Latest News

According to government, town and parish councils are the first level of local government. They provide communities with a democratic voice and a structure for taking community action; they are meant to represent community views.

Millom Town Council should have 15 councillors but there are three vacant posts at the moment. Of the current 12 councillors only four were elected (unopposed) in the last elections of 2019 – they were elected unopposed because not enough people stood for there to be an election; the other eight have been co-opted without the constituents having any say, this is because eight councillors have resigned during this period.  So unless we are told something different (both Millom Town Council and Copeland Borough Council have been contacted for information) there should be an election for all 15 Millom town councillors this coming May.

We do not want a GDF to be sited in our area; it would appear that this is the view of over 60% of the community (as shown in the two surveys – one conducted by millom.org., the other baseline survey commissioned by the Community Partnership.  Whilst both were small surveys nevertheless it seems likely the results reflect the views of the majority).

The position of the current Millom Town Council is said to be neutral regarding the GDF however their actions speak louder than their words as they are represented on the South Copeland GDF Community Partnership.  The Community Partnership (CP) are meant to listen to the views of the community and make information about the GDF available to the community. Not only do the CP not listen to the views of the community (who appear to be opposed to a GDF being sited here) but they only promote one view about the GDF, that of the developer and do not address the concerns of the community by obtaining independent information and letting the community know about this.  So, in effect, Millom Town Council are actually promoting the possibility of a GDF being sited in our area against the wishes of the majority.

It would seem Millom Town Council agreed to join the Community Partnership in order to access the £1 million funding available because this is what they were told they had to do by the chair of the Partnership. Well, we discovered that this is not the case: they do NOT have to be a member of the CP to apply for funding!  But they intend to continue to be a member as stated in their response to a request that they consider withdrawing as a result of the baseline survey:

In answer to your questions, Millom Town Council (MTC) will, for the foreseeable future, continue with its neutral stance on the possible siting of a Geological Disposal Facility (GDF) off the coast of South Copeland as ultimately should a suitable site be identified, the community will make the final decision.

We will also not be withdrawing from the South Copeland GDF Community Partnership as this is a major infrastructure project that aims to protect people and the environment for generations to come. Withdrawing from the partnership serves no purpose, as the process does not require MTC to be around the table to continue. It is our collective responsibility as a council to ensure that process is transparent, open and robust to ensure our community has all the information required to make an informed decision should the process develop to that stage.

As a Council, we will continue to monitor the views of the community and ensure that they are fed into the discussions of this process over the coming years as more information becomes available.

How on earth is making our area Britain’s main nuclear dump “a major infrastructure project that aims to protect people and the environment for generations to come?”   As already stated, the CP does not (nor does Millom Town Council) provide the community with all the information required to make an informed choice: they are only giving one side and are not addressing the concerns of the community.

It is in our power to change this: we can put forward candidates for the forthcoming election who stand on an anti-GDF ticket. Once elected the new council can conduct a poll to ascertain the views of the community with regard to the GDF (which the current Town Council will not do).  It could then pull out of the Community Partnership and gather information about the concerns residents have raised about the GDF, making this information public.

The new council could also survey residents about their needs and wants and produce a Town Plan based on the views of residents (most town and parish councils have one but not Millom).

The people of this town deserve better; they deserve proper representation, their opinions should count.

Are you willing to stand up and be counted??????

A Complaint has been sent to the Chief Constable of Cumbria Constabulary about a Lead Member of Copeland Borough Council.

Over 20 Copeland residents (along with other signatories) have signed a letter of complaint to Chief Constable Michelle Skeer about the Portfolio Holder for Nuclear, and Lead Member of the Council Executive. Councillor David Moore has failed to declare financial interests at Copeland Borough Council Meetings.

This failure to declare financial interests came to light at an Executive meeting in July. A petition from tens of thousands of members of the public condemning seismic testing of the subsea area for a Geological Disposal Facility off the Copeland coast, was presented to the Executive of Copeland Borough Council.

The letter states “It would be completely in the interests of the civil nuclear industry to disparage opponents of the project and Councillor Moore was quick to publicly dismiss petitioners as out-of-borough and ‘odd people’ but completely failed to declare at the meeting that he receives payment from that same industry for his services.” Nuclear Waste Services who commissioned the seismic testing is a division of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-62397013

The letter goes on to say that: “Under the Localism Act of 2011, it is a criminal offence if, without a reasonable excuse, an elected member (Councillor) fails to tell their Council’s monitoring officer about their disclosable pecuniary interests, either for inclusion in the register held by that officer or at any meeting where a matter relating to those interests will be discussed or on any matter related to those interests where that elected member is acting alone (for example, where that elected member is also a portfolio holder with devolved responsibilities).

The complaint concludes that:

“In our view, Councillor David Moore has committed numerous offences under the Localism Act of 2011 in:

• Failing to declare disclosable pecuniary interests
• Acting alone on Council business where he has disclosable pecuniary interests
• Participating in Council business where he has disclosable pecuniary interests
• And he also acted in complete contravention to his oath of office to always conduct himself in accordance with the Seven Nolan Principles of Public Office.” And calls upon the “Chief Constable to take prompt and effective action on the contents of this letter.”

The Nuclear Free Local Authorities have sent a second letter to each the four Community Partnerships responsible for taking forward proposals for a nuclear waste dump to seek assurances that opponents of the plan will have a chance to take up membership.

The Community Partnerships in Allerdale, Mid-Copeland, South-Copeland, all in West Cumbria, and in Theddlethorpe, in East Lincolnshire, are each pursuing the possibility of hosting Britain’s many tons of highlevel radioactive waste, produced from Britain’s civil nuclear and military nuclear programmes, in an undersea Geological Disposal Facility.

The waste will be radioactive and hazardous for well over 100,000 years and the British Government wants to dispose of this in a dump extending out under either the Irish or North Sea. Plans are at an early stage and public opposition is growing.

In his letter, NFLA Chair, Councillor David Blackburn, asks the remaining Community Partnerships to follow the lead shown by Theddlethorpe in being prepared to accept new members who are opposed to the GDF, should they choose to apply for membership.
The Chair of the Theddlethorpe Community Partnership, Mr Jon Collins, has publicly stated that his wishes to see membership reflect a range of views ‘which means recruiting members who are sceptical, or even, at this stage, against the proposed GDF’.

Councillor Blackburn said: “The NFLA believes that the membership of each of the community partnerships must reflect both the demographic and the range of views of those communities.

“Until now most members have been elected Councillors or in some instances connected to the nuclear industry through employment or business interests”.

“We need more independent voices from all walks of life, particularly young people as decisions over a GDF will take place over more than a next decade, and this should include members of the community opposed to the plans, if they want to participate”.

Councillor Blackburn also wants to see newly appointed members to the Community Partnership able to have their say in revising the key documents that determine how the Community Partnership works and
what is expected of them.

He added: “It seems completely unfair to expect new members to the Community Partnership to adhere to a collective Community Partnership Agreement and a personal Code of Conduct that were drawn up without their input. I therefore hope that periodic reviews can be built into the process so they can have their say in
the future as part of the consent-based approach Nuclear Waste Services say they have adopted”.

In his statement about Community Partnerships dated 22nd November Councillor Moore, Copeland Borough Council says:

“What we provide in the Community Partnership is a dispassionate, measured consideration of the facts so we can give our community credible evidence and real information. We want you to be fully informed about what is going on. This is a long-term process, and we are only at the very start of it. The Community Partnerships are doing what they can to help people get the information they need about what hosting a GDF would mean – the positive impacts and the negative.”

I contacted South Copeland GDF Community Partnership to ask when is Councillor Moore (Community Partnerships) going to tell the community what the negative impacts of hosting a GDF are?

Their response was to direct me to two government documents from 2019, in particular section 5 Impacts from National Policy Statement for Geological Disposal Infrastructure.

WOW, this is what helping people to get the negative impacts of hosting a GDF is?

The response also said: “We are at a very early stage of the siting process and the maturity of the GDF design reflects this, so at this point we are really only talking about generic impacts (available via the NPS above). As we progress our site evaluation work, we will engage via the Community Partnership to understand the community’s views and concerns about more localised impacts.”

Well, they have engaged with the community in South Copeland via a Baseline Survey. In his statement in response to the findings, Councillor McGrath, chair of the South Copeland GDF Community Partnership, said, “We are listening to everyone’s views, and we will continue to do so…” If you are listening to everyone’s views why are you continuing to look at siting a GDF in the Millom/Haverigg/Kirksanton area when the survey clearly shows the majority of the community here do not want it?

How’s about letting the community know what the generic negative impacts are of hosting a GDF?

At the South Copeland GDF Community Partnership held in the Guide Hall in Millom on 9^th November, Jan Bridget asked the following questions of the Community representatives:

1. What community do you represent?
2. How do you communicate with them to ensure you represent their views?
3. How are you representing those members of your community who are opposed to the GDF being sited here?

It is clear from the responses that different reps have different beliefs about their roles on, and the role of, the CP. However, the main takeaway was that it was up to groups that oppose the GDF to provide information on the negative effects of a GDF on our area.  By the way, it was noted there was no representation from Millom Town Council.

Here is an extract from the Community Partnership Agreement, 2.1, about the role of the CP:

• to facilitate discussion with the community.
• to identify relevant information that people in the communities benefitting from the formation of the Community Partnership want or need about the siting process
• to agree a programme of activities to develop the community’s understanding of the siting process and the potential implications of hosting a GDF (a ‘Programme of Activities’)

At the moment the only information being distributed by the CP concerns the so-called benefits to the community. Nowhere is there information about the possible negative impacts of a GDF.

The CP have yet to agree their Programme of Activities (should have been agreed within the first six months so it is now six months late).

It was made clear at the meeting that the CP can commission independent reports.  So why do they not commission an independent report on the possible negative impacts of a GDF on the host community given that community members are asking these questions? But this must be from a totally independent source such as the Nuclear Waste Advisory Associates.

The next meeting of the above, which is now open to the public, is 6.30-8.30 this Wednesday, 9th November, at the Guide Hall, Millom. Here is more information including the agenda (minutes not available yet!)

At last night’s meeting of Whicham Parish Council it was agreed to survey parishioners on their views regarding the GDF.

It would be wonderful if Millom Without and Millom Town Councils would do the same. Having said that, as the proposed site is likely to be across Haverigg and Kirksanton, why should Millom make the decision and not folk who live in Haverigg?

HOW CAN SOUTH COPELAND GDF COMMUNIITY PARTNERSHIP (AND MILLOM TOWN COUNCIL, WHICHAM AND MILLOM WITHOUT PARISH COUNCILS) TRUST THE DEVELOPERS WHEN THEY PERPETUALLY LIE OR GIVE MISINFORMATION?

For example,

1. Local councils were initially told they needed to sign up to the Community Partnership in order to access the funding – it later turned out they could still access the funding whether or not they were in the CP.
2. We (the public) were told the Community can withdraw at any time:  not true, only Copeland and NWS can withdraw at any time.
3. We were told the developers will take into consideration environmental issues:  not true, they used exemption to get permission for seismic surveys despite research which says these are dangerous to marine life.
4. We were told the community will be at the heart of the siting process and decision-making:  not true, the community has not been consulted on where the GDF will be sited nor have we taken part in any decision-making.  (Unless, of course, the Community Partnership is considered to be ‘the community.’)  Even the baseline survey, which found 61% were against the GDF being sited here is being ignored on the grounds that only about 150 people took part.  But they will use the findings to fine-tune their message to the public.
5. We were told to come and meet the experts at information events:  no nuclear experts there – many of locals who attended knew more about the issues.
6. In making their decision to grant exemption re seismic surveys, the Marine Management Organisation said they “understand that NWS have had ongoing engagement with the public via their community partnerships.” NWS might have ongoing engagement with the public via the community partnerships but neither they nor the community partnerships take any notice of what the public say.
7. In letter of 21^st October NWS say “currently no site for the surface elements of a Geological Disposal Facility (GDF) have been identified. The current studies are focused on understanding the feasibility of hosting a GDF in South Copeland and any potential site will not be identified until these studies have been completed which could take 3 – 5 years.”  It is quite clear from the Initial Evaluation Report that the area they are looking at is the old airfield at Haverigg and part of Kirsanton.

If after analysing the results of the seismic surveys the developers wish to continue to the next stage of drilling bore holes, how can we trust them to do this in a way that the radioactive mud which lies on the seabed all along the coast of south and mid Copeland, is not disturbed?  Or will the MMO – who will need to give permission – simply waver an exemption again because it is ‘research’?????

On 13th October the following email was sent to Millom Town Council:

TO:  Millom Town Council 

In light of the results of the random base-line survey of local people disclosed at the meeting of South Copeland GDF Community Partnership last night, i.e. 

• 61% against the GDF being sited here (of whom many were strongly opposed) 
• 27% in favour 
• Reasons given why against:  safety and security; environment; transportation; infrastructure 
• Wanting more independent information from experts on:  safety; environment; waste transportation; economic impact; impact on future generations 
• 44% said they wanted the information from the Council and they wanted to know what the views of the Council are regarding the GDF for or against 

As well as the strong questioning and opposition by the CALC rep, Millom Without and Whicham councillor reps regarding several, significant, aspects of the process so far with implications that the developers were not listening to their concerns. 

It is clear that the majority of constituents in Millom and Haverigg are opposed to the GDF being sited here.   

Will Millom Town Council come off the fence and tell its constituents whether they, as a Council, are in favour of or against the GDF being sited here? 

Will Millom Town Council put forward a motion to the South Copeland GDF Community Partnership to withdraw Millom, Haverigg and Kirksanton from the search area for a GDF? 

Or, at the very least, hear what the constituents are saying in the survey and seek independent advice from experts to discuss the issues raised in the survey and share this with the constituents? 

Thank you. 

Here is their response, dated 27th October 2022:

Dear Ms Bridget

South Copeland GDF Partnership

Thank you for your email dated 13th October which was brought to Millom Town Councillor’s attention at the meeting last night.

In answer to your questions, Millom Town Council (MTC) will, for the foreseeable future, continue with its neutral stance on the possible siting of a Geological Disposal Facility (GDF) off the coast of South Copeland as ultimately should a suitable site be identified, the community will make the final decision.

We will also not be withdrawing from the South Copeland GDF Community Partnership as this is a major infrastructure project that aims to protect people and the environment for generations to come. Withdrawing from the partnership serves no purpose, as the process does not require MTC to be around the table to continue. It is our collective responsibility as a council to ensure that process is transparent, open and robust to ensure our community has all the information required to make an informed decision should the process develop to that stage.

As a Council, we will continue to monitor the views of the community and ensure that they are fed into the discussions of this process over the coming years as more information becomes available.

A complaint against the Deputy Mayor of Copeland and Borough Councillor David Moore will be heard by the Standards and Ethics Committee of Copeland Borough Council on 25th October 2022.

The complaint is being brought by nuclear safety group Radiation Free Lakeland who campaigned vigorously against the seismic testing (often called “blasting”) carried out in August to test the geology deep under the Irish Sea bed for a high level nuclear waste facility known as a Geological Disposal Facility.

Founder of Radiation Free Lakeland Marianne Birkby said “Immediately following the seismic survey there have been visible damaging impacts including dead and displaced harbour porpoises (reported to Cetacean Strandings UK) and hundreds of dead jellyfish washed up on West Cumbrian beaches. The long term impacts will be felt by marine life for years to come and that was just the start of the nuclear dump developments. Councillor David Moore will, despite his financial and personal nuclear interests, be aiming to rubber stamp further GDF developments without a by-your-leave from the full council or from the public. It is a nuclear fiefdom in Copeland and this is clearly becoming increasingly undemocratic and dangerous for Cumbria and Cumbria’s neighbours.”

TWO COMPLAINTS

1. 50,000 signatures on the petition opposing seismic blasting are an “odd few” says Councillor Moore on the BBC News (2nd August).
2. Cllr David Moore’s failure to declare interests at the Executive meeting of 12th July at which the Petition of then nearly 50,000 signatures was presented.

Context: In January 2013 the then Conservative leader of Cumbria County Council, Eddie Martin, led councillors in refusing to take the next steps (stage 4) towards the Delivery of a Geological Disposal Facility (GDF). The next steps would have included intrusive investigations of the geology of Copeland which is already very well studied and known to be complex and faulted. In November 2021 Copeland Borough Council joined the new GDF process of Partnership with Nuclear Waste Services. That Partnership has opened the flood gates on invasive investigations the first being, seismic blasting. There has been no public vote nor even a vote by the full Copeland Borough Council on whether investigations should take place. Decisions on GDF- which since Cumbria County Council’s NO vote has been designated a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project – are delegated to the Copeland Executive without reference to discussion or vote by the full council (or the public).