First, I would like to convey my sympathy to the relatives of those who lost their lives in the nuclear power disaster near Kiev yesterday. Unfortunately, we do not have the exact facts or figures of that accident since the information is coming through in a very scant manner. However this raises very pertinent questions for this country for a number of reasons.
We are very close to an extensive and massive power plant at Sellafield. No one can argue about the possible effects of what has come to be known as trans global pollution where deadly matter, depending on the prevailing winds, can be transmitted vast distances across continents to cause damage and possibly deaths to innocent people living in other countries.
It is close on three years since I first raised this matter in the House and I seem to be repeating a lot of what I said in that Adjournment Debate, but a number of other issues must be stated as new evidence becomes more apparent at the Sellafield plant. It is a shame that this Government continue to show an ambivalent attitude towards the Sellafield plant despite the fact that the head of the Nuclear Energy Board, Dr. George Duffy, recently expressed concern about the possible danger from the nuclear reactors at Sellafield. In a very thorough interview Dr. Duffy made the point that he was less concerned about the possible environmental or health risks from the actual discharges into the Irish Sea than he was about the nuclear reactors. He said that some of these had passed their accepted span of life, close to 30 years, and he was concerned about the possibility of these either breaking down or going on fire.
That warning must be expressed in the loudest possible terms in this House in the hope that it will fall on the ears of the Government and that they will take a strong stand with Britain in this regard and not just accept the British point of view, as stated by Mrs. Margaret Thatcher, "You know, there is nothing really to fear from Sellafield." I do not know if it was just for amusement or what the British Minister for the Environment intended in stating that our fears were akin to those of medieval people talking about witchcraft. We are dealing with a deadly menace quite close to this nation, a menace which is going to increase over the next ten years, some people say threefold or fourfold, others say tenfold, a moneymaking industry which will be a continuing menace to this country for many many years to come. A £3 billion expansion is about to take place at the Thorpe expansion plant at Sellafield.
I suppose we are fortunate in a sense that in Ireland the prevailing winds tend to be south-westerly. The Minister realises that this is not always the case. He represents a maritime constituency and he is well aware of the anxieties and fears that people living along the eastern seaboard have, particularly in the light of what happened in 1957 when the winds were north-easterly and brought the result of the fire at Sellafield over along the Irish coast. In this nation we do not want to arrive at the stage where our excellent monitoring stations tell us that the levels of radiation are increasing and something must be happening across the water, and waiting for our information to come in secondhand to us when some major accident has taken place.
It is our duty as a nation, and particularly the Government's duty, to sound the warning to England that we want this plant to cease its operations. How on earth can this Government accept the point of view of the British when their own agency, the Nuclear Energy Board, have stated that the nuclear reactors are not safe? What type of logic is that? It is tantamount to engaging in very dangerous dealing with the British in this regard. A very strong case could be made to take Britain to the European Court on this matter. All the evidence is there: the facts are there. The Black report was discredited by lack of information from British Nuclear Fuels. In the House of Commons the all-party committee report on the question of Sellafield safety indicated that the plant was not safe. The European Parliament overwhelmingly rejected information coming from the Sellafield plant and called for its closure. It is regrettable that on 12 March this House turned down a motion by the Opposition calling for the closure of Sellafield. I felt at the time that that was a lost opportunity. I could not understand for the life of me what the Government were engaging in in that debate because a strong call from Ireland to England, a united voice, in this regard is needed.
Did the Minister see the headlines in the British papers the next day, in which they said, "Irish Government votes down call for closure of Sellafield"? It was an absolute let-off for them. I sense a slight change of attitude on the part of the Irish Nuclear Energy Board in that I think they are beginning to put this whole question into perspective, putting the Irish nation first. They are beginning to see themselves as having a very important role in the future of nuclear radiation measurements in this country. That board were established for a purpose different from that in which they find themselves engaged now. It is critically important that we as an independent nation are prepared to take a firm stand on this issue in relation to the closure of Sellafield.
What has happened in Russia is just an example of what can happen to this nation. Given the appalling safety record in this plant, it is now not unreasonable to assume that there will be a serious accident at Sellafield. I do not know how the Government can come into this House and stand up and defend their inactivity in this respect. We have been told about the lack of safety of the reactors how they are positioned and structured, and that they do not meet the safety requirements. What of the possibility of seismic activity? There has been a fair degree of seismic activity in the Irish Sea and it is continuous. Just a couple of years ago we had the undersea earthquake which measured quite a strong reading on the Richter scale. If it had been close to the Cumbrian area it could have caused a great deal of damage and possibly started some serious fires at that plant.
We all know the old saying about a little knowledge being a dangerous thing and that people, who profess to set themselves up as experts in a particular field when they have not the in-depth knowledge, can be misleading, but how can this nation, given the inaccurate information from British Nuclear Fuels, stand over this plant as we seem to be doing as a nation at present? We seem to be defending the British point of view; that is the way it is perceived by our nation at present. I have read the account of the Minister, Deputy Spring, of what is going to be done and the safety measures that are to be taken at Sellafield, etc. I have read it all ad nausem, but we must guard against a serious accident taking place in Sellafield such as occurred in Russia yesterday. It could happen. I want the Minister to address himself to the possibility of an accident taking place at Sellafield and not to engage in speaking about the dangers to our marine environment or the radiation levels in the air or anything like that. I would like him in this House to give a guarantee, or at least state that in his opinion an accident will not take place, given the information that has been given to him. If he does that he will relieve the anxieties of many people because he will have information given to him that many of us have not got.
I am unhappy about this whole question of a European team of investigation. It is just a kick for touch. The EC have vested interests in the development of the nuclear industry. I am not opposed to the question of an inspectorate taking place at the Sellafield plant but I am suspicious of it because I cannot see how countries who have these plants will be able to engage in an impartial manner in inspecting a plant like that. As I said before, it is a bit like the police investigating themselves: they will not come up with objective criticism or anything more positive in that regard.
The Minister in his earlier contribution referred to the expansion which will take place at Sellafield. Many people are unaware of the fact that there are massive expansion plans to reprocess the waste of other nations to make money for Britain. It is a money making industry with waste coming from Japan, Germany and all over the world to be reprocessed at that plant. What is in it for Ireland? Nothing, except health and environmental hazards on a massive scale. Ships will be carrying deadly cargoes up and down the Irish Sea and there will be constant withholding of information to this nation. The Minister will have to go further than talking about an inspectorate to monitor Sellafield because that is just not enough. The objective at present, given this awful record of 300 accidents over the past 30 years and those chronicled earlier this year and the fact that British Nuclear Fuels have been fined large sums of money, is to obtain more information. British Nuclear Fuels have paid out very large sums in compensation — I know without admission of liability — to widows of former employees in the firm and there is circumstantial evidence to support the view that the plant is unsafe, even deadly.
Beaches have been closed and medical doctors in the area agree that there is a tenfold increase in cancer within the plant environs. The Minister would earn the respect of the House if he made it clear to Britain that if they are not prepared to accede to our demands we will take them to the European Court. There is nothing to be ashamed of in that as the Minister's duty — I am not speaking personally — as a member of the Government is to future generations and not just to ourselves. We enjoy a relatively peaceful environment, although we live with the continuing risk of an accident taking place at Sellafield. What of future generations? We should seek to protect the environment, given the fact that some of these deadly man-created elements like ceasium and plutonium will take thousands of years to disappear, if they ever do. How will future generations view the Irish Government for not taking a stand on this? Regrettably, a stand has not been taken and there has been no firm directive given to Britain on this issue, which was raised first in this House three years ago and on subsequent occasions by other Members of the House. We had a full-scale debate on it last month and now this accident has taken place. Increased levels of radiation at Sellafield have also been raised by way of Private Notice Question and yet the Government have gone along with the British point of view against what the rest of Europe said. This is a shame.
I do not know whether the Government feel that by so doing they would injure Anglo-Irish relations. Is that the case? If so, it is indirect blackmail, equally shameful and should not be tolerated. I will listen very carefully to the Minister's reply. I hope it will not be a repeat of what he said earlier today: that the best way is to have a European inspectorate and hope that something will come out of that.
Given the rapidity of the accidents which have taken place at Sellafield over the past few years, it is reasonable to assume that more will occur and that, as the plant expands, more and more accidents will take place. We must make a clean break from the British point of view and hold to the view that the vast majority of people have in this country. We want the plant closed. It is situated in the worst possible place for a nuclear reprocessing plant and is now a military target as it is refurbishing nuclear warheads. It puts us in the front line as a neutral nation. All the evidence supports a call from the Government to close the plant down and there is no point in taking an ambivalent view of the matter. I do not want to be alarmist, although when I raised the matter three years ago I was accused of being so. We have a duty to future generations and it is our firm wish and demand that the Government should call on the British Government to close down Sellafield once and for all.
