti-nuclear groups and campaigners concerned about the cost.

Built at a cost of £7.75bn per unit, four Dreadnought submarines will replace the current Vanguard ships, which constantly patrol the seas carrying ballistic missiles equipped with thermonuclear warheads.

The Trident system is designed to act as a deterrent to other nations with nuclear capability, as a first strike on the UK would not eliminate the ability to strike back, given some of the country’s weapons are continuously at sea.

The building is designed to receive, store, assemble, and maintain Spearfish torpedoes, the Royal Navy’s primary underwater weapon for both anti-submarine warfare and anti-surface warfare. The VES will also be used to train personnel to handle the weapons…………………………………………………
https://www.helensburghadvertiser.co.uk/news/26648451.work-begins-coulport-building-dreadnought-submarines/

October 25, 2026 Posted by | UK, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Rosyth councillor raises concerns over submarine dismantling

By Jamie Szmitz, Dunfermline Press 19th Oct 2026
https://www.dunfermlinepress.com/news/26648971.rosyth-councillor-raises-concerns-submarine-dismantling/

FRESH concerns have been raised about nuclear submarine dismantling plans at Rosyth Dockyard.

Councillor Brian Goodall has voiced renewed opposition to the long-term storage of radioactive material in the town, following recent discussions at the SNP annual conference in Aberdeen.

At the political party gathering he quizzed Gareth Hedicker, Babcock International’s Marine Chief Operations Officer, on the plans for radioactive waste that’s being removed from the first of seven old nuclear subs that are laid up at the West Fife yard.

Cllr Goodall said: “I’ve still not had any response from Babcock on how long, and where, they intend to store the highly radioactive reactor pressure vessel that they intend to cut out of the decommissioned nuclear submarine, Swiftsure, over the next few weeks, as part of the ongoing Submarine Dismantling Demonstrator Project.”

In a social media post he also stated: “I challenged the chief operations officer about the poor communication with the local community in relation to the activities at the nuclear regulated site at Rosyth Dockyard.”

He raised concerns about the outdated mailing list used for stakeholder meetings and criticised the lack of clarity around plans for storing the highly radioactive reactor pressure vessel from the decommissioned submarine HMS Swiftsure.

Cllr Goodall said he intends to accept an invitation to meet Mr Hedicker as soon as possible.

Rosyth Dockyard is at the centre of the UK Government’s Submarine Dismantling Programme, which aims to safely dismantle and recycle decommissioned Royal Navy nuclear submarines.

HMS Swiftsure is the first vessel to undergo dismantling under the programme.

Cllr Goodall has consistently opposed proposals to expand the programme at Rosyth, warning that bringing additional submarines to be cut up at the site would be “totally outrageous” and would go against assurances previously given by the Ministry of Defence.

He believes that long-term storage of radioactive materials at Rosyth is inappropriate given the dockyard’s proximity to homes, businesses, and the new Caledonia High School development.

The debate comes as a wider conversation continues about the future of the submarine dismantling programme and Rosyth’s role within it.


October 25, 2026 Posted by | decommission reactor, UK | Leave a comment

Concerns over scrutiny of nuclear factory plans

Questions have been raised over whether West Berkshire Council has the
expertise and resources needed to scrutinise plans for a major
redevelopment at the Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE) in Aldermaston. The
nuclear weapons site is expected to submit plans for its Future Materials
Campus, part of a wider £15bn investment in the UK’s warhead programme.


During a meeting on Thursday, Conservative councillor Dominic Boeck said
residents had concerns about the impact of the project and asked how the
authority would independently assess an application of such scale and
complexity. Liberal Democrat deputy council leader Denise Gaines said any
proposal would be examined by qualified professionals and specialist
consultants to ensure all technical and environmental issues were properly
considered.

BBC 19th Oct 2026, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cm369jg6d2wno

October 25, 2026 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

Microsoft pulls out of AI datacentre project in Essex over power supply concerns

Driven by hopes of an economic transformation, many are taking on increasingly risky debt, including companies vital to the AI boom

Development by UK firm Nscale heralded by ministers as largest of its kind in country loses anchor tenant

Gwyn Topham and Aisha Down, Mon 19 Oct 2026 ,
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/oct/18/microsoft-drops-huge-ai-datacentre-project-in-essex-over-power-supply-concerns

The development of a huge AI datacentre hailed by the UK government has received a fresh setback after Microsoft pulled out of the project over concerns about power supplies.

The development by the British company Nscale, heralded by ministers as the country’s largest AI datacentre when it was announced in 2025, was planned to open at Loughton in Essex next year.

Doubts had already emerged about the scheme after the Guardian revealed in March that the location was still an operational scaffolding yard.

Now there are further concerns after Microsoft, one of its largest planned customers and expected to have been the anchor tenant, informed the company that it was pulling the plug on its agreement.

It comes a month after it emerged that power supply problems meant the project would face a lengthy wait before coming online.

Keir Starmer’s government had highlighted the Loughton project when announcing the UK’s AI strategy in 2025, describing it as the “largest UK sovereign AI datacentre”. Datacentres are the central nervous system of AI technology such as chatbots.

The end of the deal with Microsoft, first reported in the Telegraph, means Nscale has lost its only publicly announced customer for the Essex datacentre. It is understood that Microsoft remains on board for another project the company has in Norway.

Doubts had already emerged about the scheme after the Guardian revealed in March that the location was still an operational scaffolding yard.

Now there are further concerns after Microsoft, one of its largest planned customers and expected to have been the anchor tenant, informed the company that it was pulling the plug on its agreement.

It comes a month after it emerged that power supply problems meant the project would face a lengthy wait before coming online.

Keir Starmer’s government had highlighted the Loughton project when announcing the UK’s AI strategy in 2025, describing it as the “largest UK sovereign AI datacentre”. Datacentres are the central nervous system of AI technology such as chatbots.

The end of the deal with Microsoft, first reported in the Telegraph, means Nscale has lost its only publicly

Nscale, which is backed by tech companies including Nvidia, has positioned itself as Britain’s “sovereign” datacentre provider but the loss of an anchor tenant for its Loughton project could undermine its ambition to float on Wall Street this year with a potential valuation of $35bn (£26bn).

Targeting the rapid growth of AI to boost the economy, the UK government’s proposals to harness the technology have focused on two Nvidia-backed companies: the London-based Nscale and the US company CoreWeave.

Official figures show investments in AI are among the factors helping Britain’s economy to beat expectations of a weaker growth performance this year as the war in the Middle East rattles global business activity.

Nscale is a “neocloud”, one of a number of companies with deep ties to Nvidia that are building the key infrastructure for the AI boom. It is this relationship with Nvidia that meant it and CoreWeave were chosen as key players in the UK’s sovereign AI push, which happened under Starmer.

There is, however, a growing chorus of voices which suggest that neoclouds may be a vulnerability in the broader AI economy, especially as delays pile up across partners.

Driven by hopes of an economic transformation, many are taking on increasingly risky debt, including companies vital to the AI boom. If Nscale pushes back its initial public offering in New York, these vulnerabilities may come into sharper focus.

The former UK deputy prime minister Nick Clegg and the former Meta chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg are board members at the company. Clegg holds a 0.25% stake that could be worth $88m if the company floats at a $35bn valuation.

It emerged earlier this month that UK Power Networks (UKPN), which owns and maintains the electricity grid across London and the south-east of England, had informed Nscale that it would not be able to supply enough power to the company’s Loughton datacentre until the early to mid-2030s.

Nscale said it was “committed to the project” but the failure to find a quick fix to the power supply issue underlines how much energy has become a hindrance to datacentre development.

The scaffolding yard site has been cleared by Nscale, and the company is investigating whether it can generate power onsite and whether it can speed up the connection process.

An Nscale spokesperson said: “We remain committed to both the Loughton project and the UK, and we are exploring alternative power sources for the site, in addition to other expansion sites in the UK.

“Our relationship with Microsoft remains strong and long-term, and this unfortunate London-wide grid issue has no impact on our other contracts.”

October 24, 2026 Posted by | ENERGY, technology, UK | Leave a comment

Deep concerns regarding the Rolls-Royce development at the Wylfa site



Open Letter to Miatta Fahnbulleh MP, Secretary of State for Energy Security
and Net Zero.

Dear Secretary of State, I am contacting you with a letter
written to the former holder of the post, Ed Milliband, expressing my deep
concerns regarding the Rolls-Royce development at the Wylfa site on Ynys
Mon.

Since writing to Ed Miliband, there have been developments that make
the prospects of a nuclear site on the island even more concerning:


1)Increasing threats of war mean that we will be targets for attack. Russia
and Iran have both threatened us, due to our interventions in Ukraine and
the use of British bases for the bombing of Iran. Whatever the rights and
wrongs of these interventions, it is clear that nuclear power stations are
now regular targets for attack. How are we to be protected? How are we to
get off the island in the event of an attack ( or nuclear accident)? There
are two bridges connecting us to the mainland, and even if there were
three, there would be no safe evacuation possible, without the danger of
accidents.

RAF Valley is also on the island, making us a further target.
The waste produced by the possible new nuclear reactors will also serve as
an ongoing target and risk, as it would remain onsite for at least 100
years, being too hot to remove. Our future generations will be responsible
for this; not a legacy we want to bequeath.

2) Increasing droughts and
wildfires have threatened the safety of nuclear plants all over the world,
including at Sizewell B this year. Should the electricity supply be cut to
a nuclear power station, if backup diesel power is then cut off or damaged,
through flooding, as in the case of the Fukushima nuclear disaster, then
there is also disaster, as the reactors cannot be cooled if there is no
electrical power to the station. So, for a nuclear station to be safe,
there needs to be adequate power in the first place. This can no longer be
relied on.

3) A December 2025 Harvard T.H Chan study found a statistical
link between those living close to nuclear power plants and higher cancer
rates in Massachusetts. The strongest link was seen within 20 to 30
kilometers of a nuclear station, and the risk increased as people got
older. There is also a risk to workers.

4) Whereas the Rolls-Royce site has
advertised that the electricity generated at Wylfa would go to homes, it is
now published that energy could go to AI centres being developed on the
island and nearby. How are we to know the end use of the electricity to be
generated by these nuclear reactors?

The World Nuclear Industry Status
Report ( WNISR) 2026 shows that between March 2025 and June 2026, both
solar and wind power have independently surpassed generating electricity
from nuclear reactors. I understand that you want to mitigate the effects
of climate change in the most efficient and safe ways possible. Nuclear
power is neither efficient or safe, particularly under conditions of
conflict, climate change, or indeed pandemic, where routine maintenance is
reduced, as happened during the Covid pandemic.

We implore you to
reconsider pouring more money into these nuclear reactors, yet to receive
the Generic Development Consent order, and instead concentrate our
resources to upgrading the grid, as you propose, and using our excellent
renewable energy sources.


People Against Wylfa B 19th Oct 2026,
https://www.stop-wylfa.org/

October 24, 2026 Posted by | safety, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, UK | Leave a comment

New nuclear technology is predicted to transform North Wales.

A major programme delivering Small Modular Reactor (SMR) technology is set
to transform Anglesey and wider North Wales in the coming years. Wylfa on
Anglesey has been selected as the site of the UK’s first SMR nuclear power
station. The move recognises the strong nuclear heritage and expertise of
the area.

Earlier this month, a group of public and private bodies across
industry, local government and the Welsh Government, and led by Bentley
Systems met at a roundtable to discuss benefits for the region. Gary
Pritchard, leader of Isle of Anglesey County Council and Llinos Medi AS/MP
for Anglesey were in attendance. Institution of Civil Engineers Wales Cymru
Fellows provided impartial advice and expertise on building the programme
in its first steps.

The programme will pioneer skills in the region,
develop new vocational and academic training programmes, and create jobs in
Anglesey. ICE Wales Cymru Regional Director Keith Jones said: “ICE Wales
Cymru supports the Welsh and UK governments in the development of Small
Modular Reactors (SMR). Wales is ideally placed to play a very significant
role in clean energy generation and become an energy hub for the UK.
Nuclear power has a key part to play in the transition to net zero”.

Insider Media 19th Oct 2026, https://www.insidermedia.com/news/wales/new-nuclear-technology-set-to-transform-north-wales

October 24, 2026 Posted by | Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, UK | Leave a comment

UK’s Green Party goes nuclear

I still find the pro-nuclear case unconvincing.  Though basically I’m a Faithfull trying to accept that a group of Traitors have won! At least for the moment, in this specific setting

COMMENT from Amory Lovins – on this article

Re land-use: my 2011 Electricity Journal article at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tej.2011.06.005 showed that including the nuclear fuel cycle makes land-use equivalent between groundmount solar and nuclear power. Newer data would probably give solar a modest advantage. Windpower’s land-use is one or two order of magnitude smaller than either, if one avoids the common confusion of area actually occupied by infrastructure (equipment, roads,…) with area spanned across. The latter confusion would say that the area of lampposts in a car park is the area of the car park (leaving no room for cars), when actually it’s roughly 1% of the total area. As noted, the other ~99% can be and often is used for farming, grazing, wildlife, recreation, or solar power. And solar power’s land-use can be displaced by mounting on roofs or other structures (then it’s ample to power the whole world), or by sharing the same land with agriculture via profitable agrivoltaics. In short, the claim that solar and wind use far more land than nuclear power is wrong.


Another point omitted in the discussion in the article below flows from nuclear power’s producing electricity manyfold costlier than solar or windpower (even if they’re equivalently firmed by now-ultracheap batteries or the nine other and generally cheaper carbon-free grid-balancing methods). That lack of a nuclear business case means there’s no climate case either. That’s because of opportunity cost: you can’t spend the same £ on two different things at the same time. Every £ spent on nuclear electricity would have bought far more solar or wind electricity (or efficient use of electricity) and hence displaced far more fossil fuel and carbon emissions. In other words, because nuclear power produces less electricity and displaces less fossil fuel per £ (and per year), it actually makes climate change worse than if more climate-effective competitors were bought instead.

, https://renewextraweekly.blogspot.com/2026/10/green-party-goes-nuclear.html

The Green Party of England and Wales has abandoned it long standing opposition to nuclear power. A bit of a shock. However, its briefing paper on ‘Ending the Green Party’s Blanket Opposition to Nuclear Fission’, produced evidently by the ‘greens for nuclear’ group, says the proposed new policy, now accepted by the Party, ‘does not commit the green party to being a pro-nuclear party in any way beyond committing the party to following contemporary scientific research. We contend this is what the motion is really about: evidence’. OK so let’s look at its marshalling of the evidence.

First it points to an ‘Our World in Data’ chart which it says shows that ‘nuclear power has the lowest carbon footprint and the second lowest death rate of any energy source.’  It’s hard to know where to start with these much debated and controversial topics.  It is true that nuclear plants do not generate carbon dioxide when running, but producing the fuel for them does. That’s not the case for renewables like wind and solar, so they also avoid the eco and social impacts of uranium mining and waste management, although their output per GW installed is less and is variable and dependent on location, making comparisons hard. But, though there are debates on the exact difference between nuclear and renewables in CO2 terms, it is small – fossil fuels are much worse.

In terms of the deaths, there are some big uncertainties and controversies. For example, in the video produced by Greens for Nuclear Energy, Prof Gerry Thomas puts the death toll for the Chernobyl disaster at 28 initially, followed by around 19 later. But others put it very much higher, in the thousands including from clean-up workers, and possibly even more globally. Whereas the highest figure I’ve seen for wind, from an anti-wind farm group, is 272 fatalities so far worldwide, while, as the World in Data chart shows, deaths for solar are very low.

It may be true that, thankfully, at Fukushima, with the wind blowing the radiation cloud eastward across the sea and the prompt evacuation of local people, public exposure was reduced and deaths avoided, as Greens for Nuclear note, but there were some staff impacts and the debate on health impacts of nuclear in normal operation on workers and the public globally continues, with, for example, a US study claiming new proof that proximity to nuclear plants can lead to increased local cancer rates.

What about nuclear waste? The background paper says that the risk from nuclear waste (and by implication leaks) were less than was commonly thought, since ‘radioisotopes with long half-lives are inherently less radioactive than ones with short half-lives as they spread their radioactivity over a longer time.’ Even so it did admit that ‘raw spent nuclear fuel remains more radioactive than uranium ore for around 300,000 years’. However, it claimed that ‘the Plutonium can be removed from the spent fuel and reprocessed into new fuel. Fuel treated in this way decays to be less radioactive than uranium ore in 9,000 years’. So that’s fine then! And in case you were worried, it adds that, while some countries did get nuclear bombs from reactor material, that is no longer the case and now ‘there is not a clear connection between states with civilian nuclear power programs and the acquisition of nuclear weapons’. Tell that to those who worry about Iran’s uranium enrichment programme!

Then it moves on to ‘Nuclear Power’s Greatest Advantage’- reliability. Last summer’s heat wave led to many reactors across Europe having to be shut down due to problems with cooling.  And in any case, in normal circumstances, reactors have to shut down regularly for spent fuel replacement – unlike renewables such as wind and solar, which do not need any fuel. These renewables do depend on the weather, so there have to be balancing/backup systems, but then, as noted above, that is also true of nuclear plants- they can’t be relied on all the time.  The issue is how much will that backup add to the cost of either of them.  Some say it will add a lot more to the cost of renewables, but Lazarsd’s LCOE data, which now includes the cost of storage, still has most renewables doing much better than (US) nuclear over almost all the range of cost estimates.

The greens for nuclear briefing does concede that ‘per unit of energy generated wind and solar are cheaper than nuclear’, but it says that is irrelevant since the market ‘is structured so that all producers are paid the price of the most expensive producer – i.e. whatever the cost for wind, solar, and nuclear they are all paid the price of whatever the most expensive electricity source currently being used is, generally natural gas’. However, it adds ‘any Green government would fix the electricity market (likely by bringing it into government control).’. Fine! But how does that make nuclear cheaper? Or faster to install- something that renewables also beat nuclear at hands down.

The Briefing paper may be more convincing when it talks of land use. Wind and solar do take up more space than nuclear plants, although the land needed for uranium mines and waste repositories also has to be taken into account, and the land around wind turbine bases can be used for farming, while solar can be on roof tops and there are agri-solar options for solar farms. The higher use of scarce minerals and materials for some wind and solar technologies is another key issue- although that has to be set alongside the fact that nuclear plants need uranium and reserves of that are not infinite. While there are options for recycling of all materials, including nuclear wastes, perhaps what needs to be said in all cases of impact (including in relation to the use of land and materials), is that we need to reduce demand for energy- that is something greens should all agree on.

The Briefing note ends by reporting that a survey conducted by IPSOS for Greens 4 Nuclear Energy in 2022 ‘found that on balance members of the public would look more favourably on the Green Party if it dropped its anti-nuclear stance’. It said ‘this was especially pronounced for members of the wider green movement’. I thought this was surprising. But when I checked with Google it confirmed that the report said that ‘people involved in environmental campaigning and green groups continue to support nuclear energy for electricity production.’

Sadly the Green4 nuclear web site link on this report is broken, so I could not explore more. But it is true that views may be changing. That may not be surprising given the wave of pro-nuclear propaganda in recent years – even Nature seems to have succumbed. However, I still find the pro-nuclear case unconvincing.  Though basically I’m a Faithfull trying to accept that a group of Traitors have won! At least for the moment, in this specific setting.

There may still be some battles ahead, internally and externally – after all there are many who don’t want nuclear, especially if it undermines renewables.  And the conference vote may not reflect the views of the wider party membership. So there may yet be a challenge. Though, maybe the big political issue is likely to be what the Green Party will do when and if Small Modular Reactors start spreading, and, as seems likely, local people object. Its deputy leader had earlier spoken out against SMRs. And, more generally, what will it do over the battles for funding between renewables and nuclear as the latter tries to expand? Will try to to sit on the fence on that too?

October 23, 2026 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment

How much will the AWE Aldermaston build cost West Berkshire in consultants?


By Niki Hinman Local Democracy Reporter, 19 October 2026, https://www.newburytoday.co.uk/news/questions-raised-over-council-ability-to-approve-nuclear-wea-9487315/

Questions over West Berkshire Council’s ability to scrutinise forthcoming planning applications into a multi-billion pound upgrade to AWE Aldermaston have been raised.

The plans are likely to cost the authority tens of thousands of pounds in specialist consultants to evaluate the proposal to upgrade the nuclear weapons facility into a state-of-the-art science park.

The council will have to handle the massive application in the coming weeks, and has said it will need specialist help to deal with it.

The Government’s £15bn defence investment is dedicated specifically to the UK’s nuclear warhead programme as a whole – which encompasses both the Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE) Aldermaston and its sister site at Burghfield.

Security-cleared consultants working on defence or submarine programmes command a notable market premium.

A Google search puts them upwards of £1,000 per day.

The nuclear weapons factory is soon to submit plans described as ‘being on the scale of London 2012 in complexity’ to the authority, which must then figure out whether they pass planning policies.

The person leading the project from the AWE side is Andrew McNaughton CBE – a prominent British civil engineer.

He led on delivering key components for the London 2012 Olympics and is on record as saying the Future Materials Campus is on the same scale.

The matter came up before West Berkshire Council last night (Thursday).

“Government-funded plans for the multi-billion pound Future Materials Campus (FMC) at AWE’s Aldermaston site will see planning applications coming forward soon,” said Dominic Boeck (Con, Aldermaston).

“How will the council support and engage constructively with residents, local councils and businesses on this enormous development?

“AWE have compared the scale and complexity of the proposed FMC development with London 2012

“What specific assurance can the lead member give that council has sufficient planning, emergency planning and other relevant technical resources and expertise to undertake a thorough and independent assessment of the application, including its implications for residential safety, emergency preparedness and amenity within and around the Aldermaston DEPZ?”

Deputy council leader Denise Gaines (Lib Dem, Hungerford and Kintbury) said: “We take the safety of residents and people at AWE very seriously.

“The anticipated planning application is going through the process.

“At this stage of the proposal it is a pre application.

“This is a confidential part of the process between council officers and the applicant.

“This sets out a clear timetable for a major and complex application.

“As with any planning application it will be assessed by a team of qualified professionals to ensure that all relvant technical and environmental matters are considered and evaluated either in house or by specialist external consultants.”

There is a statement of community involvement.

And the consultation will involve talks with the council’s emergency planning service and the Office for Nuclear Regulation.

“My concern and my community’s concern is the scale of this project,” added Mr Boeck.

“Of course we understand it is a matter of national security, but there are concerns about how this multi-billion pound project will impact us here.

“I appreciate much will be done behind the wire, but the trucks have got to roll.”

When local authorities deal with ‘enormous’ or hyper-scale planning applications like the London 2012 Olympic Games or major urban regenerations, the standard local planning mechanisms are usually adapted, bypassed, or heavily augmented.

Because these applications are far too large, complex, and politically sensitive for a standard local authority planning department to process normally, they are managed through a combination of special purpose vehicles, and strategic planning frameworks

October 23, 2026 Posted by | business and costs, UK, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Stop Japan’s Failed Nuclear Plant Waste Coming to Cumbria

Radiation Free Lakeland

Please sign the petition here: https://www.change.org/p/stop-japan-s…

Cumberland Council plans to import sodium coolant, a type of nuclear waste, thousands of miles from Japan to Cumbria, for processing at the Port of Workington, just 885m from Northside Primary School and nearby residential areas including many towns and villages.
Sodium coolant is extremely hazardous, and carries a high risk of violent explosion or fire if exposed to air or water.
It may also contain radioactive elements.
Further concerns include:

  • Less than a mile from Northside Primary School, the chemical plant is being designed to convert the hazardous coolant into caustic soda.
  • Caustic soda is also a hazardous material and carries enormous risks to the environment over decades if spilled.
  • £4.5m of the Workington Town Deal government funding is being used to develop this site, despite the development planning to employ just 20 people over a period of 7 years.
  • The Workington Town Deal was promoted as being for the public benefit, not for creating profit for a handful of private businesses.
  • The £25m that the site construction phase is predicted to generate is meaningless compared to the certain risk our children and local environments would face as a result of the site’s operation and the £Billions that would likely be required for clean up following operation of this proposed chemical plant for Japan’s failed fast breeder nuclear reactor wastes.

Further Info
Japan’s prototype fast-breeder reactor (FBR), ‘Monju’, was a disaster from the start. It was shut down due to an accident less than 9 months after achieving criticality, and remained closed for 15 years. Reopening in 2008, a second accident closed it for good. Overall, Monju generated electricity for exactly one hour after achieving criticality in 1994 and will cost £Billions to decommission.
Fast breeder reactors use liquid metal as a coolant – usually liquid sodium, which violently explodes on contact with air water. Dounreay, which ran the UK’s own Fast Breeder Reactors, processed the coolant onsite at both reactors. Sodium coolant at Dounreay did contain radioactive caesium.
Cumberland Council are partners in the plan to bring the Monju’s sodium coolant to the Port of Workington.
Ironically, ‘Monju’ was named to represent transcendent wisdom in Buddhist tradition. It has achieved neither wisdom nor its stated aim of electricity generation apart from one hour’s worth.
It has produced tonnes of chemical and radioactive waste some of which the operators the Japan Atomic Energy Agency want to ship thousands of miles to Cumbria instead of dealing with in Japan..

October 23, 2026 Posted by | Japan, UK, wastes | Leave a comment

Worried About Russian Meddling In UK Politics? Wait Till You See What Israel Is Up To

Burnham’s exclusive focus on Russian influence almost laughably beside the point. This furious finger-pointing at the Kremlin is designed with one purpose in mind only: to distract the British public from where the real external meddling in our politics is coming from.

October 16, 2026, Jonathan Cook Substack

Andy Burnham’s government is rolling out a new “Centre for Information Defence”. But the outside actors most aggressively undermining what little remains of British democracy are nowhere in its sights

Russia “interfered” in the 2016 Brexit vote by running some “anti-EU” articles on its RT channel and promoting a few internet trolls. Even MI5 has to admit that this activity had no tangible impact on the referendum campaign.

No matter. British prime minister Andy Burnham has once again revived the incendiary claim that Russian disinformation is an especial threat to British democracy. At the United Nations a few weeks ago he announced plans for a National Centre for Information Defence “to detect, attribute and disrupt these kinds of hostile state information attacks”.

For the new British prime minister, as for his predecessors, this is all about Moscow and the UK’s favourite bogeyman, Vladimir Putin. At the UN, Burnham promised British expertise to other European nations to protect them from Kremlin disinformation.

Meanwhile, evidence continues to mount that another foreign actor is meddling even more aggressively in British politics – and neither Burnham nor MI5 have a word to say about it.

Any evidence of Russia disinformation-peddling in the UK pales in comparison to Israeli influence operations – and that’s just the ones we know about. The head of MI5, Ken McCallum, noted that Russian disinformation was neither sophisticated nor successful. The same cannot be said for Israel’s handiwork.

Israel has been using “hasbara” trolls on social media platforms to manipulate public debates in Britain for years – the thrust of the accusation against Russia. But in Israel’s case, it goes much further than that.

This year the Israeli state massively increased its public diplomacy budget to $730 million to expand its influence operations. That includes flying even more politicians, clergy, academics and influencers to bombard them with pro-Israel propaganda they are then likely to spread back home. According to foreign minister Gideon Saar, Israeli advocacy should be treated “like investing in jets, bombs, and missile interceptors”.

”.

There was already plenty of evidence through the late 2010s, as I reported at the time, that Israel was helping to organise, stoke and amplify a campaign to smear its arch-critic, Jeremy Corbyn, as an antisemite, in order to prevent him from reaching No 10 Downing Street.

Not least, Israel did so by advancing a new, bogus definition of Jew hatred through the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA). Usefully, for Israel, that definition largely ignores hatred of Jews to focus instead on criticism of Israel.

That was the most blatant meddling possible in what remains of Britain’s democratic processes. UK politicians and media not only failed to oppose it, but actively sought to amplify the smears.

Civil war

This week the fanatically pro-Israel US lobby group the Anti-Defamation League revealed that it had been working with leading AI firms, which are increasingly being integrated into social media platforms, to suppress what it calls “antisemitism” – or what the rest of us would refer to as criticism of Israel.

CEO Jonathan Greenblatt observed: “We’ve had excellent collaboration with Silicon Valley.” The platforms, he said, would tackle content the ADL doesn’t like “right in the source code” – that is, before users can see it.

That is likely not only to remove criticism of Israeli atrocities and criticism of western governments, such as the UK’s, for colluding in Israel’s genocide but turn social media into a playground for bots and Israel apologists, giving them free reign to spread their propaganda without challenge.

We also know, thanks to the work of the French security services – maybe MI5 was too busy chasing Russian bots to notice – that an Israeli cyber agency called Blackcore targeted the SNP in May’s Scottish elections, as well as meddling in elections in France and New York.

Israeli tech firms, especially those dealing in spyware, intelligence and influence operations, are typically closely aligned with the Israeli state and its military. Most of the founders of tech start-ups are alumnae of the Israeli army’s 8200 intelligence unit.

Alongside the SNP, New York mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani and a leftwing French party headed by Jean-Luc Melenchon were targeted. Why? Because, unlike their political rivals, all had dared to speak out against Israel’s genocide in Gaza

With echoes of what happened to Corbyn, Blackcore’s campaigns were designed to smear candidates. In the case of the French elections, fake accounts were created to accuse one candidate of rape and another of paedophilia.

A new documentary, NAZA, shows how Israel has paved the way in using AI in pioneering new ways to kill on a mass scale in Gaza. It selected banks of targets for assassination, often by murdering those “suspects” when they are in family compounds, slaughtering large numbers of bystanders in the process.

It is therefore hardly surprising that tech firms in Israel have been caught using AI in similarly innovative and indiscriminate ways online, to target western publics with disinformation.

In the summer it emerged that the Israeli government had created a website for a fake “scholarly” think-tank. In a short period of time, it produced prodigious quantities of AI-generated content on Israel, optimised for common search terms, that promoted Israeli talking points and constantly suggested criticism of Israel risked fuelling antisemitism.

It was set up not only to influence internet chatbots into echoing its pro-Israel disinformation but also to integrate its content into what experts call the “underlying training data”: that is, the unquestioned assumptions on which chatbots operate.

Back in May 2024 Meta identified fake Israel-based accounts, “posing as Jewish students, African Americans and other concerned citizens”, peddling pro-Israel content in the US and Canada in support of Israel’s slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza.

Two months ago, Meta again found the same kind of dirty tricks emanating from Israel, this time targeting Britain, France and Australia among other countries. The AI-generated accounts posed “as local, civically-engaged brands, news sources, religious organizations, and political activists”.

Notably in the case of the UK and France, the influence campaigns were designed to stoke “anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim” sentiment. Israel has been critically involved in advancing Islamophobic content, fuelling fears of a supposed “Muslim takeover” of Europe to mobilise support for Israel as a bulwark in the Middle East against Islam, and thereby encourage sympathy for its genocidal attacks on Gaza.

As a consequence, the political landscape in Britain has been disfigured. Support for the far-right has been artificially inflated, polarising British society. The path is being paved towards deeper authoritarianism and the possibility of civil war.

Death knell

None of these dire outcomes, the death knell for what little remains of British democracy, is attracting even the mildest interest from the Burnham government or MI5. Instead, they are chasing what so far appears to have been far more marginal Russian output.

But it isn’t just the influence of Israel we should be worried about. The problem runs much deeper, with a host of other noxious outside actors trying to warp and disfigure British politics in ways that closely accord with Israel’s malign intent. Burnham’s Centre for Information Defence will do precisely nothing to tackle any of it.

Here are two other powerful external actors aligned with Israel in distorting British politics.

The billionaire class, a transnational elite that has no loyalty to Britain, interfere in our politics by making our political parties dependent on their donations. They use their money to buy influence with the main parties – which is why for decades it has made little difference whether we vote for the Conservatives or Labour. We get austerity either way, while the billionaires get permission for their forever wars, directing public wealth away from public services into the arms industries and resource grabs.

Jeremy Corbyn tried to break with this model by funding Labour with small donations from ordinary people instead of the billionaires. As a result, he was destroyed by a confected campaign run by the billionaires, in association with Israel and its trolls, to smear him as an antisemite.

Sir Keir Starmer, Corbyn’s successor, went right back to begging for money from Big Business, got the billionaires behind him, and rolled on with the austerity programme.

Is Nigel Farage’s Reform different? Of course, not. Even before reaching power, he’s dependent on crypto-billionaires living in Thailand and Hong Kong.

Meanwhile, the sometime US trillionaire Elon Musk is busy rallying Britain’s new blackshirts, led by serial fraudster Tommy Robinson, to chase after a few “illegal” migrants rather than identifying the real criminals tearing apart Britain: the super-rich like Musk.

The billionaires both wield and conceal their influence through their ownership of the corporate media. They use the media to aggressively promote their own causes – political and economic policies ensuring their further enrichment – by normalising the extreme ideology of neoliberal capitalism, with its promotion of endless resource extraction through forever wars and the fuelling of needless consumption.

The consequence is the destruction of the conditions for human life on the planet. The billionaires hope they can ride out the catastrophe in their bunkers, or cryogenically freeze their bodies until a point in the future when they can be uploaded to the cloud.

One of the media’s most important jobs is to use smear campaigns to destroy anyone, such as Corbyn and now Zack Polanski, who threatens the billionaires’ privileged position by offering a mildly socialist programme of wealth redistribution..

Vassal state

If the UK media wasn’t entirely captured by the billionaire class – serving as its PR division – then we might know more about the role of the United States in meddling in our politics.

The recent claims of a supposed “terrorist plot” outside RAF Fairford – really a US airforce base pretending to be a British base and one from which the US has waged an illegal war of aggression against Iran – should have reminded us that the Pentagon is largely in charge of UK foreign policy.

The US has some 15 major military bases on British soil, plus half a dozen smaller intelligence sites. As the rightwing US podcaster Tucker Carlson recently observed, the fact that Britain has foreign troops crawling all over it makes us little more than an occupied “vassal state”.

The US recently announced a $4 billion upgrade of its UK bases, including establishing storage sites for its nuclear arsenal. The plan caused barely a ripple of interest among British politicians or the media .

Although our political and media class pretend the UK is an equal partner in a western defence alliance, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, the reality is very different. Nato takes its orders from the US, doing Washington’s bidding. That’s why Nato has been pivoting towards America’s biggest economic rival, China, which is, of course, nowhere near the North Atlantic.

When the US snaps its fingers, Britain stands to attention and hikes its spending on the war industries. Along with European governments, the UK is willing to drain its national coffers and scythe through public spending with yet more austerity cuts to support Washington’s military agenda for “full-spectrum global dominance”.

Hidden influence

Much of the US influence on British politics is carefully concealed from view, operating behind closed doors.

In the early 2010s, the US was desperately seeking a pretext to extradite Julian Assange from the UK and lock him up in a super-max jail, hiding him out of sight after his organisation Wikileaks revealed US and British war crimes in Afghanistan and Iraq. It was during this period that Starmer, as the director of public prosecutions, repeatedly jetted off to Washington for secret meetings with US officials.

We will never know what was discussed. Freedom of information requests discovered that his own officials destroyed all records of those meetings.

Once he became a politician, Starmer was recruited to the shadowy Trilateral Commission, originally founded in the 1970s by officials in Jimmy Carter’s administration to deal with the supposed problem of “an excess of democracy” in the US. The commission’s view was that voters were becoming dangerously less passive, at that time over the Vietnam war, and ways needed to be found to return them to docility.

A similar British-American Project cements ties between rising stars in British politics, business and journalism and Washington elites. The power imbalance between the two sides ensures up-and-coming British leaders are readily groomed into an Atlanticist worldview in which the UK is very much the junior partner.

There are a plethora of other “respected’ think-tanks and organisations whose chief role is to embed US policy ideas, especially those relating to foreign policy, in the thinking of British elites. They include the Bilderberg Group, Chatham House, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Atlantic Council, The British-American Parliamentary Group, and BritishAmerican Business.

The US uses its financial muscle through these organisations and many others to manufacture consent for its extreme neoliberal and neoconservative ideologies. The latest example are massive grants to organisations willing to export Trump’s MAGA ideology to the UK, masquerading as a “public education” initiative.

There is plenty of evidence to show that it was pressure from the Trump administration that led to the unprecedented decision by Starmer’s government to proscribe a civil disobedience group, Palestine Action, for the first time in Britain’s history as a terrorist organisation.

Palestine Action had incensed Israel by targeting its weapons factories on UK soil, highlighting another aspect of British collusion in the Gaza genocide, and had infuriated Trump personally by spraying one of his golf courses in Scotland with the words “Gaza is not 4 sale”.

In truth, the ways that the US meddles directly in British politics are so numerous it is virtually impossible to quantify them. Britain is little more than a colony of the US, receiving diktats on important foreign policy issues – especially regarding US and Israeli interests – that the UK is invariably too frightened to oppose.

Burnham is already rolling over to reverse the UK’s decision to honour a ruling from the International Court of Justice and other international tribunals that Britain has no claim to sovereignty over the Chagos Islands and must return them to Mauritius. The UK has faced a temper tantrum from Trump on the matter because the US operates an illegal military base on one of the islands.

Disobedience by the UK is the exception, not the rule. Which makes Burnham’s exclusive focus on Russian influence almost laughably beside the point. This furious finger-pointing at the Kremlin is designed with one purpose in mind only: to distract the British public from where the real external meddling in our politics is coming from.

October 21, 2026 Posted by | Israel, politics, UK | Leave a comment

Why Boris Johnson Must Answer for Ukraine’s Destruction — and Why the Public Should Decide on Future Ukraine Aid

A conversation with Mary Dejevsky and Commodore RN (Ret’d) Steve Jermy

Ian Proud, Oct 15, 2026, https://thepeacemonger.substack.com/p/why-boris-johnson-must-answer-for?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=3221990&post_id=220504822&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=1ise1&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

In this wide-ranging discussion, I am joined by two of Britain’s most experienced and independent voices on the Ukraine war and European security: Mary Dejevsky, former Moscow correspondent for The Times and long-time foreign affairs commentator, and Commodore Steve Jermy RN (Rtd), a decorated naval officer with combat experience dating back to the Falklands War and the author of Strategy for Action.

Prompted by Mary’s powerful Substack essay J’Accuse – Boris Johnson, we examine Boris Johnson’s role in the early phase of the war, the collapse of the April 2022 Istanbul talks, the broader strategic failures of Western policy, the gap between political narrative and military reality, and what a realistic security architecture for Europe might look like once the fighting ends. We also discuss Steve’s support for a petition calling for a pause in UK military aid and a proper public debate (and possible referendum) on Britain’s involvement.

In this conversation we discuss:
– Mary Dejevsky’s case for holding Boris Johnson to account after the war
– The Istanbul negotiations of April 2022 and why the draft agreement collapsed
– Johnson’s Churchillian framing of Zelensky and the early Western response
– Military analysis of Russia’s initial operation and the West’s strategic misjudgements
– The role of other key figures (Liz Truss, Ben Wallace, Tony Radakin)
– Why the West continues to rely on one-sided information and propaganda
– Russia’s actual security objectives versus the “restore the empire” narrative
– Neutrality for Ukraine and the case for reforming or replacing NATO
– A possible future European security architecture centred on the OSCE
– The petition to pause UK support and open a national debate on aid spending
– What a post-war reckoning in Britain might look like.

October 21, 2026 Posted by | UK, Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment