BAE Systems fire: blaze at shipyard ‘could delay Aukus’
Building schedule of new fleet could be set back, experts warn, as two taken to
hospital after blaze breaks out at facility in Cumbria. Investigators are
still trying to determine the cause of a massive fire at a nuclear
submarine shipyard in Cumbria that analysts warned could delay the delivery
schedule of new boats for Australia as part of the Aukus pact.
Times 30th Oct 2024
Cost of maintaining decommissioned nuclear submarines
UK Defence Journal 29th Oct 2024
Graeme Downie, Labour MP for Dunfermline and Dollar, recently raised a question regarding the financial burden of maintaining decommissioned nuclear submarines at two key UK facilities: Rosyth and Devonport. Specifically, he inquired about the annual costs associated with these sites.
In response, Defence Minister Maria Eagle provided the figures for the financial year 2023-24, explaining that “the annual cost for maintaining decommissioned submarines varies each year depending on the respective maintenance requirements.”
For the last financial year, £1.7 million was spent at Rosyth, while the maintenance costs at Devonport were significantly higher, totalling £7.1 million.
These figures highlight the ongoing financial commitment required to manage the UK’s decommissioned nuclear submarines, a task dependent on the maintenance needs of each vessel and the infrastructure of the respective facilities.
Additionally, during a recent exchange in the House of Lords, Lord Coaker expressed the urgency for the UK to expedite its nuclear submarine dismantling programme, addressing the slow progress in decommissioning and dismantling outdated submarines.
Responding to a question from Baroness Bryan of Partick, he outlined the current challenges and ongoing efforts to dismantle the aging fleet, currently spread across Scotland and Devonport, and acknowledged that, without significant changes, the timeline could stretch into decades.
Baroness Bryan highlighted widespread concerns, pointing out that many submarines have been out of service for years or even decades without being dismantled. She cited, for example, the case of a Dreadnought-class submarine stationed at Rosyth since 1980, a delay emblematic of the broader issue. “There remains real concern that not one of these submarines has yet been dismantled,” she noted, adding that with the rate of dismantling, “it will take decades to dismantle the boats remaining in both Scotland and Devonport.”……………………………………………………..
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/cost-of-maintaining-decommissioned-nuclear-submarines
Labour just railroaded a secretive US-UK nuclear treaty renewal deal
by The Canary, 30 October 2024
The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) said it condemns the government’s outrageous railroading through parliament of the renewal of the US-UK Mutual Defence Agreement (MDA), the secretive treaty that underpins the nuclear ‘special relationship’ between London and Washington.
The MDA: under a cloak of secrecy
In force since 1958, the MDA allows for the transfer of key technologies, information, and nuclear materials to and from the US. Since its inception, the treaty has been amendable every ten years, also requiring parliamentary agreement on its extension.
But the government intends to make this treaty permanent by removing the clause that requires the treaty to be extended, and enables debate and amendment, including rejection. CND said:
n an open and democratic society, a major change like this should be given due consideration and debate in parliament. However, the government has disgracefully obstructed this by announcing its planned changes to the MDA just before parliament’s summer recess – guaranteeing six weeks of inaction.
Upon their return, MPs spent much of September and October engaged with party conferences. This shamefully left little time for parliament to debate the proposed changes before the deadline of 23 October.
Labour’s railroading of US nuclear co-operation: CND reacts
CND general secretary Kate Hudson said:
Thousands of CND supporters have contacted their MPs to raise the MDA as an issue for debate in Parliament before the 23 October deadline. Despite this outpouring of public concern, the limited time MPs have spent in Parliament since the election has left very little space for the open discussion this significant but little-known treaty deserves.
The railroading of the MDA by the government is typical of the policy that successive governments have been pursuing when it comes to Britain’s military policies and its possession of nuclear weapons.
This ‘special relationship’ tethers British military and foreign policy to Washington – and makes redundant the claim that Britain has an independent nuclear weapons system. Without US support, Britain would be unable to sustain its nuclear arsenal. Efforts to scrutinise this relationship are regularly deflected by the government under the guise of national security.
SO, CND will protest not only the MDA, but also the return of US nuclear weapons to Britain – ahead of the US presidential election.
CND protesting at Lakenheath on 2 November
The group and its supporters will mobilise at RAF Lakenheath on Saturday 2 November, to oppose plans to station US nuclear weapons in Britain for the first time since 2008.
This will be CND’s fourth national mobilisation at RAF Lakenheath since 2022, after US government budget documents revealed plans for upgrade works at the US-run air base for the storage of the new B61-12 guided nuclear bomb.
With the US presidential election to take place just days later, the protest aims to highlight the significant impact of US foreign and military policy on the British public, and the increased nuclear dangers brought by deploying its nuclear weapons in Britain – by whoever wins the White House.
Attendees will also witness an unofficial declaration of Lakenheath as a nuclear-free zone, and calls for both the UK and other nuclear weapons states to engage with the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.
CND will be joined by Melissa Parke ,executive director of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), the organisation that won the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize. Melissa will speak about nuclear dangers in Europe.
No US nuclear weapons on UK soil
Details of the protest are as follows:
- Saturday 2 November.
- 12 noon to 3pm.
- RAF Lakenheath Main Gate, Brandon Road, Lakenheath, Suffolk. More details on parking can be found on the CND website here.
…………………………………………………..
https://www.thecanary.co/uk/news/2024/10/30/cnd-nuclear-weapons-treaty/
Sizewell C nuclear project proceeds by stealth – vast sums of public money spent, with no public disclosure about its true cost
1 The Autumn Budget includes a £14.1bn settlement for DESNZ in 2025/26,
which includes £2.7 bn for Sizewell C. This amounts to half the £5.5bn,
two year subsidy scheme published in August. The Chancellor chose not to
mention Sizewell C or nuclear energy in her speech to the House of Commons.
Stop Sizewell C said: “For a government that criticised the opposition
for playing fast and loose with the nation’s finances, the Chancellor is
surprisingly happy to do the same, allocating another £2.7 billion of
taxpayers’ money on risky, expensive Sizewell C, without making any
guarantee of a Final Investment Decision being taken.
Including £2.5 billion already spent, this means £5.2 billion of our money will be spent
on a project that cannot even help Labour achieve its energy mission, and
is looking increasingly toxic to private investors.”
The Chancellor also announced that David Goldstone has been appointed as the independent Chair of the “Office of Value for Money” within the Treasury. “Stop
Sizewell C urges David Goldstone to call in Sizewell C for immediate
scrutiny, as the project is currently proceeding by stealth. Despite almost
no public disclosure about its true cost or transparency about value for
money, vast sums of public money have already been spent on Sizewell C,
with the potential for billions more to be poured down the drain.”
Stop Sizewell C 30th Oct 2024
Nuclear Free Local Authorities (NFLAs) believe budget is opportunity to lobby Ministers to ditch Sizewell C
Chancellor Rachel Reeves will be unveiling the contents of her red box when making her Autumn Statement on Wednesday and the UK/Ireland Nuclear Free Local Authorities believes this offers an opportunity to lobby Labour to ditch Sizewell C – if opponents act now.
Though intended to be constructed by French owned nuclear operator EDF Energy, the outgoing Conservative Government squandered £2.5 billion of taxpayers money on preparatory work, and in August 2024, Labour compounded the calumny by announcing a new subsidy scheme that could make up to a further £5.5 billion in public money available to support this unwanted white elephant. Consequently, the project is now 76%-owned by the British Government at a time when Ministers and their advisors still desperately chase private sector investors to back this Suffolk turkey.
There are still many unknowns about the eventual overall cost of Sizewell C. In contrast to the amazing reductions achieved in recent years in the cost of generating electricity through renewables, the delivery cost of nuclear continues to rise. Given that Sizewell C’s predecessor, the identical Hinkley Point C, is being delivered hugely over budget with some estimates that the cost in real terms will be up to £46 billion, it is wholly incredible that this project can be delivered for the £20 billion that Ministers claim.
And Sizewell C presents additional costly challenges. As a consequence of climate change, the coastal location will be increasingly threatened by inundation from an encroaching sea, requiring significant expenditure on coastal defences. Further Suffolk is ‘water stressed’ meaning that there will be increasing competition for fresh water from inhabitants or commercial operators, and Sizewell C has still to secure a guaranteed sustainable potable water supply for its planned 60 years of operation.
Given the circumstances it is unsurprising that few players amongst the financial markets have expressed any interest in taking a stake in the Sizewell doonboggle, and there is still considerable uncertainty when, or even if, the Financial Investment Decision will be made.
Sizewell C also represents a double whammy for electricity consumers. As taxpayers, we are expected to front up to £8 billion in funding, incidentally almost the same in total that Labour has dedicated to Great Britain Energy over the entirely of its five year term in office, but as electricity consumers we will also be expected to reimburse the construction costs through the imposition of an additional levy on bills, derisking the project for the profit-focussed operator. Unsurprisingly, the NFLA Secretary has described this Regulated Asset Base (RAB) model as the ROB for it represents daylight robbery.
The Labour Government has announced that they will establish a new ‘Office of Value for Money’ within the Treasury and the appointment of a Chair is expected imminently. Stop Sizewell C has launched a petition calling for that office holder to prioritise an examination of the financial liability that is Sizewell C.
Although initial feedback from the Treasury to campaigners had indicated that Sizewell C would definitely be examined by the new office holder, officials in recent correspondence have been more ambivalent and a recent written answer by Nuclear Minister Lord Hunt to a House of Lords parliamentary question was opaque and non-committal.
Stop Sizewell C are also asking supporters of their campaign to join them in writing to the Chancellor, Prime Minister and Secretary of State for Energy to cancel Sizewell C.
The NFLAs would urge opponents of Sizewell C to sign the petition:
Reeves urged not to cut Sellafield funds amid concern at rise in ‘near misses’
GMB raises safety concerns amid rumours of budget cuts across sites and Nuclear Decommissioning Authority
Guardian, Alex Lawson and Anna Isaac, 28 Oct 24
Rachel Reeves has been urged not to carry out mooted funding cuts for nuclear sites including Sellafield amid safety concerns, as it emerged that the number of incidents where workers narrowly avoided harm had increased at the Cumbrian site.
The GMB union has written to Reeves, the chancellor, before Wednesday’s budget to raise safety concerns after rumours emerged that the budget for the taxpayer-owned Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) could be reduced, which could result in cuts at nuclear sites including Sellafield and Dounreay in Scotland.
In the letter to Reeves, seen by the Guardian, union leaders warned that a safety incident at Sellafield, Europe’s most hazardous industrial site, would “have devastating consequences far beyond the immediate community”. The NDA had a budget of £4bn in the last financial year.
The warning came as recently released annual accounts for the NDA showed “near misses” at Sellafield had risen in the last financial year, and an “international nuclear event-scale” incident had occurred at the site, which is a vast dump for nuclear waste and also the world’s largest store of plutonium.
The NDA said there was an “inadequate response” during an incident in 2023 as some staff did not follow procedures when an emergency alarm unexpectedly sounded inside the site’s hazardous chemical separation area.
The report also said Sellafield, which employs 12,000 people, had received six enforcement letters from its regulator, the Office for Nuclear Regulation, and that in studying its safety record the “rate of significant near misses is higher across 2023-24”.
It found that the impact on employees from work injuries had “often been significant” even if many of the incidents had appeared innocuous.
In the letter, Denise Walker and Roger Denwood, of the GMB, wrote: “While operators and regulators work tirelessly to ensure safety, the inherent risks of the site mean that any lapse in safety standards could result in serious and far-reaching economic and ecological consequences.”
They said radioactive “materials must be safely managed to prevent leaks or accidental releases of radiation. The health risks of radiation exposure, including cancer and other serious illnesses, are well documented.”
They added: “Any reduction in funding would inevitably result in fewer resources for maintenance, monitoring, and emergency preparedness-heightening the risk of a serious incident.”
The Guardian’s Nuclear Leaks investigation in late 2023 revealed a string of cybersecurity problems at Sellafield, as well as issues with its safety and workplace culture. Last week the National Audit Office said the cost of decommissioning the site had risen to £136bn, with major projects running years behind schedule……………………………. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/oct/28/sellafield-work-accidents-reeves-budget
MP seeks answers on Submarine Dismantling Project in Rosyth
26th October, By Ally McRoberts
THE UK Government have been asked what steps they’re taking to keep West Fife safe and mitigate the “potential risks” posed by the Submarine Dismantling Project.
Radioactive waste is being removed from old nuclear subs at Rosyth Dockyard and Babcock have just applied for permission for more hazardous material to be taken out in the next stage.
Christine Jardine, Lib Dem MP for Edinburgh West, submitted a question at Westminster: “To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (John Healey), what steps his department is taking to (a) ensure the safety of and (b) mitigate potential risks posed by the decommissioning of nuclear submarines at Rosyth Royal Dockyard for surrounding residential areas.”
On Mr Healey’s
behalf, Maria Eagle, Minister for Defence Procurement, replied: “All the
submarines currently stored at Rosyth have already been de-fuelled, which
has significantly reduced overall potential risk. “Further, steps include
contractual requirements with Babcock International around safety and
environmental factors. “These include regular sampling of surrounding
waters and beaches, and dismantling one boat as a demonstrator to determine
the safest methods before starting on other boats.
Dunfermline Press 26th Oct 2024, https://www.dunfermlinepress.com/news/24679595.mp-seeks-answers-submarine-dismantling-project-rosyth/
Green jobs and green skills – the state of play
October 26, 2024, https://renewextraweekly.blogspot.com/2024/10/green-jobs-and-green-skills-state-of.html
In 2023, the global renewable energy sector witnessed a record increase in jobs, rising from 13.7 million in 2022 to 16.2 million. China led with an estimated 7.4 million renewable energy jobs, representing 46% of the global total. The EU followed with 1.8 million jobs, while Brazil had 1.56 million. The US and India each contributed nearly one million jobs. The strongest growth was seen in the solar photovoltaics sector, which accounted for 7.2 million jobs globally, with 4.6 million jobs located in China.
However, as I have reported in earlier posts, green skill shortages may slow progress and, exploring this issue in the UK context, an Imperial College Futures Lab briefing paper has investigated the Net-Zero job skills and training requirements in the UK’s energy system. It notes that the governments advisory Committee on Climate Change (CCC) estimates that between 135,000 and 725,000 net new jobs could be created in the UK by 2030 directly in low-carbon sectors, this wide range highlighting uncertainties in estimates about the number of workers required to support the transition to Net-Zero. The Futures Lab study identifies ongoing barriers and opportunities for expanding low-carbon job competencies, culminating in a set of policy recommendations to create clear, inclusive training pathways into low-carbon energy jobs.
Using three sectoral case studies, the paper investigates challenges and opportunities for improving skills and training. Firstly it shows how the building energy retrofit sector faces a significant shortage of skilled workers, particularly in heat pump installation, energy efficiency measures, retrofit coordination, and digital roles. Despite the potential to create 120,000–230,000 new jobs by 2030, it says ‘inconsistent policies and funding have hindered private investment in training’. Secondly, the offshore wind sector is forecast to employ over 100,000 workers in 2030, compared to 32,000 in 2022. But it says ‘offshore wind struggles with skills gaps in electrical, digital, consenting, and marine roles, relying on experienced workers and those from other industries to fill these gaps’. Thirdly, the paper claims the electric vehicles sector ‘could generate at least 80,000 new jobs over the next 10-15 years’ but says that this ‘is contingent on gigafactory development, with key skills needed in charging point installation, vehicle recycling, battery manufacturing, and electrification engineering.’
Most of these cases involve expanding training for specific green energy technologies and electrification, but the report says that ‘not all industrial decarbonisation can be achieved through direct electrification, and particularly across hard-to-abate industries, decarbonisation will depend on the development of hydrogen and CCUS sectors’. It notes that ‘growth of these sectors is considered highly conditional, subject to the competitiveness of international markets, the availability of skilled labour, and levels of investment,’ but reports that the CCC estimates that ‘these industries could create between 1,500 and 97,000 new jobs by 2030’. It adds that ‘the current offshore oil and gas workforce is expected to provide a large number of skills required in these sectors’.
That’s good news (arguably blue hydrogen/CCUS apart) but making it happen won’t be easy. It is interesting in this context that there has recently been a call for £1.9bn a year to help oil and gas workers move into clean energy, with the Green Jobs Taskforce also estimating that ‘the low-carbon transport sector could create 78,000 new jobs by 2040, including 24,500 in battery manufacturing, 43,500 in the battery supply chain, and 10,000 in EV manufacturing’.
Looking to the way ahead, the Future Lab identify a series of barriers facing this type of job transition. First come straight forward ‘skills transferability’ barriers. For example it notes that it has been estimated that 100,000 jobs in the UK’s offshore energy sector will be filled by workers transferring from oil and gas into offshore renewable roles, and by new entrants from outside the sector. But it says ‘there is debate about how transferable skills across high- and low-carbon sectors actually are, and whether a ‘topping up’ of skills or more rigorous retraining will be required for those transitioning’.
Then there are mobility barriers. ‘Whether or not workers are able to take low-carbon jobs will depend on where and when existing jobs are being lost and new jobs become available. It will also depend on the supply of and demand for relevant training, which is likely to be unevenly distributed in terms of quantity and quality. If green jobs or re-skilling opportunities do not appear in areas where jobs have been phased out, workers will either have to lose out on opportunities, seek employment in other high-carbon sectors, or relocate, which risks reinforcing existing regional inequalities.’
That links up to regional barriers. It says ‘UK regions with a higher concentration of energy-intensive industries, such as the North East, Yorkshire and the Humber, and the West Midlands, stand a higher chance of being negatively affected by the transition. These regions are often also those whose economies have seen the least growth in recent decades. They are also likely to have less capacity and resources to be able to provide adequate re-skilling support’.
And finally there are diversity barriers. The report notes that ‘the current energy sector is predominantly represented by white male workers. Available statistics suggest that only 5% of the workforce comes from BAME backgrounds. Unless active measures are taken to support underrepresented groups joining the Net-Zero energy workforce, occupational gender & ethnicity gaps are likely to persist’.
Some of the reports recommended actions are obvious enough from the foregoing analysis. For example green sectors should be ‘inclusive and respectful places to work, where underrepresented groups not liable to be discriminated against’, and we should build ‘closer links between high- and low-carbon energy sectors to create direct routes into new jobs.’
More specifically ‘current public financing mechanisms for skills, including the Apprenticeship Levy, the National Skills Fund, and the Adult Education Budget, should be reviewed to see how funding can be better directed towards the development of training for green jobs. Additional public funding should also be leveraged to support long-term development of skills for Net-Zero, specifically for FE colleges and training providers to be able to develop new, high-quality green courses and overcome low participation rates. There is also a case for targeted funding for SMEs who cannot afford to send staff to be trained or take on apprentices’. And more generally, ‘introduce a national Net-Zero Skills Commission to take on monitoring, research and advisory roles to support development of skills for the Net-Zero transition in England.’
Plenty of good ideas. Let’s hope some are implemented soon, and meantime, the UK government is pushing ahead with its ‘skills passport’ initiative. In parallel, we hope helpfully, OU Visiting Research Fellow Terry Cook and I are putting together a journal paper on this whole area, looking in particular at what governments can do at the strategic level, by making new energy technology funding/subsidies conditional on the provision of green skill training programmes.
CND condemns ‘outrageous railroading’ of US-UK nuclear agreement renewal through Parliament.
Anti-arms campaigners today condemned the
“outrageous railroading” of the US-UK Mutual Defence Agreement (MDA)
renewal through Parliament. The MDA, active since 1958, enables vital
nuclear material and technology transfers between the US and Britain,
reviewed every 10 years. But the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND)
condemned the government’s intention to make the treaty permanent by
removing the clause that requires the treaty to be extended and enables
debate and amendment, including rejection.
Morning Star 25th Oct 2024 https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/cnd-condemns-outrageous-railroading-us-uk-nuclear-agreement-renewal-through-parliament
UK Snubs Council of Europe Over Assange Inquiry
Politicians across Europe want Britain to investigate why the WikiLeaks founder spent five years in jail.
MARK CURTIS, 25 October 2024, https://www.declassifieduk.org/uk-snubs-council-of-europe-over-assange-inquiry/
Britain’s Home Office is making a “grave mistake” by ignoring a call from the Council of Europe to review its treatment of Julian Assange, the WikiLeaks founder’s wife has warned.
The Council’s parliamentary assembly, of which the UK is a member, passed a resolution earlier this month designating Assange as a “political prisoner”.
Assange endured five years in Belmarsh maximum security prison in London before being released in June, and flying to his native Australia. The UK government had incarcerated him while the US pursued extradition proceedings in the British courts.
His treatment has outraged the Council of Europe, which was created in the aftermath of World War Two with strong backing from Winston Churchill.
Its resolution urged the UK authorities to conduct a review “with a view to establishing whether he [Assange] has been exposed to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, pursuant to their international obligations”.
It found the UK authorities “failed to effectively protect Mr Assange’s freedom of expression and right to liberty, exposing him to lengthy detention in a high-security prison despite the political nature of the most severe charges against him.”
Declassified asked Britain’s Home Office what its response was to the Council of Europe’s call.
The government department deflected the question, replying: “The longstanding extradition request for Julian Assange has been resolved. As is standard practice, all extradition requests are considered on an individual basis by our independent courts and in accordance with UK law.”
The demands of the parliamentary assembly are not binding on European governments but they are “obliged to respond”.
‘Cover-up’
Stella Assange, Julian’s wife, told Declassified the Home Office is making a “grave mistake” in refusing to heed the Council of Europe’s call.
She said: “We know that the Crown Prosecution Service has disappeared key documents relating to Julian’s imprisonment and refused to provide information, first to a journalist, and now to the court, that might shed a light on the political side of Julian’s persecution in the UK.
“It is one thing for rogue elements in the CPS to collude with foreign governments to persecute a publisher and attempt to cover their tracks. It is quite another for the UK government to stonewall in this manner in the wake of an independent report by the Council of Europe and a vote by the overwhelming majority of the chamber calling on the UK to carry out an investigation.”
She added: “The UK government is effectively partaking in the cover-up, in a way that only a guilty party would.”
‘Psychological torture’
Assange’s detention in maximum security Belmarsh was “out of proportion in relation to his alleged offence”, the Council of Europe’s resolution found.
It recalled the findings of the then United Nations special rapporteur on torture, Nils Melzer, that Assange had been exposed to “progressively severe forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, the cumulative effects of which can only be described as psychological torture”.
Melzer’s report, produced in 2019 while Assange had secured asylum in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, called on UK officials to be investigated for possible “criminal conduct” in their treatment of Assange. It was never reported in the UK national media.
The Council of Europe found that the UK authorities “appear to have ignored” Melzer’s findings.
Its resolution was passed with 88 in favour, 13 against and 20 abstentions. All four UK members of the parliamentary assembly voted against, including Lord Richard Keen, a Conservative peer, who expressed a dissenting opinion.
Keen argued that it was “legally incorrect” to find that Assange had been detained unlawfully, as he had violated bail conditions before and was considered a flight risk.
Keen also rejected the accusation of torture against the UK, saying that Assange’s “regrettable psychological state” identified by Melzer was due to Assange’s “self-imposed lengthy isolation in the Ecuadorian embassy in London and cannot be blamed on the UK authorities.”
‘Chilling effect’
The Council of Europe concluded that the treatment of Assange “creates a dangerous chilling effect and a climate of self-censorship affecting all journalists, publishers and others reporting matters essential for the functioning of a democratic society”.
It added: “It severely undermines the role of the press and the protection of journalists and whistle-blowers around the world.”
The resolution also noted that the Council was “alarmed” by reports that the US Central Intelligence Agency had covertly surveyed Assange while he was in the Ecuadorian embassy in London and was allegedly developing plans to poison or even assassinate him on UK soil.
Rebecca Vincent, campaigns director at Reporters Without Borders, told us that Julian Assange’s sentencing by UK courts to 50 weeks in prison for breaking bail was “disproportionate”.
She added: “His subsequent prolonged detention in a high-security prison with no charges against him in the UK, held purely on remand, constituted a gross violation of his rights.”
Vincent said: “We faced unusual restrictions from UK authorities in trying to do our jobs advocating in this case, including extreme difficulties securing consistent access to monitor extradition proceedings against Assange in UK courts, and access to visit him in Belmarsh prison. These aspects all merit a serious independent review.”
Fighting for More Evidence of Assange’s Political Prosecution
Italian journalist Stefania Maurizi has been in court trying to get some missing emails — or data about them — that could further expose the political motivation behind the prosecution of the WikiLeaks publisher.
Joe Lauria and Mohamed Elmaazi / Consortium News, October 23, 2024
A tribunal in Britain is set to decide whether to order the government’s Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to prove it deleted emails that may have covered up more evidence of a politically motivated prosecution of Julian Assange.
The three judges heard arguments on Sept. 24 in the nearly decade-long freedom of information saga regarding the emails that top British prosecutors say were deleted.
They involved an exchange with Sweden during a Swedish prosecutor’s attempt, beginning in 2010, to extradite the WikiLeaks publisher from Britain. ……………………………………………………….
It was only when the U.S. realized it would lose on appeal after a four-year extradition battle that the Department of Justice cut a plea deal with Assange who was released on June 24 and returned to his native Australia.
Assange had been charged in the United States under the Espionage Act for possessing and publishing defense information, which revealed evidence of U.S. war crimes.
Britain took an active role in Assange’s prosecution. Its Crown Prosecution Service sought to stop Sweden from going to the embassy to question him.
Seeking to learn more about Britain’s role against Assange, Italian investigative journalist Stefania Maurizi first made a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request in 2015 for all emails between the British and Swedish governments concerning Assange.
Some of the emails she obtained showed political motivation on the part of the lead British prosecutor, Paul Close. One email Maurizi obtained from the Swedish Prosecution Authority (SPA) revealed that Close appeared to be pressuring Swedish prosecutors to continue seeking Assange’s extradition instead of dropping the case or questioning him at the Ecuadorian embassy, where Assange had been granted asylum………………………….
After Maurizi noticed a sizeable gap in the emails released to her she filed another FIOA seeking to obtain the missing emails.
The CPS first claimed that it had destroyed the emails. It said that when Close retired, his account along with his emails, were automatically destroyed.
But Maurizi did not buy it. She asked the court at the hearing last month to order the CPS to turn over “metadata” — data about data, such as file creation and modification dates, email sender and recipient addresses, timestamps, email routing information, keywords, and subject lines — proving the emails really were deleted and when.
“We have NO certainty whatsoever” that the emails were destroyed, Maurizi wrote in a message to Consortium News. Maurizi is in court because she believes the allegedly deleted emails could provide additional evidence of a politically motivated prosecution of Assange.
……………………………………………‘When, How & Why’ Were the Emails Deleted?
Maurizi, who travelled to London from Rome to attend the Sept. 24 hearing at the First-Tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber), is challenging the ongoing failure of the CPS to respond adequately to her December 2019 FOIA about the missing emails.
………………………………………………………………….Maurizi is betting the tribunal will agree with her that metadata is clearly information that can be requested under the Act and which can clearly be provided with little difficulty. If she succeeds, future FOIA requests will also be able to demand metadata if and when an individual thinks it may be useful.
Hillary, who was called to testify for the CPS, freely admitted to the tribunal that she could easily provide the metadata Maurizi requested and that she would be happy to do so, as long as any information which identified individuals is redacted.
The tribunal will also consider whether to “order the CPS to carry out a proper, full search for information held” as to “when, how and why?” the thousands of emails were allegedly deleted while Assange’s Swedish extradition case was still very much active.
No date has yet been set for the announcement of the tribunal’s decision. https://consortiumnews.com/2024/10/23/fighting-for-more-evidence-of-assanges-political-prosecution/
Cost overruns at Sellafield nuclear waste site to hit £136bn
Storage facility is not delivering value for money as large projects are running
behind schedule, warns spending watchdog.
The cost of managing Britain’s most hazardous nuclear waste has risen by almost a fifth to £136 billion due to a failure to set a realistic budget, the government’s spending
watchdog has concluded.
Sellafield, which is home to about 85 per cent of the UK’s nuclear waste and stores the most hazardous waste, is not delivering value for money as large projects are running behind schedule and over budget, according to the National Audit Office’s latest
assessment.
The site in Cumbria is operated by the Nuclear Decommissioning
Authority (NDA), a mainly taxpayer-funded body, and over its lifetime will
retrieve about 3.3 million m3 of waste from ageing facilities and store it
in more modern silos. The cost of maintaining the site into the next
century, when Sellafield is scheduled for demolition, is likely to cost
£136 billion after adjusting for inflation, up from £84 billion at March
2019, but could run to £253 billion under a worst-case scenario.
None of the budgets for the four big projects under way at Sellafield in 2018, when
the audit office last scrutinised the waste storage site, accounted for
“optimism bias”, which assumes work will be delivered on time and
within budget. More realistic costings were only included in 2018, despite
the watchdog recommending the NDA require Sellafield to do so in 2012.
There has been some progress made since the National Audit Office last
scrutinised Sellafield, including savings of about £170 million a year by
operating the sites as subsidiaries rather than contracting out their
management and the government indemnifying the decommissioning authority
against certain risks so it no longer needs to buy insurance. The
Department for Energy Security and Net Zero said that the NAO’s report
showed “significant progress” had been made by Sellafield and the NDA
but “there is still more to do”.
Times 23rd Oct 2024, https://www.thetimes.com/business-money/energy/article/cost-overruns-at-sellafield-nuclear-waste-site-to-hit-136bn-zjklxk3p7
Alistair Osborne: Nuclear is waste of time and money
The National Audit Office has found that the Sellafield nuclear waste dump is still a mess,
with costs spiralling and projects delayed. As rebranding jobs go, it’s
hard to beat. Somehow, the nuclear lobby has managed to convince
politicians that the industry is not only green, but “clean”.
Just about all of them have fallen for it, not least our energy supremo Ed
Miliband. Here he is last month: “Homegrown clean energy from renewables
and nuclear offers us a security that fossil fuels simply cannot
provide”. On the energy security point, fair enough. But isn’t he
forgetting something about nukes that you don’t get with windmills and
sunbeams?
Luckily, the National Audit Office is not so easily taken in, as
it’s just proved with a nice reality check: its latest report on
Sellafield, the radioactive waste dump in Cumbria owned by the state-backed
Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA). True, there is a glimmer of good
news: the spending watchdog says the “management of major projects has
begun to improve”. But it must have been off a chronically low base,
given the problems the NAO finds.
As it notes, of the NDA’s 17 sites
“Sellafield is the UK’s most complex and challenging”: home to
“seven former nuclear reactors” and Britain’s “entire stockpile of
civilian-owned plutonium”. Indeed, much of the “highly hazardous”
stuff knocking around has been deemed by the government to “pose an
intolerable risk”. Cleaning it up is a thankless task, too. On NDA
estimates, it “will take until 2125”.
Times 23rd Oct 2024, https://www.thetimes.com/business-money/companies/article/nuclear-is-waste-of-time-and-money-ljmxhqklh
Fears salt marsh plan could lead to ‘destruction’ of Severn Vale
Gazette, 21st October 24
THERE are fears plans for new salt marshes linked to the construction of nuclear power plant Hinkley C would lead to “wholesale destruction of the Severn Vale”.
EDF bosses have been severely criticised for their environmental improvement plans in Gloucestershire which are linked to the new Hinkley C site in Somerset.
Their original plan for Hinkley Point was to install an acoustic fish deterrent system to scare fish away from the site as the Bristol Channel is home to numerous species such as eels, herring, salmon and sprats.
However, the French government-owned energy firm feel this will no longer be viable and have instead drawn up alternative plans to create salt marshes along the River Severn.
In the area, they have identified sites in Arlingham and Littleton Upon Severn near Thornbury in South Gloucestershire.
Other proposed sites include Rodley near Westbury-on-Severn in Gloucestershire and Kingston Seymour in Somerset.
But the proposals, which were aired at a recent parish council meeting, have been met with strong opposition in the Severn Vale.
David Seal, a local resident, believes the plans would “likely bring an end to most ideas of future development of the village, farming, farmland, miles and miles of hedgerow, trees and just about everything we all love about the green serenity of the village”.
“All this to ‘offset’ Hinckley C destroying 182 million fish in the estuary per year over 60 years,” he said.
“EDF has all the technical know-how to dig two enormous cooling water tunnels 3.3km out under the Bristol Channel, yet they say it’s ‘too risky’ to fit an acoustic deterrent to mitigate the problem at source in the same estuary.
“What is too risky is messing about with the River Severn and destroying the land we and nature live off…………………………………………………….
https://www.gazetteseries.co.uk/news/24665869.fears-salt-marsh-plan-lead-destruction-severn-vale/
Sellafield cleanup cost rises to £136bn amid tensions with Treasury
National Audit Office questions value for money as predicted bill for decommissioning increases by £21bn
Alex Lawson and Anna Isaac, Wed 23 Oct 2024 , https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/oct/23/sellafield-cleanup-cost-136bn-national-audit-office
The cost of cleaning up Sellafield is expected to spiral to £136bn and Europe’s biggest nuclear waste dump cannot show how it offers taxpayers value for money, the public spending watchdog has said.
Projects to fix buildings containing hazardous and radioactive material at the state-owned site on the Cumbrian coast are running years late and over budget. Sellafield’s spending is so vast – with costs of more than £2.7bn a year – that it is causing tension with the Treasury, the report from the National Audit Office (NAO) suggests.
Officials from finance ministry told the NAO it was “not always clear” how Sellafield made decisions, the report reveals. Criticisms of its costs and processes come as the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, prepares to plug a hole of about £40bn in her maiden budget.
Europe’s most hazardous industrial site has previously been described by a former UK secretary of state as a “bottomless pit of hell, money and despair”. The Guardian’s Nuclear Leaks investigation in late 2023 revealed a string of cybersecurity problems at the site, as well as issues with its safety and workplace culture.
The NAO found that Sellafield was making slower-than-hoped progress on making the site safe and that three of its most hazardous storage sites pose an “intolerable risk”.
The site is a sprawling collection of buildings, many never designed to hold nuclear waste long-term, now in various states of disrepair. It stores and treats decades of nuclear waste from atomic power generation and weapons programmes, has taken waste from countries including Italy and Sweden, and is the world’s largest store of plutonium.
Sellafield is forecast to cost £136bn to decommission, which is £21.4bn or 18.8% higher than was forecast in 2019. Its buildings are expected to be finally torn down by 2125 and its nuclear waste buried deep underground at an undecided English location.
The underground project’s completion date has been delayed from 2040 to the 2050s at the earliest, meaning Sellafield will need to build more stores and manage waste for longer. Each decade of delay costs Sellafield between £500m and £760m, the NAO said. Meanwhile, the government hopes to ramp up nuclear power generation, which will create more waste.
Sellafield is owned by the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA), a taxpayer-owned and -funded quango. The NDA believes the cost of decommissioning Sellafield could range from £116bn to £253bn, depending on the length and complexity of the cleanup.
Plans to clean up three of its worst ponds – which contain hazardous nuclear sludge that must be painstakingly removed – are running six to 13 years later than forecast when the NAO last drew up a report, in 2018. The NAO said deteriorating buildings, Covid restrictions, staffing and equipment breaking down were to blame. Sellafield had “retrieved much less waste than it had planned” since 2020, it said.
Sellafield could spend more on demolishing buildings earlier to be more efficient and offer better value for money, the NAO said.
One pond, the Magnox swarf storage silo, is leaking 2,100 litres of contaminated water each day, the NAO found. The pond was due to be emptied by 2046 but this has slipped to 2059. The Guardian investigation revealed it could continue leaking until 2050.
The NAO said: “Sellafield has demonstrated that it can remove safely the most hazardous waste, but is not progressing quickly enough to meet its plans.”
Last year, Sellafield defied the Treasury and without consultation increased its headcount from 11,200 to 12,000, despite previous commitments to reduce its employee numbers by becoming more efficient, the report said.
In one blunder, Sellafield paid out £2.1m more in staff bonuses than it should have done – about £200 a person – in 2023. This was paid after a management decision that the NAO suggests was questionable.
Sellafield had expected to replace a testing facility that is more than 70 years old and in “extremely poor condition”, but after racking up £265m over more than seven years the project is under review amid concerns over delays and the condition of buildings on the site. The NAO said this was the single biggest risk to Sellafield’s future, as workers needed to carry out many different regular scientific tests.
Gareth Davies, the head of the NAO, said: “Despite progress achieved since the NAO last reported, I cannot conclude Sellafield is achieving value for money yet, as large projects are being delivered later than planned and at higher cost, alongside slower progress in reducing multiple risks.”
He added: “Continued underperformance will mean the cost of decommissioning will increase considerably, and ‘intolerable risks’ will persist for longer.”
This month, Sellafield was fined £332,500 for cybersecurity failings and the chief magistrate in the case, Paul Goldspring, said it fell into a category “bordering on negligence”.
The NAO said the nuclear site had again admitted that its cybersecurity efforts were falling short.
David Peattie, the NDA’s chief executive, said: “Sellafield is one of the most complex environmental programmes in the world. We’re proud of our workforce and achievements being made, including the unprecedented retrieval of legacy waste from all four highest hazard facilities.
“But as the NAO rightly points out there is still more to be done. This includes better demonstrating we are delivering value for money and the wider significant societal and economic benefits through jobs, the supply chain and community investments.”
1 This Month
Chernobyl: The Lost Tapes – A good documentary on Chernobyl on SBS available On Demand for the next 3 weeks– https://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/tv-program/chernobyl-the-lost-tapes/2352741955560
of the week–London Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament
Tell the Ukrainian Government to Drop Prosecution of Peace Activist Yurii Sheliazhenko
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- April 2026 (133)
- 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)
- May 2025 (261)
-
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 