Day X Marks the Calendar: Julian Assange’s ‘Final’ Appeal
December 22, 2023, by: Dr Binoy Kampmark https://theaimn.com/day-x-marks-the-calendar-julian-assanges-final-appeal/—
Julian Assange’s wife, Stella, is rarely one to be cryptic. “Day X is here,” she posted on the platform formerly known as Twitter. For those who have followed her remarks, her speeches, and her activism, it was sharply clear what this meant. “It may be the final chance for the UK to stop Julian’s extradition. Gather outside the court at 8.30am on both days. It’s now or never.”
Between February 20 and 21 next year, the High Court will hear what WikiLeaks claims may be “the final chance for Julian Assange to prevent his extradition to the United States.” (This is qualified by the prospect of an appeal to the European Court of Human Rights.) Were that to take place, the organisation’s founder faces 18 charges, 17 of which are stealthily cobbled from the aged and oppressive US Espionage Act of 1917. Estimates of any subsequent sentence vary, the worst being 175 years
The WikiLeaks founder remains jailed at His Majesty’s pleasure at Belmarsh prison, only reserved for the most hardened of criminals. It’s a true statement of both British and US justice that Assange has yet to face trial, incarcerated, without bail, for four-and-a-half years. That trial, were it to ever be allowed to take place, would employ a scandalous legal theory that will spell doom to all those who dive and dabble in the world of publishing national security information.
Fundamentally, and irrefutably, the case against Assange remains political in its muscularity, with a gangster’s legality papered over it. As Stella herself makes clear, “With the myriad of evidence that has come to light since the original hearing in 2018, such as the violation of legal privilege and reports that senior US officials are involved in formulating assassination plots against my husband, there is no denying that a fair trial, let alone Julian’s safety on US soil, is an impossibility were he to be extradited.”
In mid-2022, Assange’s legal team attempted a two-pronged attempt to overturn the decision of Home Office Secretary Priti Patel to approve Assange’s extradition while also broadening the appeal against grounds made in the original January 4, 2021 reasons of District Judge Vanessa Baraitser.
The former, among other matters, took issue with the acceptance by the Home Office that the extradition was not for a political offence and therefore prohibited by Article 4 of the UK-US Extradition Treaty. The defence team stressed the importance of due process, enshrined in British law since the Magna Carta of 2015, and also took issue with Patel’s acceptance of “special arrangements” with the US government regarding the introduction of charges for the facts alleged which might carry the death penalty, criminal contempt proceedings, and such specialty arrangements that might protect Assange “against being dealt with for conduct outside the extradition request.” History shows that such “special arrangements” can be easily, and arbitrarily abrogated.
On June 30, 2022 came the appeal against Baraitser’s original reasons. While Baraitser blocked the extradition to the US, she only did so on grounds of oppression occasioned by mental health grounds and the risk posed to Assange were he to find himself in the US prison system. The US government got around this impediment by making breezy promises to the effect that Assange would not be subject to oppressive, suicide-inducing conditions, or face the death penalty. A feeble, meaningless undertaking was also made suggesting that he might serve the balance of his term in Australia – subject to approval, naturally.
What this left Assange’s legal team was a decision otherwise hostile to publishing, free speech and the activities that had been undertaken by WikiLeaks. The appeal accordingly sought to address this, claiming, among other things, that Baraitser had erred in assuming that the extradition was not “unjust and oppressive by reason of the lapse of time”; that it would not be in breach of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (inhuman and degrading treatment)”; that it did not breach Article 10 of ECHR, namely the right to freedom of expression; and that it did not breach Article 7 of the ECHR (novel and unforeseeable extension of the law).
-ADVERTISEMENT-
Other glaring defects in Baraitser’s judgment are also worth noting, namely her failure to acknowledge the misrepresentation of facts advanced by the US government and the “ulterior political motives” streaking the prosecution. The onerous and much thicker second superseding indictment was also thrown at Assange at short notice before the extradition hearing of September 2020, suggesting that those grounds be excised “for reasons of procedural fairness.”
An agonising wait of some twelve months followed, only to yield an outrageously brief decision on June 6 from High Court justice Jonathan Swift (satirists, reach for your pens and laptops). Swift, much favoured by the Defence and Home Secretaries when a practising barrister, told Counsel Magazine in a 2018 interview that his “favourite clients were the security and intelligence agencies.” Why? “They take preparation and evidence-gathering seriously: a real commitment to getting things right.” Good grief.
In such a cosmically unattached world, Swift only took three pages to reject the appeal’s arguments in a fit of premature adjudication. “An appeal under the Extradition Act 2003,” he wrote with icy finality, “is not an opportunity for general rehearsal of all matters canvassed at an extradition hearing.” The appeal’s length – some 100 pages – was “extraordinary” and came “to no more than an attempt to re-run the extensive arguments made and rejected by the District Judge.”
Thankfully, Swift’s finality proved stillborn. Some doubts existed whether the High Court appellate bench would even grant the hearing. They did, though requesting that Assange’s defence team trim the appeal to 20 pages.
How much of this is procedural theatre and circus judge antics remains to be seen. Anglo-American justice has done wonders in soiling itself in its treatment of Britain’s most notable political prisoner. Keeping Assange in the UK in hideous conditions of confinement without bail serves the goals of Washington, albeit vicariously. For Assange, time is the enemy, and each legal brief, appeal and hearing simply weighs the ledger further against his ailing existence.
Spiralling nuclear costs make UK’s Ministry Of Defence’s equipment plan unsustainable.
While there are shortfalls in every ‘Top Level Budget’ (TLB) in the plan, huge increases in the forecast cost of the MOD’s nuclear weapon upgrades is the most significant driver of these deficits.
While there are shortfalls in every ‘Top Level Budget’ (TLB) in the plan, huge increases in the forecast cost of the MOD’s nuclear weapon upgrades is the most significant driver of these deficits.
Nuclear Information Service 20.12.2023, DAVID CULLEN
The Ministry of Defence’s plan for equipment acquisition over the next decade has once again been branded unaffordable, with overspending on its nuclear programme now clearly responsible for the overall insolvency of the plan. After two years where the plan was predicting a modest surplus, due to the greatest increase in UK military spending since the Korean war, the apparently inexorable rising costs of the government’s nuclear weapon upgrades have created the largest deficit since the government started publishing these plans in 2012.
The Ministry of Defence (MOD) plans its equipment spending around a 10-year budget set by the Treasury. This is longer than most departments, due to the substantial costs and lead-in times involved. The plan covers spending on all equipment used by the armed forces, from submarines to small arms ammunition. The plan is updated annually to cover the next 10 financial years, and is intended to show Parliament that the MOD is able to properly finance its ambitions in military equipment spending.Once the plan is published the National Audit Office (NAO) carries out an analysis of the affordability, which is published separately. The MOD decided not to publish its 2023 Equipment Plan, telling the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee that it needed more time to “work through the consequences” of the 2023 Integrated Review Refresh (IRR) and its accompanying Defence Command Paper. However, all of the financial analysis for the plan has been undertaken and the NAO has published a report based on that analysis.
The MOD’s assessment
The MOD’s own figures show that there is a £16.9bn shortfall in the plan, compared to the £2.6bn surplus in the previous year’s plan. While there are shortfalls in every ‘Top Level Budget’ (TLB) in the plan, huge increases in the forecast cost of the MOD’s nuclear weapon upgrades is the most significant driver of these deficits.
The Defence Nuclear Organisation (DNO), the TLB which oversees the majority of the MOD’s spending on its programme, has seen its spending on the equipment plan increase 62% since last year to £99.5bn. The DNO appear to have been given approval to spend whatever is deemed necessary to avoid delays in the production of the Dreadnought submarine class, as the NAO says it has prioritised delivery to schedule “over immediate cost constraints”. This approach is apparently supported by the Treasury, and although it is hard to dispute their claim that fewer delays will in general lead to lower overall costs, it is a questionable approach to financial management………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………….. Over the full life of the Dreadnought programme, CAAS estimates that costs will be £4bn higher, a substantial increase from their estimate last year of costs being £1.2bn above current forecasts.
……………………… The NAO also highlights the propensity of project delays leading to increased costs, both in the projects themselves and in related programmes, such as maintaining equipment that had previously been scheduled for retirement. This has frequently been the case within the MOD’s nuclear programme, and again raises questions about the substantial ‘adjustments for realism’ in the DNO’s current calculations.
A lack of plans
The gulf in the MOD’s equipment plan finances in general, and nuclear project finances in particular, is emerging despite substantial increases in funding from the Treasury. In the 2023 Spring Budget £3bn of additional funding was announced alongside the IRR, and current budgets allow for annual increases of £2bn, both specifically for nuclear projects. £2bn of the Dreadnought programmes nominal £10bn contingency fund had already been spent by March 2023, and the current forecast cost for the project appears to anticipate another £1bn being spent. The Treasury have apparently ‘set out the arrangements’ for further contingency spending, although it is still to be agreed on a case-by-case basis. In practice, the contingency does not exist as a separate fund, and this ‘contingency’ is just a mechanism for the Treasury to approve overspend.
While the stated commitment of the MOD and Treasury to funding the Dreadnought programme above any other considerations is clearly intended to dispel any doubts about the viability of that project, it is hard to see any resolution to the current state of the equipment plan that does not involve spending on conventional equipment projects being cut. The NAO warns about this prospect and highlights the reliance of nuclear-armed submarine patrols on conventional forces that are not currently protected by the ring-fencing of the MOD’s nuclear spending.
………………………….. The MOD’s refusal to take difficult decisions now merely increases the number of tough choices that will await an incoming government after the next election. The most likely outcome of those choices is that once again conventional military spending will be cut to fund the government’s nuclear ambitions. https://www.nuclearinfo.org/comment/2023/12/spiralling-nuclear-costs-make-the-mods-equipment-plan-unsustainable/
UK’s Nuclear Minister has so far failed to meet East Suffolk communities who have concerns about Sizewell C nuclear project
The Chair of the Nuclear Free Local Authorities has written to Nuclear
Minister Andrew Bowie MP urging to honour his promise to revisit the
communities of East Suffolk to meet and talk with elected representatives
and local people about their concerns over this massive project.
NFLA 19th Dec 2023
Assange Appeal Hearing Set for February
Julian Assange’s wife Stella Assange confirmed that the hearing will take place at the Royal Courts of Justice in the middle of February.
By Joe Lauria / Consortium News, https://scheerpost.com/2023/12/19/assange-appeal-hearing-set-for-february/
Imprisoned publisher Julian Assange will face two High Court judges over two days on Feb. 20-21, 2024 in London in what will likely be his last appeal against being extradited to the United States to face charges of violating the Espionage Act.
Assange’s wife Stella Assange confirmed that the hearing will take place at the Royal Courts of Justice. Assange had had an earlier request to appeal rejected by High Court Judge Jonathan Swift on June 6.
Assange then filed an application to appeal that decision and the dates have now been set. Assange is seeking to challenge both the home secretary’s decision to extradite him as well as to cross appeal the decision by the lower court judge, Vanessa Baraitser.
Baraitser had ruled in January 2021 to release Assange from Belmarsh Prison and deny the U.S. request for extradition based on Assange’s mental health, his propensity to commit suicide and conditions of U.S. prisons. On every point of law, however, Baraitser sided with the United States.
The U.S. appealed her decision, issuing “diplomatic assurances” that Assange would not be mistreated in prison. The High Court, after a two-day hearing in March 2022, accepted those “assurances” and rejected Assange’s appeal.
His application to the U.K. Supreme Court to hear the case was then denied. Assange then applied for a new appeal of Baraitser’s legal decisions and the home secretary’s extradition order.
Swift rejected Assange’s 150-page argument in a three-page rejection. The appeal of that decision will now take place two months from now.
If convicted under the World War I-era Espionage Act, the WikiLeaks publisher and journalist is facing up to 175 years in a U.S. dungeon for publishing classified material revealing crimes by the U.S. state, including war crimes.
Assange was also charged with conspiracy to commit computer intrusion, though the indictment agains him does not accuse him of stealing U.S. documents or even of helping his source, Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning, to do so.
Time to shelve Hinkley Point C?
Alan Debenham: December 19, 2023, https://somersetapple.co.uk/news/time-to-shelve-hinkley-point-c
SEASONAL old TV films could well remind us of the 1990s popular sit-com Drop the Dead Donkey about a fictional national newspaper’s forever squabbling journalists, where it was imperative to drop all stories past their sell-by date. Very much like the growing absurdity of the little-mentioned massive overspend and time delay over the enormous Hinkley C nuclear power station construction project on the Severn estuary. Would be good if last week’s putting a roof on the first reactor was matched with putting a roof on nuclear nonsenses.
The arguments against Hinkley C, from all sides of the media, NGOs and professional experts, definitely have been loud and sustained enough to label it a ‘dead donkey’ which should have ‘died’ at reviews in 2012 and 2015. The enormous cost overrun, going from an original £16bn in 2012 to double that figure announced recently, and an enormous completion time delay, going from first forecast 2017 to now only a single reactor operating by 2027 – both reactors a year later – should have killed off the whole project long time ago.
However, as we all know, big billions of investment have colossal lobbying power – especially with this millionaire-led Tory government regarding its daft nuclear mania around proven existential linkage between nuclear bombs and nuclear power. With our essential public services collapsing around hardworking families now driven to food banks, Tory spending hundreds of billions on maintaining our so-called submarine-based nuclear deterrent and planning to build eight new nuclear power stations – with Labour not far behind – it’s as obscene and broken as parliamentary democracy gets.
Sadly, if ever Hinkley C satisfactorily operates – unlike EDF’s other wonky EPR reactors – it’s likely to be both a miracle and another very big increase in electricity prices for us consumers because of 2013 Coalition’s agreeing far too high an index-linked “strike price” ( £92.50 Mw/hr, uplifted 2022 to £128 ) likely to be 50% above the then ‘global market’ price, unless reduced by some big hidden ‘nuclear levy’ put on all bills.
However, it’s not too late to scrap Sizewell C etc, PLUS join GREEN LEFT policies for: no nuclear, new wealth taxes, funded public services, democracy reform ( inc. PR voting ), de-growth for climate help etc.
The danger of rising tides to the Dungeness nuclear site, and to planned small nuclear reactors for Sussex
suggestions that Dungeness might become the site of a new nuclear power station featuring Small Modular Reactors (SMRs). The UK’s energy infrastructure, as noted by Peter Frankopan, is highly exposed to danger by even modest rises in sea levels, with all 19 of the country’s nuclear reactors located in coastal regions
As climate change increases the frequency and severity of storms, the inhabitants of low-lying Sussex coastal towns face potential danger
Rising Tides and Nuclear Solutions: the urgent call for coastal protection, byChris Wilmott, 16-12-2023
Born in the coastal town of Hastings, I was lucky to grow up in Sussex by the Sea. I recognise that being able to enjoy the proximity of the sound of the waves, with the many wild and warm variations of weather, was a fantastic benefit during my childhood. However, in recent years, my gaze has shifted somewhat towards a looming threat – the peril that coastal towns now face from climate change and the relentless rise of the tides and adverse weather.
I’ve been doing some research on this and according to NASA there is the potential for lunar cycles to start creating higher tides as soon as 2030, leaving low-lying areas vulnerable to the unforgiving turmoil and rage of the sea. This makes me very concerned for Dungeness, just across from Hastings in Kent, an iconic region situated in a famously low-lying area. In a recent article published by Sussex Bylines, Susan Kerrison posed the question The rising costs of sea defences – how prepared are we? In my opinion, we’re not prepared at all.
…………………………………………….Dungeness B is a nuclear power plant that even as far back as 2014 caused serious concerns over its safety and is now closed and in the process of de-fuelling. EDF privately acknowledged to the Office of Nuclear Regulation (ONR) that the shingle bank protecting the reactors from the sea was “not as robust as previously thought.” This revelation sparked worries among environmentalists, with Greenpeace’s Doug Parr highlighting the lack of transparency about serious safety concerns over flooding.
My interest in this site is heightened by suggestions that Dungeness might become the site of a new nuclear power station featuring Small Modular Reactors (SMRs). The UK’s energy infrastructure, as noted by Peter Frankopan, is highly exposed to danger by even modest rises in sea levels, with all 19 of the country’s nuclear reactors located in coastal regions – the UK Office for Science has acknowledged this threat.
Apart from the potential fall out of power stations failing, one must consider the localised impact of families having to relocate and businesses losing their premises, potentially at short notice. Hastings has suffered two floods so far this year, with sandbags a common sight and businesses forced to close.
Onwards and Upwards for the sea
Ocean scientist Eelco Rohling warns that the combination of global sea-level rise and increased storm intensities could spell doom for exposed coastal regions. The threat of flooding extremes looms large, even with a sea-level rise of 20 centimetres. Twenty centimetres may seem like a modest rise, the corresponding storm surge of two metres would cause considerable damage. Picture then a sea-level rise of say, 80 centimetres, and one can only imagine the destruction that would be caused by a corresponding storm surge of eight metres. ……………………………………………more https://sussexbylines.co.uk/news/environment/rising-tides-and-nuclear-solutions/—
French nuclear submarine visits Scotland
French nuclear submarine Suffren visited Faslane naval base near Glasgow in
Scotland this week. The visit isn’t the first time a French nuclear
submarine has visited Scotland, not by a long shot, as the increasing
number of visits by the French and U.S. Navy in recent years reflects the
enhanced security posture in the North Atlantic.
UK Defence Journal 16th Dec 2023
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/french-nuclear-submarine-arrives-in-scotland-2/
Theddlethorpe nuclear waste site: Informed decision needed, says council.
Residents must be clear about plans to build a nuclear waste site in their
village before deciding on them, a council leader has said.
A former gas terminal in Theddlethorpe, near Mablethorpe in Lincolnshire, was announced
as a possible location for an underground disposal facility in 2021. A
public vote on whether to approve the plans may not take place until 2027.
Craig Leyland of East Lindsey District Council said it was “critical”
voters made an “informed decision”. The proposal by Nuclear Waste Services
– formerly known as Radioactive Waste Management – for a Geological
Disposal Facility (GDF) would see nuclear waste from the UK being stored
underneath up to 1,000m of solid rock until its radioactivity had naturally
decayed.
The plans have “had a detrimental effect on physical and mental
health” of residents, according to Travis Hesketh, an Independent Group
councillor at East Lindsey District Council. He called for a review into
residents’ views on the GDF at a meeting on Wednesday, the Local Democracy
Reporting Service said.
BBC 14th Dec 2023
EDF told not to expect UK to step in to fund Hinkley Point C flagship nuclear project
Cost overruns a ‘commercial issue’ for Hinkley Point C’s French
developer after CGN halts payments, says British official.
The UK government has signalled it will not step in to help France’s EDF fund
Hinkley Point C after its Chinese partner CGN halted payments to cover
mounting cost overruns on Britain’s flagship nuclear power project. The
reluctance of the British government to intervene comes as the price tag
for the power plant under construction in south-west England is likely to
exceed the revised £32.7bn estimate EDF put on it earlier this year,
according to people close to discussions.
CGN, EDF’s partner in Hinkley Point C, had agreed to finance 33.5 per cent of the original £18bn cost of the plant in 2016, with the French group responsible for the remainder. But
after paying its contracted share, CGN has not made payments linked to the
overruns in recent weeks, three people familiar with the matter said.
The French group warned earlier this year that the Chinese group could refuse
to pick up the extra costs. One UK government official said there were no
plans to step in to fill the gap left by CGN, suggesting EDF could pull in
other investors. “It is a commercial contract which we obviously don’t
play a part in financing,” the official said, adding: “It would first
be a matter for the shareholders.”
One industry source said pulling other
investors into the project at this stage would be “complicated”. The
French economy ministry said it was in contact with London over the issue.
“We’re working with the British government to ensure the rollout of the
UK nuclear programme, including on the financing front,” an official in
Paris said.
FT 14th Dec 2023
https://www.ft.com/content/2bccd67f-a3c6-48d1-baa5-8ef9d54cdf67
Cumbrian councils urged to poll public over controversial nuclear dump plan
The Nuclear Free Local Authorities have sent a joint letter to the parish and town councils located in the West Cumbria search areas under consideration for a Geological Disposal Facility urging them to consider polling their parishioners over the controversial plan.
The co-signatories are the NFLAs English Forum Chair, Councillor David Blackburn, Councillor Jill Perry, Green Party Group Leader on Cumberland Council and Jan Bridget, co-founder of Millom against the Nuclear Waste Dump.
Nuclear Waste Services, a division of the taxpayer-funded Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, is engaged in long-term investigations to determine the suitability of locating the GDF on the West Cumbrian coast. The facility would have a surface site to receive regular shipments of high-level radioactive waste from Sellafield and this waste would then be transported along tunnels out under the Irish Sea, before the GDF once filled is sealed.
Two search areas have been designated Mid-Copeland and South Copeland, with their boundaries drawn in conformity with Cumberland Council electoral wards, and NWS has established a Community Partnership in each, which provide some limited oversight to the process. Members of the Community Partnerships include elected members from Cumberland Council, deemed the Relevant Principal Local Authority under the guidance established for the plan, and representatives from each of the parish and town councils encapsulated in the search areas.
The UK Government and NWS are adamant that the final selection of the site will be determined by two factors – the suitability of the geology and the acceptance of the plan by the local host community.
Geological investigations may take up to 15 years to complete, with desktop, aerial and seismic surveys being augmented in the second stage by deep exploratory boreholes for rock sampling. NWS are expected to periodically sense check public perceptions of the plan until in the final stages a Test of Public Support is conducted to determine if local people are willing to see their area taken forward.
The so-signatories are unhappy that there is no mechanism built into the plan to conduct interim opinion polls to identify public feeling over time, and they are disappointed that most local councils have yet to conduct their own polls to determine if their appointed representatives to the Community Partnership are reflecting the opinions of their parishioners. They would like parish and town councils to follow the lead shown by Whicham which took the initiative, independently of NWS, and did so./………………………………………………….
more https://www.nuclearpolicy.info/news/cumbrian-councils-urged-to-poll-public-over-controversial-nuclear-dump-plan/
Sellafield staff ‘used home computers to beat security failings’.
Cybersecurity fears grow amid claims Britain’s most hazardous nuclear
site was targeted by hackers linked to Russia and China. Staff at
Sellafield were asked to work on sensitive projects using their home
computers, a former employee has said, amid questions about cybersecurity
at Britain’s most hazardous nuclear site after claims it was hacked by
groups linked to Russia and China.
Claire Coutinho, the energy secretary,
is due to meet representatives from the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority
(NDA) after an investigation alleged that state actors had embedded sleeper
malware into the computer network at Sellafield, the largest nuclear waste
and decommissioning site in Europe.
Sources told The Guardian that IT
breaches had been detected as far back as 2015, and accused the
organisation’s leaders of having “consistently covered up” the scale
of the intrusions. Highly sensitive material potentially relating to the
movement of radioactive waste and monitoring of leaks had likely been
compromised, and it is still unknown as to whether the malware has been
successfully eradicated, the newspaper reported.
A former staff member, who
worked as a senior manager at the site between 2008 and 2021, told The
Times that staff had a “complacent” and “lax” attitude towards
cybersecurity, with employees often leaving their login details attached to
their computers and frequently having to be reminded to lock their screens.
Times 9th Dec 2023
Sellafield nuclear site exposés are long overdue
The fact that it is in Cumbria, far away from London, makes it easily ignorable, writes Isaac Cooper. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/dec/11/sellafield-nuclear-site-exposes-are-long-overdue
As a journalist based in Cumbria, I appreciate your investigations into Sellafield (Sellafield nuclear site workers claim ‘toxic culture’ of bullying, sexual harassment and drugs could put safety at risk, 6 December). The exposés are long overdue. The reaction of many, however, has been distinctly muted and is directly linked to how Sellafield has been getting away with it for many years: geography. The fact that Sellafield lies on the west coast of Cumbria makes it easily forgettable to large swathes of the media and the public.
Were Sellafield based within a hundred miles of London there would have been a national uproar, but its “out of sight, out of mind” location means it can be ignored easily. It is indicative of the public’s attitude towards Cumbria being just the lakes and nothing more.
Isaac Cooper
Cumberland News, Carlisle
Fears of a major leak at Sellafield nuclear plant should be taken seriously
There are reports of more than 100 safety problems at the Sellafield nuclear power plant and a leak first reported four years ago has been allowed to worsen. It’s a nightmarish prospect and I hope someone is taking urgent remedial action, writes Cumbria native Chris Blackhurst
Every so often, when we were children, Father would borrow a portable
Geiger counter and take us to the beach. While we – my sister and I –
played on the sand, he would wander around with the machine. Whenever it
neared a clump of seaweed the gadget would click furiously and loudly.
He taught in a secondary school and the device was in their laboratory. We
lived at Barrow-in-Furness in Cumbria, just down the coast from Sellafield,
Europe’s largest nuclear reprocessing plant.
Back then, we would see
ships from Japan regularly dock and unload their radioactive cargo onto
special freight trains for transporting to Sellafield. Meanwhile, in the
nearby shipyard, they were building submarines powered by nuclear reactors.
By and large, we Cumbrians were grateful for the atomic business.
Employment in that part of the world does not come easily. There is the
adjacent Lake District, with its tourist trade, but otherwise, that’s
about it as far as mass numbers are concerned. Sellafield and the shipyard
are by far the biggest single employers.
Not everyone was so delighted. The
campaign group Cumbrians Opposed to a Radioactive Environment made plenty
of noise, but because of the jobs and cash that was flowing into the local
economy from things nuclear, struggled to have any impact.
We knew that the
risk of a spillage, of a major accident, was an ever-present. It was a
given, it went with the Faustian pact of relative prosperity in return for
accepting the danger. We put it from our minds, reassuring ourselves that
the powers-that-be would ensure our wellbeing and that the standards would
be maintained.
Reading of a worsening leak from a crumbling silo of
radioactive waste and fears concerning cracks in a reservoir of toxic
sludge at Sellafield sparks alarm and other memories. The authorities had
not always been so vigilant.
The dreadful thought is that none of this
comes as a major surprise. As we’ve discovered recently, successive
governments have let the nation’s infrastructure creak and wear away. If
schools are forced to close because they have asbestos in them; if other
public buildings are shut for the same reason or because they are in a
state of neglect and no longer fit for purpose; if our motorways and
railways are in a constant state of disrepair, what prospect is there of
Sellafield being any different? Equally, poor working culture has been
shown to be rife in many areas of British life.
Independent 9th Dec 2023
Atomic Kittens! Locals invaded by ‘radioactive’ cats after workers at UK’s most hazardous site nicknamed ‘nuclear Narnia’ feed 100 strays…but are they a myth?
- Protestors claim Europe’s largest nuclear facility is jeopardising safety of locals
- Sellafield facility chiefs hotly deny that the cats pose any risk to public safety
Protestors have claimed villagers living close to a giant
facility known as the UK’s ‘nuclear Narnia’ have been invaded by swarms of
‘radioactive’ cats. Strays roaming wild across the Sellafield nuclear site
on the Cumbrian coast pose a risk because they are ‘literally pooing
plutonium’, the anti-nuke campaigners say.
The colony of feral cats grew
after they were fed scraps by workers at Sellafield, which is Europe’s
largest nuclear facility, and sheltered under the warmth of giant steam
pipes for decades.
The group, called Radiation Free Lakeland (RAFL), claim
to have consulted experts and found that the cats’ faeces contain
detectable traces of plutonium and caesium. A theory firmly denied by
chiefs at Sellafield, who say the strays – nicknamed ‘atomic kittens’ by
locals – pose no risk to the public. However, MailOnline has seen documents
which prove some of Sellafield’s 11,000 employees have been threatened with
disciplinary action if they feed the cats because it encourages them to
congregate around the offices.
Daily Mail 9th Dec 2023
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12836429/radioactive-cats-invade-hazardous-site.html
The beautiful little UK seaside village torn apart by nuclear power station fight
Fierce battle raging over Sizewell C in Suffolk is in stark
contrast to the tranquil nature of this picturesque historic fishing
village. Despite its relaxing vibes, this tiny historic fishing village is
at the centre of a bitter battle over whether a massive nuclear power
station should be built on its shores.
It is a struggle that could not only
determine Sizewell’s future, but the whole of Britain’s. Were it not
for its existing power station and plans to build an even bigger one next
door, you would never have guessed that this small, remote place would be
at the centre of a struggle of national importance.
Express 7th Dec 2023
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1842407/sizewell-suffolk-nuclear-power-station-fight
1 This Month
of the week– Nuclear Reactor Information Task Force
14 May – online event From Bombs to Data Centres: the Face of Nuclear Colonialism
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- May 2026 (116)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
-
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
nuclear-news 