Nuclear store fall-out: Could west Cumbrian councils merge?
Last updated at 15:38, Friday, 01 February 2013
Politicians have hinted that the veto of plans for an underground nuclear waste site in west Cumbria may have brought the county to a political crossroads that could result in a merger of Copeland and Allerdale councils.
yea sounds like a good idea then you can cut jobs for the council rather than eny one else lose a job hey yous are the ones banging on about saveing the cash point proved !!!!!!!!!!
The speech by Eddie Martin says a lot about a flawed process that MRWS (impartially) ran.
They did not even follow their own mandate to hold a referendum and people have more say on the building of a school or windfarm than we had with the repository.
The Allerdale vote cannot be used as a mandate as they were ruled out of the process and may have voted differently if it were real.
The likelihood of the repository getting a safety case in Cumbria is very very slim so if stage 4 went ahead would have probably been a waste of tax payers money as was the NIREX project.
Our democratically appointed leaders should be ashamed that they now suddenly disagree with a democratic process. They should be treated with the same contempt that they have shown to our democracy.
http://mariannewildart.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/minutes-cabinet-30-1-13.pdf









Have your say
For those who have not yet woken and smelled the coffee. It is not an issue about the benefits that Sellafield has brought to the area historically nor of those it might yet bring, nor of those it promised in the early fifteies that never happened. Of course, people want and need jobs. Nuclear power is clean; it is possible to mass produce it fairly easil;it does not blight the whole of the country only those areas that have to put up with a nuclear station; it is powerful; it is probably less expensive than relying upon hideous unproductive windfarms which benefit nobody but the energy companies and the farmers who either sell their land or lease it.But for goodness sake, it produces a highly toxic, highly poisonous bi-product called low and high level radiation waste about which neither the political classes nor the industry had any idea how they would manage it from the outset seven decades ago. Whether you want or need a job at Sellafield, you can't argue that wasn't particularly clever. So can we please have a sensible objective debate about this without the divisiveness that Jamie Reed and Elaine Woodburn are using as a strategy for further action?
Posted by joeblogger on 8 February 2013 at 18:10