Published at 11:11, Thursday, 17 May 2012

SIR – It was both unfortunate and somewhat misguided of local Tory councillor Stephen Haraldsen to highlight conflicts of interest in local government with a personal attack on my colleague, Coun Elaine Woodburn.

Whilst a grace and favour relationship with the nuclear industry is undoubtedly an issue in local Cumbrian politics, he omitted to mention that his own Conservative council shadow leader, Coun David Moore, is in receipt of a considerable stipend from the industry for simply chairing the quarterly meeting of the West Cumbria Site Stakeholder Group.

Securing the long-term future prosperity and well being of Copeland communities against a back-drop of dependency on the nuclear decommissioning programme demands elected council and other community leaders put aside personal self-interest and political prejudices to remain absolutely impartial and free of constraint through fear of offending industry leaders for whom community interests are of secondary importance.

In this instance, Coun Haraldsen would therefore be well advised to desist from political sparring to focus on the wider issue and work to galvanise cross-party support to clean up often long-standing arrangements that cast a veil over attempts by the industry to carry favour and influence political decision makers.

Public respect for elected councillors and confidence in them to negotiate with industry leaders will always be an imperative in Copeland, but never more so than at this time, if the area is to thrive and prosper. Grace and favour relationships do nothing to imbue the public with either.

Coun Phillip GREATOREX

Copeland Executive Member – Regeneration

SIR – To say the least, it is surprising that the ‘independent’ panel which approved the borough council leader’s pay increase included one individual with a possible vested interest in the civic affairs of Copeland.

That this person should be Sellafield Limited’s head of public affairs is indeed worrying. Whilst not attempting to impugn Ms Williams’ integrity in any way, would it not have been prudent for her to have rescued herself from serving on this panel? Especially so in respect to the ongoing saga over local public servants’ salaries.

Who convened the panel and what are the backgrounds of the other two individuals who served on it? Even more to the point, who appointed them, and why?

Like Caesar’s wife, public and prominent figures should be ‘above suspicion’.

Brian PARNABY

Ullock

SIR – I read with interest last week’s article on the independent remuneration panel, and the questions posed by the Conservative Group on how the Leader’s pay is set. As an aside, I also found it interesting to note that the council didn’t receive the letter addressed to it until after the media. It would seem it’s more important that the media received it than to get answers to the questions posed.

But that actually makes sense because the Conservative Group should already have the answers to the questions they posed. In fact, let me enlighten you to the reality and not the political spin. The first of these is that Coun Moore was involved in the recruitment of the panel, and so should have been able to answer the questions posed by his party.

The independent remuneration panel has been in place since 2002, and has always included a representative from the nuclear industry. The agreement – made by 51 councillors – gave delegated authority to a Copeland officer to appoint the independent members after consultation with both the leader of the council and, funnily enough, the leader of the opposition – Coun Moore – a member of the Copeland Conservative Group.

This process was again carried out this year when the membership was refreshed.

The independent member of the panel who was criticised by the Conservative group has been a member since 2006, and there has never been any opposition to their appointment or reappointment. Interestingly, this includes in the past when recommendations were made by this panel to increase the allowances of these Conservative members as well.

In fact there has been no criticism of the appointment at all until the Conservative group have decided that they’re not happy with the recommendations this year.

I think that if this is how the Conservative group likes to treat people who give up their free time when they don’t like their view, then they need to look no further than themselves when we next wonder why people aren’t willing to volunteer their time.

So that’s the truth of the matter. It sounds much less sensational when you realise that both the Labour and Conservative group leaders approved the make-up of the panel, and have done for a number of years. But why let the truth get in the way of a good story!

Coun Alan HOLLIDAY

SIR – A man from Ipsos MORI, the major UK and global research company, rang the other evening out of the blue to ask if I had a few minutes to spare to answer questions relating to research work they were conducting for Cumbria County Council.

I said okay, and then the questions, as they unfolded, revealed that the research was solely related to the proposal for a high level radioactive waste repository in what is loosely described as West Cumbria, encompassing the area covered by Copeland and Allerdale Councils.

It would appear that the consultation process surrounding this issue is now hotting-up.

To cut a long story short I told the man from MORI that while I had no political or anti-nuclear affiliation, and was not employed in the nuclear industry (nor were any relatives) I was dead against the project because of the potential long-term implications of burying high level radioactive waste; deadly waste that has a staggering shelf life of thousands of years.

I stated that the geology here has already been shown (through the Nirex Inquiry in the late nineties which all cost millions) to be unsound for such a purpose and that I feared for the consequences that may be visited on the environment and future generations of people living in Cumbria when this highly toxic waste starts to reappear on the surface as it assuredly will, sooner or later.

Various people, including myself, expressed similar views at the annual parish meeting of Keswick Town Council last Thursday evening. As a direct result the town council is to reconsider its previous decision – made on the casting vote of the mayor – to continue with the process. I welcome the fact that Keswick Town Council – one of only three parish councils in the Copeland/Allerdale areas (the others being Millom and Brigham) to vote in the affirmative – may now reverse its original decision and say ‘no’ to any further steps along the road to the repository.

Unfortunately I cannot help but think that we may be wasting, no pun intended, our time. I fear that the proposal for an underground repository may be a fait accompli and that the so-called consultation process is heading in only one direction: the eventual creation of the nuclear waste repository being put forward through West Cumbria MRWS (Managing Radioactive Waste Safely).

Despite this somewhat pessimistic standpoint I have completed my online answers, as best I can, as part of the consultation process after attending several meetings – as an objective observer – to enhance my knowledge of the situation and help me arrive at my decision.

In view of what happened at the Nirex Inquiry and its findings on the geology, the view of the inquiry inspector (essentially ‘Cumbria is geologically unsuitable, look elsewhere’) and the decision of the then Secretary of State for the Environment to refuse the plans for a waste repository, I cannot understand for the life of me why a nuclear waste repository for ‘West Cumbria’ is back on the agenda?

I can only conclude that there is a collective desire for this to happen and that Government and the nuclear industry recognise that ‘West Cumbria’ is the only location and the only ‘willing community’ prepared to accept such a proposal irrespective of the geology. It is no coincidence that a lot of nuclear waste is already here, on the surface, at Sellafield. Why are our customary planning procedures in danger of being bypassed? Why is the decision to move forward along the path towards a repository being left solely in the hands of the cabinets (and not the entire councils) of Copeland, Allerdale and Cumbria?

An issue of this magnitude should have far greater and wider consideration. Radioactive waste tends not to recognise local government boundaries.

I appreciate that nuclear waste is a serious problem – to say the least – and while leaving it on the surface is hardly satisfactory, I do not believe that the solution is to bury it underground, especially in a location that has already been demonstrated to be entirely unsuitable because of its fractured geology. It all smacks of sweeping the nuclear dust under the carpet.

Worryingly, the MRWS is already talking in its ‘consultation’ document about community benefits packages in the event of Cumbria opting for the repository. These proposed benefits, or “sweeteners”, could very easily be regarded as inducements in exchange for the potential risk to the environment. There are many who would use stronger terminology in pouring scorn on this offer of community benefits.

Pro-repository people talk of the benefits of the jobs that it will bring and that the area’s commitment to nuclear power is essential to the future well being of the community. It is the lifeblood of the area, they say, and without it our schools and our community will slowly die. But, surely, there comes a time when you’ve got to look beyond the short-term value of jobs and take in the bigger picture of the potential threat to the environment and future generations.

And where is the proposed nuclear repository going to be built? No one’s saying as yet (why go through all this rigmarole without having a location in mind?) Is the cart being put in front of the horse? It certainly seems that way. And it has been indicated that the repository entrance could conceivably be situated just outside the boundary of the National Park with the high level waste actually beneath the Lake District. This really has all the makings of a nightmare.

Some people have suggested to me that we should leave all this to the experts. After all, what do we know? They know best and why would those people who choose to come and live and work in this area do so if they are not confident and secure in the region’s future safety? Unfortunately, the pages of history are littered with the mistakes of “experts” who got it horribly wrong. And the nuclear industry has, thus far, not exactly covered itself in glory – Windscale, Three Mile Island, Chernobyl. Not to mention massive investment in new plant that rarely functions, the billions to be spent on decommissioning and a questionable return on the investment.

I would like to have more faith in nuclear power but the evidence is questionable and the jury most definitely out.

I referred to the fact that I have been objective in thinking about this issue of the high level nuclear waste repository. But if I must declare an interest it is that I am a Cumbrian, a Lakelander to the core and someone who cares for my county and its Norse heritage and environment. This is a very special place, one of the most beautiful places on the planet and I am concerned that the nuclear industry, or a part of it, has the potential to ruin that which I hold dear.

There has been much talk recently about the Lake District applying for World Heritage Site status. I would love to see that happen and, if it is awarded and the status is used to good effect, then I can see major benefits for the region now and in the longer term.

Sadly I do not think the words ‘High Level Nuclear Waste Repository’ will look especially good on the application form. I told the man from MORI that as well.

Keith RICHARDSON

Windebrowe Avenue, Keswick

SIR – I find Fred Story’s public backing of Copeland’s leader Elaine Woodburn disturbing. Would Mr Story employ a senior manager who failed time after time?

I don’t think so. Take a walk down the once-pristine Whitehaven town centre, Mr Story, and please give me an honest opinion on what your views are.

The majority of your dealings with the leader of Copeland Council is business and financial meetings and some could think your public backing in The Whitehaven News is a conflict of interest.

The people of Copeland are tired of persistent failures and broken promises. Mr Story, just because you are a successful and high- profile business man, doesn’t justify trying to influence the Copeland taxpayers who have to live with the outcome and decisions of this council, whose only success is to waste vast amounts.

Copeland Council should put the same amount of effort in to the things that matter, as they do with the persistent bylaws against dog lovers, taxi drivers and licensed premises. The things that the public are concerned about is the shopping centre pavements, state of the roads, lack of decent shops, bus station area and chronic shortage of public toilets.

The council’s neutered response to the transfer of local services from the West Cumberland Hospital to Carlisle has been inept to say the least.

Would your shareholders accept routine failures Mr Story – or week after week of bad and negative press? I doubt it. So don’t expect the people of Copeland to accept constant failure and unacceptable use of taxpayers’ money.

Tommy DOUGAN

West Lane, Flimby

SIR – How lovely, the pupils of a school in Seascale are going to sow seed of wild flowers to help our insects flourish.

I hope lots of people have followed Sarah Raven’s example as I have myself. But beware pupils of Seascale if you see anyone who looks like a council grass cutter heading your way, as they don’t seem to know what a wild flower is after mowing down the lovely cowslips just off the Hensingham bypass, as stated in the recent letter by Mr Nigel Harbron.

A FREARS

Sandringham Avenue, Whitehaven

SIR – When we came to live in Seascale in our present house, Singing Surf, we had lovely views across the fields to the fells behind us and, in front, the Irish Sea with views of the Isle of Man and across the dunes to Blackcombe and a lovely stretch of sands.

Then some years ago our view was lost behind us, the farmer sold the field to houses (now Wasdale Park) and we can only see the fells from the top windows, which was an awful moment for us.

At least we were comforted by the thought that no houses could be built on the sea. So we thought, until last year when suddenly the skyline on the Irish Sea was dotted with dozens of large white wind turbines looking like fence posts stretching as far as the eye could see.

These wretched wind turbines are not only there, but are also in several places spoiling the lovely view on land.

During many years, my family and I have walked several times along Drigg Road. It’s our favourite road and we have grown up knowing every field and hedgerow where flowers bloom and birds sing. Our eyes have gazed upon the fells in their different shapes and colours with wonder and pleasure.

Now a blight is on its very landscape, more wind turbines are planned to be put there. The answer is NO. What about the people who, like me, live there enjoying the view. What will it do to them when they see these large amount of white posts right in front of their windows, blocking a view they have loved.

Then, to my final point. What about the birds who regularly use the field, the sea and the sky, diving into the sea, circling the skies or on a migrating flight? Such as the gannet, osprey, lark, buzzard, falcon, barn owl, heron, racing pigeons, gull, geese, swallows, cuckoo to name but a few who are tired or, with the stormy conditions, fly into the blades and die, as dozens do. What chance have they against man’s greed?

God has given us a lovely place to live. Have we the right to continue to spoil it by filling it up with these wind turbines? Stop before it’s too late

Barrie ROBINSON

Seascale

SIR – Make a difference to the lives of older people – volunteer.

I work for Independent Age, the charity which supports thousands of older people across the UK. We tackle older people’s poverty and loneliness by offering information, advice and friendship. For those who need it, we also offer befriending and support from an Independent Age volunteer.

We support over 150 older people across Cumbria and are in urgent need of new volunteers to join our dedicated team in Whitehaven.

Whatever your talents, you can use them to help us with our work improving the lives of older people in your community. So, whether you’re a good listener and would like to visit a lonely older person near you, or enjoy getting out and about and meeting new people, we have the volunteer roles to suit you.

All new volunteers receive a full induction, and, of course, we’ll pay for your expenses.

To find out about volunteering opportunities in your area and to request an application pack, please contact Kay White, area manager, on 07595 201 436 or kay.white@independentage.org.uk

Kay WHITE

Area manager

Independent Age

Published by http://www.whitehavennews.co.uk