Due to the increasing number of personal attack posts this thread has been closed.

Ian
Online editor

Absolutely disgusted with Jamie Reed and others. We don't like the democratic decision that was taken so let's spit the dummy out and demand we get our own way , even if we have to change the law to do it. All this talk of a 'clear mandate from the people of West Cumbria -what a pile of rubbish. Economies rise and fall and change all the time - if these people had any sense they would be looking to diversify the economy of west Cumbria instead of letting the area be held hostage by the nuclear lobby. This county supplies half the UK with water - why is it ok to take even the slightest risk with that! Plutonium is one of the most toxic substances on the planet - it just takes one mistake, one tiny little leak in this absolutely UNPROVEN method of storage and there you go, environmental disaster which CANNOT be undone or diversified. And make no mistake -there ARE NO EXISTING HIGH LEVEL WASTE GEOLOGICAL REPOSITORIES IN OPERATION ANYWHERE ON THIS PLANET. There are low and intermediate level ones - talk to the Germans about theirs and you will find that they are leaking like a sieve!
So Jamie Reed - give it a rest and let's look for the best solution instead of taking advantage of a deprived community to force through the easiest! The people of Cumbria have spoken -accept their decision.

Democracy has already spoken. If it's not spoken clearly enough then how about letting it speak again, but louder; through a referendum? And not 'in a decade' after the land has been raped and so many tens of millions of public money has been spent that there can be no going back, as Councillor Woodburn suggests. If politicians on the West Coast can not respect the democracy which has played out fairly and squarely, and honour the will of the majority of the people, then we could settle this right now... Why fear a referendum right now? Woodburn, Reed and Smith claim the people of the West Coast have not been listened to. We HAVE been listened to, in our thousands; by our County Council! Who have shown incredible courage, prudence, dedication to research and thorough committment to democracy, whilst bearing massive pressures from government, the nuclear industry and the people themselves. It is the local Councils of Allerdale and Copeland that are NOT listening to the majority, but instead continue to fundamentally misrepresent us! I would ask Councillor Woodburn to please supply the evidence for her and Jamie Reed's claim that there is a mandate to proceed from the people of the West Coast, for this claim is at odds with the facts. The hard evidence I see continues to be from www.CALC.co.uk which clearly shows more than 50% of parishes on the West Coast are against proceeding. The referendum in Ennerdale revealed 95% of residents were against proceeding. Thousands of letters, emails and signatures on petitions were sent to the councils and hundreds demonstrated in the streets to let it be known they were against proceeding. Woodburn, Reed, Smith YOU ARE NOT LISTENING TO US. But this ignorance will not alter our steadfast refusal to continue in this process!

There are a lot of comments on here from people who assume an awful lot of knowledge about why this dump idea should have gone ahead. Yes it is a dump- if you throw something away and leave it there for 1 million years you've dumped it. End of!)

I'd like to share with you all something I learned at a recent nuclear industry conference:
"The geology of Cumbria is not known BELOW 10,000 metres" Ergo, ABOVE 10,000 metres it is known.

Here is another thing I learned at that conference- told to me by Professor Neil Chapman of the NDA:
"GDFs (the posh name for underground nuclear dumps)are generally sited at 300-700 metres below the ground"
So, in geology we already know about, then?
Another important piece of info from the Prof: "There are no studies of how GDF might work below 4000 metres"
That's computer studies by the way, not real dumps. And there are none of them about locations 10,000 metres deep in the 'unknown' geology.
Either a) they know about the geology so a move to stage 4 was unnecessary
or b) we were to be nuclear pioneers: guinea pigs of the world testing deep deep DEEP storage without even computer modelling to go on.
In which case how would stage 4 have identified suitable areas 10,000 metres below the ground with 'desk top studies'?
Answer: It wouldn't. It would have necessitated a move to stage 5 for further evidence, thereby destroying landscape, community, habitat and serenity.

The International Atomic Energy Authority guidelines on locations suitable for GDFs state that sites should be:
arid
flat
away from drinking water
away from areas of population
no history of seismic activity
There are others, but I think this gives you the gist. Cumbria is not a suitable location for this. It may be a convenient location- but it is not safe.

Another point worthy of note- the 1st experimental pilot into underground nuclear waste storage opened it's doors in New Mexico 12 years ago. There is no track safety record to show us how one of these dumps would actually work long term. We are guessing it will be safe. In the 1970s, the Germans followed America's best scientific advice and buried it's low level/intermediate waste in old salt mines (back-filled as a Cumbrian GDF would be to make waste irretrievable. I suggest you google Asse 2 to see how that panned out! A stark warning from our not so distant history!

County Councillors listened to the views of the residents of the whole of Cumbria which to quote Eddie Martin were 20 - 1 against going forward to stage 4. The Allerdale executive committee are geographically biased towards Workington area which is why we got the "yes" vote, however there are huge numbers of Allerdale residents vehemently opposed to going forward. Just face facts Jamie Reed you lost the vote, just get over it and have enough dignity to accept it gracefully!

Markus, the answer is simple, because no community from 'down south' has volunteered in the way that Copeland and Allerdale did. And the whole point is that nobody knows 'fine well' about the geology in Cambridgeshire or Cumbria, the point of Stage 4 of MRWS is to find out!

It is pointless to speak of 'democracy' and the 'will of the people' in this context. Public opinion on this issue depends on where you draw the boundaries of your vote. Copeland would always vote 'yes'. Allerdale would not be quite so clear cut. The county, as a whole, would probably say 'no' because of the tourism lobby. Step outside the county and the rest of the country would probably say build the repository as near to Sellafield as possible. The decision needs to be made centrally - but do we have a government which is bold enough?

A very good point Amanda. There is a term for when individuals in a society start to over rule the rule of law just because they don't like it...its called anarchy. What next Jamie, you don't agree with Speed Limits in Copeland, so over rule them, you don't agree with County Council child protection measures in Copeland, so over rule them too because you know better and so on.

Irregardless of the rights and wrongs of a respository, the road Mr Reed is advocating is a dangerous dangerous principle to follow.

Mr Reed would do well to observe the very democratic progress that put him in his job. He does not listen to those in the community which has elected him who have not agreed with this proposal. Thank goodness the County Council has a mind to listen to all those who live, work and vote in the area. Reed would do well to attend to diversification of employment rather than continue to take the easy way out and surround himself with old work mates from sellafield. Thanks what the farmers are constantly reminded isn't it, don't just rely on raising crops and farming sheep. Copeland needs to encourage and invest in industries other than nuclear. How about developing high speed broadband and transport improvements for a start.

Mr Reed,the Governments own findings,Your government from whenst they were in power,
along with the British geolodgical survey know fine well where the best place in the UK for this dump is, and that is from Cambridge,down to London, and along the Thames towards the sea.
Its solid clay, 1,000s of feet thick, clay that wont crack or fissure.
If this is the best place geolodgeically, and as you say,it is perfect;y safe to store the stuff, then this place down south, should be the place for it to go, its as simple as that, full stop, end of argument.
So the question I ask you , and the others in favour of the dump is why is this area down south not being considered.