N-sub work is 'low risk', says minister
THE Armed Forces Minister has hit back at claims a proposed nuclear submarine scrapping project is dangerous.
In a letter to Plymouth Sutton MP, Linda Gilroy, Bill Rammell claims allegations about the Submarine Dismantling Project (SDP) are "misleading" and "inaccurate".
He claims the Government would never compromise the safety of workers or the public – and insists that no decision has been taken over where to base the project.
Last month key city figures and MPs met Ministry of Defence officials in Plymouth for preliminary talks over the project.
The MoD is considering 12 sites for the storage element of the work and just two, including Plymouth, for the more controversial dismantling work.
Plymouth already refits, defuels and refuels submarines at Devonport Naval Base.
The SDP could see 27 de-fuelled nuclear submarines stored and cut up at Devonport Naval Base over the next 60 years.
In his letter Mr Rammell said the Government's intention is to deliver a "safe" and "environmentally sound" solution for submarine disposal.
"The radiological risk to the general public or workforce from activities at Devonport is already extremely low, and would remain extremely low if it was decided to carry out SDP activities there," he states in his letter.
"In spite of what some claim, there is absolutely no reason to believe that if either element of SDP work was undertaken at Devonport, it would lead to any increased risk to the public or the workforce.
"We will not compromise the safety of either the workers or the general public."
Mr Rammell said he also wished to reiterate that workers would not be involved in the removal of the nuclear fuel, stating it is a separate operation which is not part of the SDP.
"The project is only about dealing with defuelled submarines, effectively dealing with irradiated components and other waste material, not nuclear fuel," he said.
"SDP therefore has three important elements: firstly the removal of the radioactive material for appropriate storage; secondly, the method and site of storage; and thirdly the dismantling and recycling of the remainder of the submarine by an appropriately licensed contractor."
Plymouth City Council leader, Vivien Pengelly, said while she is pleased the minister has confirmed that no decisions have been made about whether the SDP will be based, she still has concerns.
It follows comments from her that she would do everything in her power to stop it happening in Plymouth.
Cllr Pengelly previously said she did not want Plymouth to become a "nuclear graveyard".
"The minister has not provided any reassurances that the consultation and decision about dismantling of the nuclear submarines will take place in the wider context of the MoD's future plans for the naval base as a whole," Cllr Pengelly said.
"Or about how locations such as Plymouth would be compensated.
"This is not just about providing assurances to the local community about safety, it is also a question about the long term image of Plymouth and the South West.
"It is essential that this decision is made within that wider context.
"We will continue to demand a joined up approach to this issue from Government departments.
"Plymouth deserves clarity and honesty from the Government and we will continue to push for that."
Plymouth Sutton MP, Linda Gilroy, added: "I am determined that we manage to get some really good quality consultation.
"I think that this will happen."
Tony Staunton, a Plymouth-based Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament national committee member, said: "No Government today would ever get away with establishing such a process in the middle of a city of 250,000 people.
"Yet, just because Plymouth was conned into accepting nuclear in the first place, we now find ourselves destined to become a blighted centre for toxic nuclear waste for generations to come."
Public consultation is planned to start during next year.
6 Comments
View all
by Baz, Plymouth
Friday, November 06 2009, 9:10AM
“How can Bill Rammell have the nerve to say that it is a low risk process when it has not been determined how they are going to cut up these subs yet. If it is so safe why isnt Bill Rammell prepared to have it done in his constituntcey. As for compensation , one accident has the potential to cause many thousands of cancer deaths for many years to come and blight the westcountry forever.”
by chaos, hells kitchen
Thursday, November 05 2009, 5:21AM
“mr justice i have had the pleasure of meeting many of your colleagues from your highest management to your lowest floor sweeping aprentices, and i must admit i would not rate many especially those at the top as the sharpest tools in the box either having said that many mechanicaly minded men do sometimes come across as switched off on matters that do not pertain to machinery but i wouldnt call them thick by any means, hardworking in the majority liking a full pay packet a waving of the risk factors is one reason many jobs get completed and the only reason i for one do not wish to see any man or their wives and children harmed like those now falling ill due to lax safety precautions ie asbestoses, i just hope these workers realise the risks and dont just swallow the managerial hogwash for the sake of a higher rate of pay..”
by Mr Justice, Plymouth
Tuesday, November 03 2009, 5:44PM
“Reg,Efford - I suppose you have worked in the Dockyard thereby being qualified to pronounce on the intelligence of Yardies? No - I don't suppose you have otherwise you would know that the yard employs very skilled workers in many various trades across the whole of its workforce. Even the non skilled workers are very intelligent capable of carrying out many tasks. So unless you have worked with us in the yard please keep silent.”
by Grizzlee, Keyham
Tuesday, November 03 2009, 5:16PM
“Last week Mrs Pengelly and the MPs were saying No to the Nuclear Scrapyard - already there are murmerings about COMPENSATION!
If we end up going down that road then it must be -
No Council Tax for anyone living in Plymouth, Saltash or Torpoint. - Lets see if they still want to talk compo?”
by Reg, Efford
Tuesday, November 03 2009, 3:19PM
“Mr Rammell - He claims the Government would never compromise the safety of workers or the public.
Lets be truthful half the yardies are not the sharpest tools in the box and if it meant overtime for 2 weekends they would sell their grandmother. Ok, how about sending our troops to fight an illegal war with none existent weapons of mass destruction or how about sending our troops to Afghanistan ill-equipped and at long last finally getting around to admitting the shortage of helicopters, oh no that¿s not endangering lives. Sending troops out on patrol in Landrovers ¿ yes they really stand up to a road side blast.
Oh yes the Labour MP¿s and ministers clearly have the publics interest at heart, anything to divert our attention from the fact that half the MP¿s do not even live in the constitutional areas but have token second homes and would like us to forget the expenses fiasco.
That other clown Johnson now also admitting immigration is a problem, however 6mths ago he said it was all fine, clearly elections are around the corner.
At the end of the day, cutting up and dismantling radioactive waste is dangerous.”